2.1 Types of Data, Methods and Research Methods- Advantages and Disadvantages Flashcards
Primary Data
Strengths:
1. complete control over how data is collected, by whom as well as for what purpose
2. greater control over relaiability
3. greater control over validity
4. greater control over representativeness
Limitations:
1. takes time, money and effort
2. difficulty accessing target group:
* regarding historical research potential respondent may be dead
* people may refuse to participate
Secondary Data
Strengths
1. saves time, money and effort
2. it may be the only available resource such as suicide statistics
3. useful for historiacal and comparative purposes
4. official statistic may be highly reliable as it is:
* collected consistently
* drom the same sources
* highly likely to represent what it claims to represent
Limitations
1. not always produced with the needs of sociologists in mind
2. personal documents may be unreliable
3. historical documents may be representative of the individual rather than wider opinions.
Quantitative Data
Strengths:
1. Useful if they simply need to compare numbers
2. summarise sources of information and make comparisons
3. comparisons and correlations cam can test whether a hypothesis is true or not
4. track changes in behaviours over time(longitudinal study)
5. more reliable as it is easier to replicate and questions are standardised
6. easier to remain objective
Limitations:
1. hard to capture normal behaviour in an artificial setting
2. superficial data
3. doesnt reveal the reasons for behaviour- lacks depth; only captures who when where of people’s behaviour
Qualitative Data
strengths:
1. capture the complex reasons for behaviour
2. researchers have greater freedom to study people in their normal settings.
3. the results are likely to show how people really behave
limitations:
2. unrepresentative
1. Low reliability as it is hard to standardise since:
* no two groups are qualitatively the same
* the depth and detail of research is hard to make it replicable
* difficult to compare across time and location
Official Statistics
Strengths:
1. may be the only source covering a particular area of study
2. data is readily available, inexpensive, low money, effort and time needed
3. representative because data is based on carefully chosen large samples
4. contain hard statistics whose level of accuracy cannot be doubted
Limitations:
1. Not all information may be available to those collecting the statistics- such as the dark figure of crime
2. does not reveal much about the reasons for people’s behaviour
3. Governments may occasionally change the definition of key concepts. different governments may also define a concept differently. this makes comparisons difficult and brings down reliability
3. althought it is more objective its significance must be interpreted- a spike in crime may mean:
* a real rise in crime
* a different way of defining or counting crime
* police targetting certain types of crime and arresting more people
Personal Documents
strengths:
1. access to data which would cost time, money and effort to collect personally
2. provide secondary data in situations where collecting primary data is not possible
3. can provide qualitative data in great depth and detail
4. can be analysed by comparing their literal meaning and their hidden meaning- the hopes, fear s and beliefs of whoever produced them
3. historical documents can be used for comparative purposes:
* contrasting how we once lived and how live now is useful for tracking and understanding social change
* historical analysis reveals the differences in people’s behaviours- things we now take for granted may have been seen differently and vice versa
* compare accounts time to test the validity of current accounts of social behaviour
Limitations:
1. Not always easy to find the documents and where they came from
2. paper documents can be faked similarly digital texts, photographs and videos may also be faked- we dont know why or by whom it was created so its hard to be sure if its a believeable source
3. digital sources may be subject to change- websites may become unavailable or updated so the original content is lost
4. some sources may be hard to acess as technologies become no longer used- CDs, DVDs for example.
3. documents may be unreliable because they may be:
* incomplete
* inaccurate
* unrepresentative
Questionnaires
Strengths:
1. easy to quantify data
2. questions quick and easy to code
3. useful when researchers need to contact large numbers of people, quickly and efficiently
4. the respondents do the time consuming work of completing the questionnaire
5. highly reliable as questions are standardised
6. easy to replicate
7. anonymity of respondents improve validity
8. less risk of respondents giving biased answers or trying to anticipate what the researcher wants to hear
limitations:
1. low response rate- unrepresentative sample as the sample effectively selects itself
2. respondents may not answer some questions or respond incorrectly
3. difficult to examine complex issues and opinions
4. researcher has to decide what is and is not significant, questions cannot be changed later
5. researcher doesnt know if respondent understood the question
6. researcher doesnt know if the questions mean the same thing to all the respondents
7. if someone out of the intended audience or selected sample answers the questionnaire the validity goes down
8. leading questions dont give room for respondents to refute questions
Structured Interviews
Strengths:
1. respondents will not misunderstand questions
2. response rate is 100%- representative sample
3. highly reliable as questions are standardised
4. easy to replicate
Limitations:
1. may involve assumptions about people’s behaviour and can contain biased questions
2. the interviewer effect- the respondent may try to help the researcher by providing data designed to please: this reduces validity data as it lacks authenticity
3. the researcher effect: the researcher may induce biased responses:
* aggressive interviewers may intimidate respondents into giving answers that they do not believe
* status considerations, based on factors such as age, class ethnicity, gender, etc.
