Originally posted by **edzob** April 20, 2022
**Chapter 3.1 Research model**
1. Rephrase paragraph 1 into a text for readers.
2. See comments on figure references and usage.
3. Does this image visualize what you want to communicate? No arrows to be seen
4. “To answer the sub-questions and the main research question literature research has a central part in the approach” .. is the research methodology not a more clear intro before using this sentence? If this is an introduction then rephrase into high level description of the approach and then links to the various sections with detailed description.
5. Summary: (small) rewrite to a story
6. After reading most of chapter 3. I think figure 3.1 is not what you want to show (here). It is not easy to be read and not in a context of a validated research model. For example, the interviews are part of the triangulation approach. So that first needs to be told to the reader. If you first tel about FAIR, Open Science, Triangulation and then to the scope and then to the application of snowball. And then the story about the interviews setup. etc.
7.
**Chapter 3.2 research approach**
1. This : “The answers will be split up into two chapters. These chapters are Chapter 2 and Chapter 5. For the literature research, two primary methods are used.“ does nto make that much sense :)
2. Make snowballing a second paragraph in 3.2 (not numbered just \n\r)
3. Scope snowballing. If you use my thesis and start snowballing your reference list would be bigger. You applied some sort of scope. Addressed the scope and the fit with the goal here. The same for the topic E.A. You imply a large literature study on the topic of E.A. But do not address the many viewpoints and sources. So there is an implicit filiter or something. Make this explicit.4. “ is administrated for replicability, independence, precision, accessibility, and reusability” add the source (ref) for this list of criteria (help the reader!).
5. Section system: Table 3.1 System keywords > add column headers.6. Section system: Add summary of result of snowbaling/ keywords search to description of system in 3.2 and perhaps a link to where the result is described in more detail.
7. Section af: There will be questions why you add botjes 2020 and botjes 2021 as both primairy sources.8. Section af:Botjes 2020 and 2021 did you oreilly, even as source for the attributes.
9. Section af:I did do backward snowballing on Taleb, I am not certain if this logic you are using holds up. The question is, what did you do and why, and is it written in this paragraph on AF lit research.10. Section EA: Link to subsection EA broken
11. Section EA: I would not reference back, but repeat a statement, for example: Antifragility fits the EA school of EEA, see also section X,Y, (la palarm) therefore … Lit research for EEA will focus on the seven key authors provided by Lapalme (tabel 3.3).
13. Section EA: “ Lapalme (2012) on the three schools of EA, Lapalme et al. (2016) on the future of EA, and T. S. Graves (2008) are used as a starting point of the literature study.“ → “ As a starting point of the literature study on EA the following three sources are being used: Lapalme (2012), Lapalme et al. (2016), and T. S. Graves (2008) are used “ ..then state why ..
14. Section EA: “For the literature study two sources are in focus” => two -> three
15. Section public sector: “The concepts in the dissertation thesis of Nurmi uses some of the same concepts as this research“ -> make this a bit more explicit
16. 3.2.2 Interviews: “ The interviews are in the format of semi-structured.” -> not certain if format is the right word.
17. 3.2.2 Interviews:“ A minimal set of questions is used because of time constraints. “ -> time constraints in which context? Of the interviewee, the interviewer, the research, ?
18. 3.2.2 Interviews:“ The set of questions is created by combining multiple attributes into one question” -> here the reader does not know about attributes and what you intent to tell.. The message is lost.
19. 3.2.2 Interviews: “ A concept map is created to define which question will give a possible answer to what attribute“ help the reader. What is a concept map? Provide an image, a link a reference or a bit more text (and a link, image, reference)
20. 3.2.2 Interviews: “The concept map is appended to the thesis see Chapter C” -> this should be appendix and sencete can be reduce to by used as referecen (see Appendix C)
21. 3.2.2 Interviews: The concept map appendix needs some love (I think)
22. 3.2.2 Interviews: add \n\r before “The interviews are recorded and transcribed.”
23. 3.2.2 Interviews: “The transcriptions will be summarised and appended to this thesis, see Chapter E.” => appendix
24. Section: expert group: not the right place in the chapter and How did you find the experts and then who filtered who would fit the group?
25. Section expert group: add reference for meerting wizard and for GSS
**Chapter 3.3 Research Methods**
1. Section 3.0 > see the last sentence. It is a summary of recker. What does the reader need to do with this information/ The same is for 3.3.1 (quantative methods) etc .. You summarize but do not convey the relevance to the reader and to your research setup.
2. Action research => the URL should be an reference (cite) style.
3.
