experiments

Question 1

1. Laboratory experiments

Answer 1

• most scientific method researcher can use - tightly controlled - artificial environment - to see if one variable has an impact on another variable (in/dependant)- experimental group vs control group

Question 2

Lab exp - example

Answer 2

An example will help us illustrate the basic principle of the experimental methods. If we want to discover what causes plants to grow, one way would be to take a set of identical plants and randomly divide them into two groups - an experimental and control group - we then treat them differently

Question 3

Experimental group

Answer 3

With this group, we might vary the quantity of nutrients that they received, carefully measuring and recording any changes in the plants size that we observe

Question 4

Control group

Answer 4

We would keep the quantity of nutrients constant, also measuring and recording any changes in the size of the plants

Question 5

Evaluation - lab exp example

Answer 5

On comparing results, we notice the plants in the experimental group have grown more rapidly than the plants in the control group after receiving extra nutrients - may have discovered a cause and effect relationship

Question 6

Logic of experimental method

Answer 6

The scientist manipulates (alters) the variables in which they are interested in order to discover what affect they have - by following this method, the scientist can establish a cause and effect relationship which will allow them to predict accurately what will happen in the future under specific conditions

Question 7

Reliability - lab exp

Answer 7

• experiments can be replicated exactly again - should produce the same results every time - scientists personal feelings / opinions have no impact on the results or outcomes - followed by positivist sociologists

Question 8

Practical issues - lab exp

Answer 8

1. Open systems - lab exp are only suitable for studying closed systems. Society is an open system (lots of variables at work) so it’s impossible for researchers to identify, or control, all of them. Lab exp are not useful in studying social phenomena 2. Studying the past - lab exp can’t be used to study the past 3. Small samples - lab exp are small samples so hard to investigate large scale phenomena 4. Hawthorne effect 5. Expectancy effect - form of experimenter bias, what a researcher expects to happen can influence the outcome

Question 9

Ethical issues - lab exp

Answer 9

1. Informed consent - gaining the subjects consent means informing them of all the details of the experiment. This can be self deflecting and therefore subjects must be deceived so they do not act differently 2. Harm to subjects - some argue that minor or temporary harm may be justified ethically if the results yield significant social benefit and if the experimental group are gaining from the treatment they’re receiving, treatment should be made available to the control group 3. The Milgram experiment is a good example of this

Question 10

Theoretical issues - lab exp

Answer 10

Positivists favour lab experiments due to reliability. However they have important limitations. Interpretivists would go as far as to argue that lab experiments lack validity

Question 11

Reliability and hypothesis testing

Answer 11

Positivists say lab experiments are highly reliable as results can be tested over and over again - experimenter can control conditions - produces quantitive data - detached and objective method

Question 12

Representativeness - lab exp

Answer 12

Positivists see representativeness as important - aim to make generalisations about wider social structure shaping individuals behaviour

Question 13

External validity - lab exp

Answer 13

Cannot be sure they are reflective of wider population 1. Small samples - greater risk of not being representative of cross section / findings cannot be generalised2. Lack of external validity due to high level of control / high level of control = less like the world outside of lab

Question 14

Internal validity - lab exp

Answer 14

Findings may not be the truth for the subjects of experiment. Artificiality of the lab may encourage Hawthorne Effect. Subjects react to being studied and change their behaviour thus invalid results are produced

Question 15

Interpretivism and free will

Answer 15

Humans are fundamentally different to subjects studied by natural scientists. Humans have free will and choice. Behaviour is not caused by external factors, so cannot be explored in terms of cause and effect statements. Actions can only be understood by the choices we make based on the meanings we give to events

Question 16

Lab exp

Answer 16

Fundamentally inappropriate method to study humans

Question 17

Methods in context links - lab exp

Answer 17

How experiments can be used to study issues in education - teacher expectations - class room interaction - labelling - pupils self fulfilling prophecy - self concept

Question 18

Lab experiments and teacher expectations

Answer 18

• Harvey and Slatin - Charkin et Al - Mason

Question 19

Harvey and Slatin

Answer 19

Used a sample of 96 teachers. Each teacher was shown 18 photos of children from different social class backgrounds - to control other variables, the photographs were equally divided in terms of gender and ethnicity - teachers were asked to rate the children on their performance, parental attitudes to education and aspirations - found that lower class children were less rated favourably - teachers based their ratings on the similarity of the photos and students they have taught - study indicates that teachers label pupils from different social classes and use these to pre judge pupils potential

Question 20

Charkin

Answer 20

Used a sample of 48 uni students who taught a lesson to a 10 year old boy - high expectancy group were told the boy was highly motivated and intelligent / the low expectancy group were told he was poorly motivated with low IQ / rest were given no information - videoed the lessons and found those in high exp group made more eye contact and gave more encouragement than low exp group

