The Recording Process of Research Proposal

https://onenote.com/webapp/pages?token=lVsdCidvVfVF_w_5XpCYWJAahu5g8Ym58Degco2ieT6r45eDHwSrZwQVs_clOYA8k6XFX89L2ZVnmYzLtlazvhjHpcU9FCZf0&id=636316253580236563

This is link of the recording process of research proposal, which contains some notes that i write on.

Research Proposal thinking process:

The research area I am interesting in is visual communication. And a lot of scholars claim that visual communication is an essential term in the culture and meaning transmission….

There are some literature that could show that why visual communication is important in the process of culture and s development.

Culture and society: (the important of visualization)

“Beginning in the 1970s, the social sciences experienced a significant change in their understanding of social life. While this change depended on a number of longer traditions of society and cultural analysis – especially the Marxist critique of mass culture offered by Theodore Adorno and Max Horkheimer, and the development of ‘cultural studies’.  The change often described as the ‘cultural turn’. That is, ‘cultural’ become a crucial means by which social scientists understood social processes, social identities, and social; change and conflict. Culture is a complex concept, but, in very broad terms, the result of its deployment has been that many social scientists are now very often interested in the ways in which social life is constructed through the ideas that people have about it, and the practices that flow from those ideas. To quote one of major contributors to this shift, Stuart Hall:

‘Culture, it is argued, is not so much a set of things – novels and paintings or TV programs or comics – as a process, a set of practices. Primarily, culture is concerned with the production and exchange of meanings – the ‘giving and taking of meaning’ – between the numbers of a society or group… Thus culture depends on its participants interpreting meaning – fully what is around them, and ‘making sense’ of the world, in broadly similar ways.’

Those meaning may be explicit or implicit, conscious or unconscious, they may be felt as truth or as fantasy, science or common-sense; and they may be conveyed through everyday speech, elaborate rhetoric, high art, TV soap operas, dreams, movies or muzak; and different groups in a society will make sense of the world in different ways. Whatever form they take, these made meanings, or representations, structure the way people behave – the way you and I behave – in our everyday lives.

This sort of argument can take very diverse forms. But many writers addressing these issues argued that the visual is central to the cultural conscious of social life in contemporary western societies. We are, of course, almost constantly surrounded by different sorts of technologies – photography, film, video, digital graphics, television, acrylics, for example – and the images they show us – TV programs, advertisement, snapshots, Facebook page, public sculpture, movies, closed circuit television footage, newspaper pictures, painting. All these different sort of technologies and image offer views of the world; they render the world in visual terms. But this rendering, even by photography, is never innocent. These images are never transparent windows onto the world; they interpret the world; they display it in very particularly way; they represent it. Thus a distinction is sometimes made between vision and visuality. Vision is what the human eye is physiologically capable of seeing. Visuality, on the other hand, refers to how vision is constructed in various ways: ‘how we see this seeing and the unseeing therein’. Another phrase with very similar connotations to visuality is scopic regime. Both terms refer to the ways in which both what is seen and how it is seen are culturally constructed. 

For some writers, the visual is the most fundamental of all senses. Gordon Fyfe and John Law (1988:2), For example, claim that ‘depiction, picturing and seeing are ubiquitous features of the process by which most human beings come to know the world as it really is from them’, and John Berger (1972:7) suggests that this is because ‘seeing comes before words. The child looks and recognizes before it can speak’. Other writers, however, prefer to historicise the important of the visual, tracing what they see as the increasing saturation of western society by visual images. Many claim that this process has reached unprecedented levels, so that westerners now interact with the world mainly through how we see it. Martin Jay (1993) has used the term ocularcentrism to describe the apparent centrality of the visual to contemporary western life.

Barbara Maria Stafford (1991), a historian of images used in the sciences, has argued that, in a process beginning in the eighteenth century, the construction of scientific knowledge about the world has become more and more based on images rather than written texts. –p3

The use of the term visual culture refers to this plethora of ways in which the visual is part of social life. – p4 VM”

In literature research, I write down the useful arguments and information for lining the arguments of my research proposal. Also, recoding the name of book and page number for further use.

According to those perspective, it is clear to see that visual communication is very important. In addition, there are some arguments talk about the visual aesthetic in visual communication. Also, those claims points out some discussion about the relationship between the visual aesthetic and human’s cognitive and affective. There are some literature could illustrate that:

A central dilemma of aesthetic visual communication is whether visual images can provide reliable evidence of important human cognitive activity and potentially meaningful affective responses or whether an image’s communication value is wholly dependent on what can be said about it; this could include discursive logic, applied subjective, by each individual viewers.

Is there communication if you cannot seem to ‘put it into words’? Does the nature of visual information transmission, its accurate interpretation, and the meaningful important of an image reside only in the subjective (inside the subjunctive’s head) processes of each individual viewers? Can there be a base of objective (based in a physical object) information on which multiple viewers can agree? Both the image-maker and all subsequent viewers must somehow have confidence in their ability to understand a level of meaning embedded in the image. If, as the subjective view holds, all interpretation is only a fanciful construction in the mind of each individual, how can any viewers judge the quality, precise meaning, and utility of the communication?” P23 – Handbook of visual communication.

“One of the most important pieces of visual communication puzzle is aesthetics. The nature of beauty and why it affects us so deeply is mysterious. Why do qualities so elusive to define (like a sunset or a half-opened rose) affect us do powerful? This is an important question to consider in visual communication. It is suggested that, because of the essentially nonverbal nature of aesthetics, what can be written is only speculation ‘about’ the nature of visual aesthetics and cannot therefore be ‘of’ visual aesthetics itself.

The aesthetic aspects of communication are (a) visible, structural, and configurational in nature; (b) largely implicit in apprehension; (c) holistic in conveying meaning (not wholly translatable into parsed, discursive form); and (d) cognitive in a generative sense, based on a unique type of visual logic.

Three disciplines – philosophy, art, and science – have been used historically to study issues about visual understanding. The sciences increasingly can, however offer factual evidence for defining how aesthetic qualities play a foundational role in human communications. – p3 HV

Noting that the aesthetic experience consists of people’s reactions to objects as opposed to aesthetics that are inherent in the object per se (Hassenzahi et al., 2008).”

And with the development of technology, there are massive technical product into people’s life. Actually, people would interact with technical product in every daily life, and the first step of interaction is visual term. Also this article https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/book/the-encyclopedia-of-human-computer-interaction-2nd-ed/visual-aesthetics  point out that the important relationship between the visual aesthetic and HCI (Human – Computer Interaction)/Interaction design which becomes an important subject in the contemporary.

Based on those perspective, the centre concept of my research proposal is that exploring the possible elements in visual aesthetic could influence human’s cognitive and affective, which might use in interaction design that could improve the use experience.

In addition, I also did research about the methods of this research, which around the Ethnography, Media Archaeology and Walking Field Recording. Having more deep understand about these three research approach to plan the particular and suit research way in this research.

Structure of my research proposal:

  1. Introduction – visual communication in the information technology era.
  2. Background – the important of visual communication (culture & society).
  3. The relationship between visual aesthetic and human’s cognitive & affective.
  4. My motivation.
  5. Aim of this proposal.
  6. Methodology – based on the approach of Ethnography, Media Archaeology and Walking Field Recording.
  7. The research questions.
  8. The possibility output.
  9. Reference list.

There are some notes about this research process, which also contain fragmentary idea in my thinking process… (the images post in their is not clear, so i upload on website. Please open the link that i post first)