|dc.contributor.advisor||Harro-Loit, Halliki, juhendaja||
|dc.identifier||Auväärt, Liis (2005) Retseptsiooni uurimise võimalusi süüdistust sisaldava teksti vastuvõtu põhjal. Other thesis, Tartu Ülikool.||
|dc.description||This paper - „Possibilities for studying reception. Based on the reception of text that contains
a charge” – dealt with the question of how different methods are suitable for reception studies.
In order to make any conclusions, three types of experiments were conducted. All of them
used students as participants. The total number of participants was 40.
In the first type of experiment a self-written narrative of the given story by the participants, a
questionnaire with semantic differential and a group-discussion were used as methods in order
to study reception (number of participants in this experiment: 21). The second one used a
questionnaire with semantic differential and a group-discussion (number of participants in this
experiment: 9). The third one included a questionnaire with semantic differential and an in-
depth interview (number of participants in this experiment: 10).
The conclusions based on those experiments were as follows:
• using an in-depth interview doesn’t make it possible to judge the impact that other
people may have on the participant, but it gives the most thorough answers per person
to the questions asked by the researcher,
• a group that includes people, who are befriended, gives good results when used in
group-discussion. These people are already used to speak out in front of eachother and
one can imagine, that in a everyday-situation people discuss articles they have read
foremost with their friends or aquaintances,
• by a group-discussion thoughts of introvert individuals might be left unheard, because
other participants will not give them a chance to talk,
• questions about reading-habits of the participant are more useful asked orally than in a
• using a commentarium before the reception experiments, proved to be a good
opportunity to form hypotheses for judgements given by the participants,
• no firm conclusions can be made about the participants personal judgements based on
their written narratives. The participants seem to focus on retelling the facts provided
in the lead,
• the semantic differential is effective only when the participants predicate their
judgements. Otherwise the numbers will be hard to explain.
Based on the three variations of the reception experiment it is my personal belief that in terms
of methodology the best possible combination is as follows: discourse analysis of the story +
analysis of the commentarium + questionnaires using the semantic differential + in-depth
interviews + group experiments.
Having used a text containing a charge (SLÕL „Imik sai kodus raskeid vigastusi) in its
original form and a version altered using the criteria of objectivity by in-depth interviews and
group interviews I concluded, that participants tended to take an accusing attitude towards the
mother of the child in both cases. The altered text seemed boring to the participants. It could
not touch them on a personal level like the original text did.
It also appeared, that opinions are affected by previous experience.||
|dc.subject||H Social Sciences (General)||
|dc.title||Retseptsiooni uurimise võimalusi süüdistust sisaldava teksti vastuvõtu põhjal||