Digital resources in the Social Sciences and Humanities OpenEdition Our platforms OpenEdition Books OpenEdition Journals Hypotheses Calenda Libraries OpenEdition Freemium Follow us

Bachelor’s Thesis – Science Blogging in the DACH Region: Exploring Authors’ Motivations

Author: (Ms) Rhian Krische

Edited 15 November 2024: The title may be changed to better reflect the broader meaning of Wissenschaft.

In a previous post, I outlined my upcoming bachelor’s thesis as part of my distance learning program in Information Management1 at the Hochschule Hannover (Hannover University of Applied Sciences and Arts). This post initially served to announce the accompanying survey for my research. The focus of the thesis is to investigate the motivations that drive researchers, scientists, academics and science enthusiasts to engage in science blogging. The survey is now complete; the interviews have been conducted and transcribed, and after several revisions, the title has been officially approved by my assessor. The challenge now is to write the thesis itself.

The process so far has been an engaging journey. I chose to write the thesis in English, which, although my research context is centred around German-speaking countries, has allowed for a broader audience and has also reduced the workload for my German proofreaders #germanassecondlanguage. Navigating the intricacies of language—especially since certain words do not translate directly from German to English and definitions can vary—has added depth to my understanding of the subject. I found a dissertation from the United States that resonated with my interpretation of science blogging and has since proved invaluable.

To ensure clarity and alignment with my research goals, I opted to broadly translate “Wissenschaft” as “science,” as I felt terms like “academic blogging” and “research blogging” were too narrow. I have substantiated my translations with real-world examples of usage and compiled detailed justifications for my definitions. I do, however, anticipate streamlining this content for the final thesis. Additionally, I encountered some nuances in terminology; for example, the term “dissertation” in the UK refers to what is known in Germany as an undergraduate thesis/Bachelorarbeit, while a “Dissertation” denotes a much higher level of academic work.3 In light of the aforementioned considerations, I opted to refrain from calling it a bachelor’s dissertation.

The interviews were transcribed using the automatic speech recognition system Whisper4, which offers five configurations of varying model sizes5. Through testing, I determined that the medium-sized model was most effective for English transcription, while the large model performed best for the German interviews. Due to the limited processing power of my laptop, I was unable to transcribe the German text using the large model in a timely manner. Consequently, I utilised my husband’s more powerful PC, which provided the necessary capacity for efficient transcription. Remarkably, it was also able to translate the German transcript into English. However, it faced challenges when multiple individuals spoke simultaneously, frequently only capturing one speaker at a time. The system was capable of smoothing out false starts, enhancing readability—for instance, transforming “y-y-ye….eh…..hmm…..I thi-…..I think that” into “yes, I think that.” For those who wish to retain verbal stumbles, the transcription still serves as a robust foundation. I listened to the audio recordings at 0.5 speed, adding missing words and background sounds such as [laughter] and [connection lost, redialling noises]. Edits to the transcript were made using oTranscribe, a free application designed to simplify the transcription of recorded interviews.6

The survey was designed and administered using Microsoft Forms7 , a tool for individuals with a valid Microsoft 365 account. While the platform is user-friendly, transforming the resulting data into actionable graphs necessitates a certain level of proficiency in Excel. The survey ultimately garnered 86 responses, approximately 59 of which came from active science bloggers. While I won’t delve into the detailed results here, I can share that about 50% of respondents have been blogging for over five years, predominantly from the humanities (Geisteswissenschaften). Additionally, most respondents possess a master’s degree or higher. Preliminary analysis indicates that financial gain is not a primary motivating factor; rather, public relations and networking appear to lead the motivations identified.

The plan is to upload all supplemental materials, such as the surveys and transcripts, to Zenodo8, linking them in the appendix as DOIs. Naturally, identifiable information will be omitted, and the transcripts will be published only after obtaining consent from the interviewees.

If you are interested in learning more about my thesis or would like to assist as a proofreader, please feel free to contact me at rhian-sian-hazel.krische(at)stud.hs-hannover.de.


[1] https://f3.hs-hannover.de/studium/bachelor-studiengaenge/informationsmanagement-berufsbegleitend-bib

[2] See All the Science That Is Fit to Blog: An Analysis of Science Blogging Practices at https://repository.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/1051/

[3] See definition by the University of York: https://subjectguides.york.ac.uk/academic-writing/dissertations and examples of terminology used in at the Hochschule Hannover and the TU Dresden: https://www.hs-hannover.de/ueber-uns/organisation/bibliothek/literatursuche/abschlussarbeiten, https://tu-dresden.de/bu/verkehr/postgraduales/promotion/dissertation

[4] https://openai.com/index/whisper/

[5] https://nexa.ai/openai/whisper-tiny.en/onnx-cpu-fp32/readme

[6] https://otranscribe.com/

[7] https://forms.office.com/

[8] https://zenodo.org/

Source for image: Computer science education.png under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International licence.


OpenEdition schlägt Ihnen vor, diesen Beitrag wie folgt zu zitieren:
Redakteur (12. November 2024). Bachelor’s Thesis – Science Blogging in the DACH Region: Exploring Authors’ Motivations. SLUB Open Science Lab. Abgerufen am 19. Januar 2025 von https://doi.org/10.58079/12nmq


Das könnte dich auch interessieren …

Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert

Diese Website verwendet Akismet, um Spam zu reduzieren. Erfahre mehr darüber, wie deine Kommentardaten verarbeitet werden.