JRBliekendaal
commented
2 years ago
Discussed in https://github.com/JRBliekendaal/master-thesis/discussions/143
1. Rephrase paragraph 1 into a text for readers. 2. See comments on figure references and usage. 3. Does this image visualize what you want to communicate? No arrows to be seen 4. “To answer the sub-questions and the main research question literature research has a central part in the approach” .. is the research methodology not a more clear intro before using this sentence? If this is an introduction then rephrase into high level description of the approach and then links to the various sections with detailed description. 5. Summary: (small) rewrite to a story 6. After reading most of chapter 3. I think figure 3.1 is not what you want to show (here). It is not easy to be read and not in a context of a validated research model. For example, the interviews are part of the triangulation approach. So that first needs to be told to the reader. If you first tel about FAIR, Open Science, Triangulation and then to the scope and then to the application of snowball. And then the story about the interviews setup. etc. 7.**Chapter 3.2 research approach**1. This : “The answers will be split up into two chapters. These chapters are Chapter 2 and Chapter 5. For the literature research, two primary methods are used.“ does nto make that much sense :) 2. Make snowballing a second paragraph in 3.2 (not numbered just \n\r) 3. Scope snowballing. If you use my thesis and start snowballing your reference list would be bigger. You applied some sort of scope. Addressed the scope and the fit with the goal here. The same for the topic E.A. You imply a large literature study on the topic of E.A. But do not address the many viewpoints and sources. So there is an implicit filiter or something. Make this explicit.4. “ is administrated for replicability, independence, precision, accessibility, and reusability” add the source (ref) for this list of criteria (help the reader!). 5. Section system: Table 3.1 System keywords > add column headers.6. Section system: Add summary of result of snowbaling/ keywords search to description of system in 3.2 and perhaps a link to where the result is described in more detail. 7. Section af: There will be questions why you add botjes 2020 and botjes 2021 as both primairy sources.8. Section af:Botjes 2020 and 2021 did you oreilly, even as source for the attributes. 9. Section af:I did do backward snowballing on Taleb, I am not certain if this logic you are using holds up. The question is, what did you do and why, and is it written in this paragraph on AF lit research.10. Section EA: Link to subsection EA broken 11. Section EA: I would not reference back, but repeat a statement, for example: Antifragility fits the EA school of EEA, see also section X,Y, (la palarm) therefore … Lit research for EEA will focus on the seven key authors provided by Lapalme (tabel 3.3). 13. Section EA: “ Lapalme (2012) on the three schools of EA, Lapalme et al. (2016) on the future of EA, and T. S. Graves (2008) are used as a starting point of the literature study.“ → “ As a starting point of the literature study on EA the following three sources are being used: Lapalme (2012), Lapalme et al. (2016), and T. S. Graves (2008) are used “ ..then state why .. 14. Section EA: “For the literature study two sources are in focus” => two -> three 15. Section public sector: “The concepts in the dissertation thesis of Nurmi uses some of the same concepts as this research“ -> make this a bit more explicit16. 3.2.2 Interviews: “ The interviews are in the format of semi-structured.” -> not certain if format is the right word. 17. 3.2.2 Interviews:“ A minimal set of questions is used because of time constraints. “ -> time constraints in which context? Of the interviewee, the interviewer, the research, ? 18. 3.2.2 Interviews:“ The set of questions is created by combining multiple attributes into one question” -> here the reader does not know about attributes and what you intent to tell.. The message is lost. 19. 3.2.2 Interviews: “ A concept map is created to define which question will give a possible answer to what attribute“ help the reader. What is a concept map? Provide an image, a link a reference or a bit more text (and a link, image, reference) 20. 3.2.2 Interviews: “The concept map is appended to the thesis see Chapter C” -> this should be appendix and sencete can be reduce to by used as referecen (see Appendix C) 21. 3.2.2 Interviews: The concept map appendix needs some love (I think) 22. 3.2.2 Interviews: add \n\r before “The interviews are recorded and transcribed.” 23. 3.2.2 Interviews: “The transcriptions will be summarised and appended to this thesis, see Chapter E.” => appendix 24. Section: expert group: not the right place in the chapter and How did you find the experts and then who filtered who would fit the group? 25. Section expert group: add reference for meerting wizard and for GSS1. Section 3.0 > see the last sentence. It is a summary of recker. What does the reader need to do with this information/ The same is for 3.3.1 (quantative methods) etc .. You summarize but do not convey the relevance to the reader and to your research setup. 2. Action research => the URL should be an reference (cite) style. 3.