Here is my final version of the first assignment requested in the lecture:
Internet Research Methodology - A Canadian Perspective
PhD. Bakardjieva Maria & PhD. Friesen Norman Philip
Leopold-Franzens Universität, Innsbruck, Austria
Sommersemester 2007
Cultural Similarities and Differences in the Design of University Websites
Callahan, E. (2005). Cultural similarities and differences in the design of university websites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(1), article 12. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol11/issue1/callahan.html
The topic of the research I will execute with is: „Cultural Similarities and Differences in the Design of University Websites“
I figured out following main points along which the researcher Ewa Callahan worked.
1.List of the participant universities – widespread in eight countries of the world
2.Empirical research questions
3.Advertising strategies in universities
4.Aspects of web design
5.Hofsted´s model of culture
6.Various pro-chioce and adverse scientific voices ( Marcus&Gould, Robins&Stylianou, etc.)
7.Research questions and hypotheses
8.Study description
9.Findings
10.Finally the conclusion
This research is theoretically based on „Hofsted´s model of culture“ in which I will go later on for a few stepps. Callahan explained a lot of Hefsted´s theorie but mentioned several adverse attitudes towards his comments.
1. Universities from eight countries – namely: Austria, USA, Ecuador, Japan, Sweden, Greece, Denmark and Malaysia - took part of this research. In her study descriptions Callahan revealed here selection criterions; e.g. country selection, website selection, etc..
Each chosen university homepage was surveyd to two criteria: first the demonstration of the organisation and secondly the graphical design.
2. Questions like e.g.: „How do different cultures represent themselves on the web?“, „Are the designs of websites in different cultures distinct or do they follow similar trends?“, „If cultural differences are found, what role do they play, and what are their practical consequences?“ were posed and later on Callahan tried to find answeres.
3. In one passage of this article „advertising strategies in Universities“ were mentioned and some background information were presented; like the use of posters, flyers and other promotional material.
4. The „aspects of web design“ were segmented in language, page design, color preferences, image modality and the tematic strukture. Some pages are color-coordinated with the colors of the national flags, like on government pages. The point „image modality“ deals with images with high quality, the solor saturation, the color contrast or the color coding.
5. As aforementioned Callahan worked on the theoretical base of Hofsted´s model of culture. Various terms, like powerdistance (PD), which deals with the question of hierarchie in a country – that would be a „high power distance“ country (he mentioned Malaysia, Guatemala and Mexico). If subordinates can involve themselves and their opinions in desicions which are elsewhere chosen only by managers, Hofsted talks about a low power distance country, e.g. Austria, Israel and New Zealand.
Furthermore I met the IC – individualism vs. Collectivism – also with adequate namings. The MAS index – femininity vs. Masculinity, UA – uncertainty avoidance and LTO – longterm, shortterm orientation completed Hofsted´s remarks to find cultural differences or similarities.
6. In Callahan´s article many scientists are quoted, e.g. Marcus&Gould (linguistic aspects), Dormann&Chisalita, who worked also with the MAS-index in 5 countries, and McSweetey, who is mentioned as a researcher with contra-choice statements.
As scientisticly representative who worked with UA and LTO Rajkumar was listed there.
7. „The question that guides this study is to what extent the design of websites differs across cultures, and whether the differences can be measured using Hofstede's cultural model.“ Callahan mentions her hypotheses and if they correlates with the research results.
I will not go into detail of the hypotheses and their issues, they can be found at page 11 ff.
8. Interessant for me was Callahans way to select the University websites. She always took two countries of both, high and low form countries. She chose Malaysia for the high PD, Austria because of it´s low PD index. USA stands for her high IC example and Ecuador as low IC country. Japan with it´s high MAS index in opposite to Sweden, the low MAS representative, and so on.
Generally only websites of Universities with bachelor degrees and master degrees get a chance to be choosen. The universities pages of three countries , Austria, Japan and Ecuador, are linked on the ministerial sites. Out of these selection terms Callahan worked with „RANDBETWEEN FUNCTION“ as analytical tool. She randomly selected 20 Universities pro country.
As next working Stepp Callahan mentioned the coding of pictures. Are there logos, persons, buildings, art, nature, artifacts or figuratives depicted. And in what countings comparative to all images on the page. The number of pictured persons, the gender, status, activity and the social distance followed. This social distance is one more devided in terms like: intimated pictured, which means only the head is on the foto, close person – with shoulder, far person is a term for a picture up from the waist, and more.
A detailed passage of her findings follows now where she tried to include the „study limitations“ of her research. This research only showed up 8 countries, only 20 sites pro country and it was only a graphical – and no linguistical research. Is this a representative number of university websites?
9. But now to the findings: In this part of the artice we find different topics. The results of them, compared with the hypothesis are listes here. First the languages used on the homepages were discussed, followed by the several colors. Which color stands in the background, are the colors of the respectiv national flag on the site. Then the information of the organisation were lightened up. Image analysis of the universities and the comparison of the results with „Hofsted´s“ dimensions of culture form the end of this part.
10. In the conclusion Gallahan mentioned the located differences and respectively the similarities of the research. Some of the searched topics were represented more often on certain sites; for example use of photos in Sweden, art depiction in Greece, use of animation in Malaysia and Ecuador, pastel colors in Japan, etc. Similarities can be found in the fotos – mostly students are pictured at the homepages, also the campus and on almost every homepage there ist he banner of the university and it´s logo.
I´ll close with a citation: „ …it is possible that Hofstede's model is valid, and can be used in studying differences in web design, but that the limitations of the present study—including the small number of countries studied—do not show the full potential of the model. In as much as most correlations did occur in the hypothesized direction, it would seem that the last interpretation is most likely, and that Hofstede's model may be helpful in interpreting cultural similarities and differences in graphical design. However, Hofstede's dimensions and graphical cultural markers require more intensive study, especially when interpreting Uncertainty Avoidance. Therefore, Hofstede's model should be used with caution by researchers and/or developers attempting to construct culturally appropriate websites.“
My conclusion:
It was very interessant for me to work through this article. Callahan described every step of her work traceble. I had not the faintest idea of the criteries that has to be compared to eachother. The importance of the color giving, the central decentral graphic layout or the different leves of a homepage.
I decided to make an overview in my exposition, which is not going into the very detail of the results. I wanted to search Callahan´s way and tools of her research considering the second part of my assignment – the reseach proposal.
It is very clear to see Callahan´s searched results, she went into detail precisely and tried to compare the various points.
I wondered a little bit about the paragraph where she talked about the undersized number of countries and universities. Why did she take 20 websites of 8 countries and finds fault with it instead of researching more institutions?
Maybe it was the first part of a longer research project furthermore. Maybe she will continue more widespread researchs later on. I would appreciate that because this article arose my interesst!