Laboratory Experiments
Strengths:
1. high reliability due to standardisation
2. find causal relationships
2. easy to replicate
Limitations:
1. findings unlikely to apply to the real world
2. the hawthorne effect
Field Experiments
strengths:
1. can be used to manipulate situations in the real world to understand underlying reasons for everyday behaviour
limitations:
1. tend to establish correlations than causations
Content Analysis
strengths:
1. can identify underlying themes and patterns of behaviour
2. can be used for concept mapping
3. the quantification of specific behaviour may allow researchers to draw complex conclusions from simple data collection tecniques
4. . use of a standardised framework such as analysis grids means that data can be checked and replicated raising reliability
limitations:
1. reliability may be limited because researchers must make subjective decisions about what they are counting
2. may have to judge which categories to use and not to use as well as decide what behaviour fits into what category
3. raises questions whether all observed behaviours can be neatly categorised
4. does not tell researchers much about how or why audiences receive, understand, accept, ignore themes and patterns discovered by researchers
Unstructured Interviews
strengths:
1. researcher’s limited input means that data reflects the interests of the respondent- therefore a more accurate and detailed account of their beliefs
2. allows the respondents to talk freely in their own words avoids the problem of the researcher pre-judging what important and/or irrelevant data
3. the researcher must establish a strong understanding with respondents. if this is achieved, people who dont trust being studied can open up to the researcher, allowing sensitive issues to be explored in depth
4. if the research is relatively informal it can take place where the respondent will feel at ease
limitations:
1. carrying out such interviews takes considerable skill- the interviewer has to resist the urge to influence, encourage or interrupt.
2. the researcher has little control over the direction of the interview and the conversation may lead into areas that can later prove to be irrelevant
3. interviews are time-consuming
4. analysing and interpreting all the data is time-consuming
5. reliability is low as questions are unstandardised/unstructured and therefore impossible to replicate
6. interviewer effect
7. respondents may have imperfect recall, memory retention is subjective to what the respondent deems important
6. researcher may not know if respondent is being honest
Semi-Structured Interviews
strengths:
1. there are no specific questions prepared therefore there is less risk of researcher predetermining the interview.
2. researcher may pick up new ideas and information from the respondent which may not have occured to the interviewer before- this knowledge may add to latter interviews and suggest further questions
3. allows respondents to develop their ideas, the researcher tries to discover what someone really means, thinks or believes.
4. focus on issues that the repondent considers important- increases validity of data as it is more likely to represent what it aims to represent
limitations:
1. demands certain skills in the researcher, such as asking the right questions, establishing a good rapport and thinking quickly about relevant question opportunities
2. interview is time-consuming
3. interpreting and analysing the data is time consuming as data is not tightly focused
4. low reliability as there is a lack of standardisation; analysing and generalising data is difficult
5. respondents may have imperfect recall, memory retention is subjective to what the respondent deems important
6. researcher may not know if respondent is being honest
7. interviewer effect
Group Interviews
strengths:
1. creates a situation where the respondents can naturally share and discuss ideas-data is more authentic raising validity
2. the researcher can:
* control the pace and extent of the discussion
* plan a schedule that allows them to focus and refocus the discussion
* ask questions, stop or change the focus of the discussions
limitations:
1. researcher requires considerable skill to allow people to speak freely and openly about an issue while maintaining the focus of the research
2. sample may become unrepresentative if even one person decides against arriving
3. may be subject to group think and at risk of reflecting a group consensus
Overt Participation Observation
strengths:
1. recording data is relatively easy because the group knows and understands the role of the researcher- the researcher can ask questions, take notes and observe behaviour openly.
2. with groups that have hierarchial structures the researcher may gain access to all levels.
3. sponsorships may help the rearcher gain access to groups who may be unwilling to be studied
4. researchers are able to build up a highly detailed picture of the lives they are describing
5. the researcher not only get to understand what people say they do but also witness and experience what people actually do. this increases validity
6. where the observers role is clearly defined there is less risk of involvement in criminal, dangerous, or unethical behaviour- the researcher can pull out from such situations without risking losing the trust of the participants.
limitations:
1. if a group refuses the researcher permission to observe it, then the research cannot be carried out
2. require time, effort and money
3. hawthorne effect
4. researcher involvement may be too superficial without full participation- not allowing a true understanding of their behaviourment
5. ethical concerns such as not participating in illegal behaviour may affect the extent to which the researcher is truly experiencing how they behave
6. risk that the reasercher may beome too involved and effectively become the story they are reporting
7. their presence becomes the focal point around which participants adapt their behaviour.
8. impossible to replicate
9. unrepresentative low reliability
10. imperfect recall of the researcher
