# data[].attributes.body
however they can also offer different perspectives

# data[].attributes.body
- Long selection process
- Participants may not be totally accurate
- Researchers don’t get to observe participants

# data[].attributes.body
Photographs - Pros and Cons

pros

- see the real thing/moment

- can be analyzed

- can give quick information

cons

- can be staged

- can be bad quality if old

- there aren't many from back then (old times)
- doesn't tell you direct information without a caption.

# data[].attributes.body
Pros
- Allows a person to giver their own opinion towards the subject
- Experienced it first hand
- Great way to all information in a summed up way

Cons
- Only one persons opinion
- Biased towards that person
- Producing false information to the public

Faith - Gemma - Anais

# data[].attributes.body
Diary entrys can be biased because they are told from the perspective of the person. E.g a victoms recount would be more against an attackers recount via diary entrys

# data[].attributes.body
- More likely to capture influential external factors
- More time for in-depth consideration and opportunities for creativity
- Record experiences in a natural environment

# data[].attributes.body
Usefulness:
- Provide multiple different views about an issue
- Keeping up to date with current issues
- Understanding others points of views
Limitations:
- They can control how much they want to share with the readers
- Some newspapers can be biased
- Exaggerate stories and headlines

# data[].attributes.body
What are the usefulness and limitations when using them as historical evidence?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When people take a photograph, they make decisions about what to show in, or leave out of, the picture. Photographers do this by choosing the angle from which they take the shot and from what distance it will be taken, either close up or further away. Experienced photographers could then also edit their pictures later in order to change how the original image looked.

Therefore, to correctly interpret what the photographer intended their audience to understand from their image, we have to identify some specific information.

1. Identify the Main Subject: What are the most important people, locations or items in the image?

You can work out what the photographer wanted you to focus on by looking at what is in the centre of the photo, or what appears the largest. This is the main subject the creator wanted the audience to see.

2. Identify Minor Subjects: What appears in the background, behind or around the main subject?

Things of minor importance appear to support the main subject. The photographer wanted to also show these things to help you draw certain conclusions about the main subject.

3. Explain the Image Composition: At what distance from the main subject was the photograph taken?

If the photograph is a 'close up' of the main subject, the photographer wanted the audience to feel 'part of the action' or to be confronted by the image. If it was taken from further away, the photographer wanted the viewer to feel 'detached' from the action or to get a 'bird's eye view' of things.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to interpret the meaning of photographs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When people take a photograph, they make decisions about what to show in, or leave out of, the picture. Photographers do this by choosing the angle from which they take the shot and from what distance it will be taken, either close up or further away.

# data[].attributes.body
https://sites.psu.edu/connorzimmerman/2013/09/26/pros-and-cons-of-speeches/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pros:

Speeches allow a person to give their own personal bias towards a subject, giving us their perspective towards certain topics.

They're a great way to present all of the information in a concise, summed-up way.

Speeches give us two mediums through which we receive information: a visual way through the person's body language and presence on the podium, and also an auditory way through their inflection, content, etc.

A person can get an emotional point across more easily instead of on paper.

Cons:

Speeches are most of the time staged, practiced. We are not seeing a person at their actual potential, only something staged after many practices (or few practices). They could be better or worse if explaining it themselves in real life.

The speech could be biased towards the person whose reading it. One person could project information different than another person reading the same information.

Speeches need to be concise and quick; no citations are used in speeches, so unless there is fact-checking, a person could be lying or fabricating information and can get the information across.

*However, in the case of Gorgias versus Socrates, Gorgias thought that rhetoric alone was enough to convince a crowd that he was a doctor. Socrates pointed out that one must need concrete knowledge and facts in order to prove a person otherwise. This example is just a way to say that a person has the capability to fabricate knowledge, but ultimately if they lack the knowledge, they are unable to effectively convince the audience.

The audience is a large factor in the reception of the speech. For example, there was a candidate for Mayor of New York City who went to a slum to give a speech, and he was completely booed off of stage. So the audience is a big factor in whether or not the point gets across.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pros: Speeches allow a person to give their own personal bias towards a subject, giving us their perspective towards certain topics. They're a great way to present all of the information in a concise, summed-up way.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Newspaper articles can provide a useful source of information, serving as a primary source of information about historical and current events. Some of the benefits of using newspaper articles as primary sources include:

Seeing how people viewed an event when it happened;

Providing multiple points of view about an issue, including a comparison of the United States and international views;

Permitting researchers to trace the historical development of subjects over time;

Examining issues in the context of their time (by seeing how stories about an issue relate to other stories, or by examining the type of coverage provided);

Giving a snapshot of a time period detailing how people lived, and what they purchased which is helpful for writers, playwrights, historians, etc.

Because newspapers also contain commentaries or retrospective articles about events, they can also serve as a secondary source.

Whether used as a primary or a secondary source, newspapers can provide a valuable research tool.

For more information about using news sources, see our news source tutorial.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Research Guides: Newspapers: Why Use Newspapers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Newspaper articles can provide a useful source of information, serving as a primary source of information about historical and current events.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Cons

Researchers don't get to observe participants: One of the recurring themes of user experience research is that people don't often know what they want. Similarly, they also tend to not know what they're doing. Some of the most valuable insights derived from design-thinking approaches to research that come from simple observation. Watching how people engage in a user experience can reveal patterns and trends that no one would think to ask about or report. By relying on the observations of study participants, researchers don't have the opportunity to observe the user experience over time.

Participants may not be totally accurate: Just as people don't always know what they want or what they're doing, they also have blind spots that can inject bias into their observations and recollections. In some instances, they may even behave differently because they know they're recording their thoughts and feelings for someone else to read or hear. The inability to accurately recall events can also present a problem. While researchers can safely throw out obviously biased or untruthful responses, there are few safeguards in place to ensure that participants are recording their experiences accurately and honestly.

Long selection process: Diary studies put a great deal of pressure on participants to be creative and detailed in their responses. Unfortunately, not all potential subjects will feel comfortable being so forthcoming or with finding unique ways to express themselves. In order to make sure that people don't drop out of the study or provide less than adequate responses, researchers need to be highly selective in who they involve in such study. This, unfortunately, extends the preparation time as they try to find the best candidates, especially compared to more traditional research methods. There's also a danger that this selection process will introduce an inherent bias into the test by filling the study with a certain type of user who may not be typical of the intended end user for the product or service.

While diary studies have a few notable shortcomings, the benefits of this approach to research make it a valuable option for organizations seeking to learn more about the genuine user experience. No approach to research is perfect, after all, and in any case, diary studies should form only one component of a broad array of research methodologies. By combining them with more traditional test methods and other innovative strategies like friendship groups, diary studies provide a glimpse into a specific aspect of the user experience that can help designers and engineers develop better products, services, and delivery methods.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UX Research Methods: Pros and Cons of Diary Studies - Motivate Design

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
User experience research is never easy. While there are a variety of methods for testing products and services with potential end users, in most cases these tests don't allow researchers to understand how people might engage with them on an everyday basis.