motivations, involvement with and pride of the movement, but also to experience daily life in GT and to get a glimpse of its many intricacies that would have been impossible from Denmark. April Theoretical and methodological I returned to Denmark but From April I began focusing 2016 chapters are finished in continued empirical sampling on developing an analytical collaboration with Martin B. from DK. This proved a framework to guide the Jørgensen. Further Empirical difficult task, though I was analysis. I had been reading collection ensues. Chapters on able to secure much data up on the literature since my empirical data, theory of science primarily from internet sources first meeting with Martin in and introduction should also be and from social media. February, but I had still not completed by the end of this Through these I extended my concluded with which lines month. connection and knowledge of of inquiry to proceed. the demonstrations, and their Moving towards May I background. started developing what was to be the final analytical framework by Neil Smelser, though at this stage it was still a crude frame. Many revisions were made before I had reached the final version incorporated in the report. Particularly the final fit with RM and PPT and the general lines to follow when all three paradigms were united in a single analytical framework. May 2016 Data collection continues but Data collection through April, The final framework was should be finished by the end of March and May remained a finished during May and the this month for subsequent analysis high priority along with the analytical process was to commence. theoretical development. initiated at this time. I still Through the months of April had to make revisions now and May, however, I decrease and again between empirical the focus on empirical observations and theoretical sampling and started assumptions, particularly developing the theoretical with regards to the analysis frame subsequently which of strain and conducive meant that theory and data structures. Which proved to became increasingly linked be the most difficult to wrap and I could prepare for the my head around, both analytical part in more detail. theoretically and At this stage my observations analytically. I suggest in the were still quite unconnected discussions that a further and because of my revision of the theoretical ‘scattered’
motivations, involvement with and pride of the movement, but also to experience daily life in GT and to get a glimpse of its many intricacies that would have been impossible from Denmark. April 2016 Theoretical and methodological chapters are finished in collaboration with Martin B. Jørgensen. Further Empirical collection ensues. Chapters on empirical data, theory of science and introduction should also be completed by the end of this month. I returned to Denmark but continued empirical sampling from DK. This proved a difficult task, though I was able to secure much data primarily from internet sources and from social media. Through these I extended my connection and knowledge of the demonstrations, and their background. From April I began focusing on developing an analytical framework to guide the analysis. I had been reading up on the literature since my first meeting with Martin in February, but I had still not concluded with which lines of inquiry to proceed. Moving towards May I started developing what was to be the final analytical framework by Neil Smelser, though at this stage it was still a crude frame. Many revisions were made before I had reached the final version incorporated in the report. Particularly the final fit with RM and PPT and the general lines to follow when all three paradigms were united in a single analytical framework. May 2016 Data collection continues but should be finished by the end of this month for subsequent analysis to commence. Data collection through April, March and May remained a high priority along with the theoretical development. Through the months of April and May, however, I decrease the focus on empirical sampling and started developing the theoretical frame subsequently which meant that theory and data became increasingly linked and I could prepare for the analytical part in more detail. At this stage my observations were still quite unconnected and ‘scattered’ because of my The final framework was finished during May and the analytical process was initiated at this time. I still had to make revisions now and again between empirical observations and theoretical assumptions, particularly with regards to the analysis of strain and conducive structures. Which proved to be the most difficult to wrap my head around, both theoretically and analytically. I suggest in the discussions that a further revision of the theoretical