Monday, August 20, 2012

Human Augmentation Research: Dephi or NGT Method


The use of information systems to aid disabled people is a promising use of technology for the future. Physical disabilities such as mobility, vision, and hearing impairment are only a few things that are being addressed through technology. More research into these problems can bring some potentially unique and undiscovered solutions to the forefront of technology manufacturers and vendors. There are two research methods that may offer help in this area: the Delphi method and the nominal group technique (NGT).

According to Skulmoski and Hartman (2007) the Dephi method is well suited when the goal is to improve our understanding of problems, opportunities, and possible solutions. It is an iterative process of data collection from experts which allows them to voice their ideas on complex problems and then revise their ideas based upon anonymous interaction with the other experts feedback and thoughts. This method has been used for extremely difficult and  complex issues such as nuclear proliferation and war strategies.

The nominal group technique can be useful for collecting semi-quantitative, rank-ordered feedback data obtained from the participant’s perceptions of the strengths and weaknesses of an evaluated process or function such as a training program (Dobie, Rhodes, Tysinger, & Freeman, 2004). This process has been used to evaluate course development activities by soliciting input from participants in a round robin fashion and then analyzing the data in rich discussions. There is less anonymity in NGT than in the Delphi method. It is also less iterative in nature. Based on these two methods, a complex problem such as computer augmentation for disabled persons may be benefited most by the Delphi method of research. Since this technology requires extreme innovation to overcome the challenges that have impeded progress, the forecasting nature of Delphi studies based on expert ideas may spawn creativity for new solutions. The NGT is more of an evaluation tool, not that new ideas could not spawn from the post discussion phase. It just seems that the “steel sharpens steel” phenomenon would seemingly be greater in the Delphi type of interaction among experts in the field.

Dobie, A., Rhodes, M., Tysinger, J. W., & Freeman, J. (2004). Family Medicine, 36(6), 402-6.

Skulmoski, G. J., & Hartman, F. T. (2007). The Delphi Method for Graduate Research. Journal of Information Technology Education, 6, 1-21.

No comments:

Post a Comment