Into the unknown ❄️ (diving head-first into research)
How do we find out what we don’t know?
Last sprint we left off with the goal of understanding what different stakeholders in the death penalty space need, and how those needs overlap. This is important to ensure that we solve the right problems facing people who are impacted the most.
But without knowing what people need, or their problems, how do we know where to start looking? Enter exploratory research. We needed to talk to anyone in the space — journalists, researchers, lawyers, policymakers, activists, and the general public — who could help paint a picture for us.
Our high-level research plan
BIG GOAL: What do people want to achieve? How do people use information to achieve this?
We decided to tackle this big goal in two ways: from the lens of the death penalty space and from analogous domains such as education, journalism, policy, and data-heavy fields that work with information in similar ways.
DP space goal: What are the most pressing issues in the space? What are strategies to solve problems in the space?
Analogous domain goal: How is information shared and displayed? What can we learn from the best-in-class in other domains?
Approaching ambiguity
In order to achieve our research goals we created the research plan above. We broke it down into 30 min interviews, a survey to the general public and some more desk research.
Interviews
For our interviews we broke them down into internal interviews with the DPIC Staff, external interviews which we broke down further into death penalty space related interviews and analogous domain interviews.
Internal Interviews
For our internal interviews our goals were to understand how DPIC works overall, what are their needs and pain points and how do they interact with their website and census. We also wanted to learn about their knowledge and experience working in the death penalty space. We were able to interview 6 DPIC staff members this sprint. Each interview was a bit different because we tailored it to their role and experience in the death penalty space.
External: Death Penalty Space Interviews
For external interviews focusing on the death penalty space our goals were to learn more about each interviewee’s work in the death penalty space and how they used data and information to support their work. We were able to interview around 6 interviewees in the death penalty space this sprint.
External: Analogous Domain Interviews
We decided to interview people in analogous domains to understand how different data-centric professions present information clearly to a variety of different stakeholders. We identified 4 different analogous domains which were explainers or educators, advocates, media, and data visualizers. Our goal through these interviews was to understand how peoplel in analogous domains sought and shared information. In this sprint we had 4 analogous domain interviews.
Survey
We designed and distributed a survey to understand what people’s goals are when they are involved in the death penalty space, how they achieve those goals, and what information or sources they use in achieving those goals. This survey is very general, so we used a distribution plan to reach the general public. We sent it out on Reddit forums general to social science research, criminal justice, and the death penalty, on Facebook groups dedicated to discussing the death penalty, through Slack groups provided by CMU, and are planning on sending it through DPIC’s listserv.
This survey has helped us with providing an idea of what information is important to people, and what further avenues of research we should dive into.
If you have any experience looking up the death penalty before and are willing to help us, please take our survey at https://cmu.ca1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_b8SIvsNCkRHaQbs! :)
Desk research
In addition to the interviews with people that are involved in the death penalty space and in analogous domains, we are doing desk research to learn from people and organizations that are already the leaders in their domains.
For example, within other domains, storytelling with information is an established part of the job. The Washington Post’s site detailing every instance of police shooting using data is a very powerful example of great data visualization and storytelling.
By learning from the pioneers in their fields, we are gathering ideas that would help DPIC get more active and engaged responses from people.
What we’ve learned so far
So what do we do with all this information? We started a new habit of debriefing and synthesizing ideas immediately after every interview and research activity. Pulling out roses, thorns, and buds, has allowed us to get in the habit of consistently making sense of the data and establishing a common knowledge across the team.
Starting with internal stakeholder interviews, we have completed interviewing relevant DPIC staff members that provided us with both a zoomed-in day to day look into their tasks, as well as a zoomed out view of their overarching mission and strategies. From these interviews, our main insights are the following:
- Make data more digestible - DPIC offers a broad range of rich data, but it is currently difficult to understand quickly and effectively. Possible avenues to tackle this include refining the data visualization experience and adding hierarchy in the articles.
- Storytelling without bias - There is a desire to tell stories from DPIC’s end, but there is a risk that building a narrative could portray them as biased. How might we make implicit connections and tell stories through the data?
- Improve media collaboration - DPIC wants the media to report more factually and be well informed when they do so. There is potential to streamline this collaboration so that DPIC data is clearly communicated to the public through media outlets.
From our external stakeholders, including our survey responses and interviews with people involved in the death penalty space, we have made the following insights:
- There has been a decrease in the support for the death penalty, but those who support it have the misconception that wrongful convictions never happen and that executing someone is cheaper than life sentence
- People who are abolitionist are looking for more hard facts and legal information to strengthen their argument
- The process from sentencing to execution is complicated so there is a desire for more clarity in the information (ex. legal process nuances such as tracking appeals)
Finally, from our analogous domain research, we have started ideating on possible strategies and best-in-class methods from other fields that could be transferrable to the death penalty space. For example, after talking to a clinical research assistant who explains hospital procedures to patients, we learned that avoiding technical jargon and using a trusted “middle-man” to deliver information can be pivotal in communicating a message clearly. From this, we can generate opportunity areas for DPIC such as using journalists as “middle-men” for information, and thinking about ways to create some sort of standardized guidelines for them to report more clearly and accurately.
From these findings, we pull out the following opportunity areas.
Our approach to these conversations has been to stay open minded to cast a wide net and capture as much useful information as possible. As we continue to learn from those in the space and those adjacent to it, it will be crucial for us to maintain a consistent practice of synthesis and sense-making as a team.
What‘s next?
Next sprint we continue on our journey of finding information to help us understand the problem space better.
Surveying and interviewing will be an ongoing process in the next couple of sprints.
Meanwhile, we’re simultaneously recording and synthesizing findings from our research and maintaining a list of ideas to identify potential opportunity spaces.