Question 21

Mason

Answer 21

Looked at whether negative or positive expectations had the greater effect - teachers were given positive, negative or neutral reports on a pupil. The teachers then observed video recordings of the pupil taking a test, watching to see if any arrows were made - they were asked to predict the pupils end of year attainment - he found that the negative reports had much greater impact than positive ones on the teachers expectations

Question 22

Practical issues - lab exp

Answer 22

• schools are large institutions that have many variables that may affect teachers expectations - expectations may be influenced by other things such as class size, streaming or type of school - impossible to identify and control all the variables that might influence teachers expectations - large scale social factors cannot be studied in small scale lab settings

Question 23

Artificiality - lab exp

Answer 23

Lab exp are artificial - Charkin ; used uni students not real teachers - Harvey and Slatin - used photos rather than real students

Question 24

Ethical issues - lab exp

Answer 24

Those that do not involve real pupils have fewer ethical issues - Mason / H + S ; no use of real pupils - Charkin ; used real pupils

Question 25

Narrow focus - lab exp

Answer 25

• only examine one aspect of teacher expectations such as body language - useful since allows researcher to examine this specific variable more thoroughly - not useful since teacher expectations not seen within the wider process of labelling and self fulfilling prophecy

Question 26

Field experiments

Answer 26

Follow the same idea as lab exp in wanting to find the causes but aim to overcome naturalness and lack of validity of lab exp - takes place in subjects natural surroundings - those involved do not know they are the subjects of an experiment - researcher isolates and manipulates one or more of the variables to see effect on subjects of the experiments

Question 27

Field exp adv / disadv

Answer 27

Adv - Avoid artificiality, more natural and valid for real life Disadv - Less control over variables cannons be certain we have found the true cause, unethical

Question 28

Methods in context links - field exp

Answer 28

Rosenthal and Jacobsen’s ‘Pygmalian in the classroom’ looked at how a self fulfilling prophecy is created - they carried out their research in a California primary school where pupils were given an IQ test and teachers were told this enabled the researchers to identity the 20% of pupils who were going to ‘spurt’ in the next year

Question 29

Rosenthal and Jacobson had 2 aims

Answer 29

1. To plant in the minds of the teachers a particular set of expectations about their pupils 2. To see if this had any effect on pupil performance

Question 30

Ethical issues - field exp

Answer 30

From R+J experiment you can identify - ‘spurters’ benefited from the study - could they have been held back academically due to teacher expectation down to lack of attention and encouragement - such experiment is unlikely to be carried out today where children have more nights and schools duty of care

Question 31

Comparative experiments

Answer 31

Comparative method - carried out only in the mind of the sociologist- researcher doesn’t experiment with real people- reanalyses secondary data - still designed to discover cause and effect relationships Adv - avoids artificiality, used to study past events, avoids ethical problems of harming or deceiving subjects Disadv - less control than field experiments

Question 32

Stanford prison experiment

Answer 32

Zimbardo wanted to explore the darker side of human nature by seeing how far people would conform to roles given to them - participants began to psychologically begin to abuse each other - experiment stopped after 6 days

Question 33

Natural/field exp

Answer 33

• Interpretivists argue they are a better alternative - Don’t attempt to control all the variables instead let behaviour and situations take their ‘natural course’ - Subjects don’t normally know they’re being studied

Question 34

Durkheim suicide

Answer 34

Based his research on stats and looked at different societies and different cultural and social groups within the same society in the 19th century - found a number of social patterns, arguing that the social patterns found demonstrate that suicide is not a random act

Question 35

Durkheim suicide cont.

Answer 35

1. Altruistic suicide - refers to having too much integration, the individual isn’t fully integrated into society 2. Egoistic suicide - refers to having not enough integration into society, the opposite of altruistic suicide3. Fatalistic suicide - refers to having not enough regulation, this is where the individual is controlled by society4. Anomic suicide - refers to having not enough regulation, the opposite of fatalistic suicide

Question 36

Lab exp advantages

Answer 36

Reliable - can be repeated Can identify cause and effect relationships in the natural sciences Positivists favour this approach

Question 37

Lab exp disadvantages

Answer 37

Cannot control all possible variables that influence behaviour / achievements Difficult to study large scale Cannot study the past as you cannot control the variables Lack of informed consent, deception and harm to participant Hawthorne effect

Question 38

Field exp advantages

Answer 38

More natural, valid and realistic than lab experiments Social experiments allow the sociologists to ‘unravel’ the processes and rules of everyday social life Experiments enable the researcher to get close to peoples actual interpretation of everyday experiences

Question 39

Field exp disadvantages

Answer 39

No consent from participants = risk of deception and manipulation The more natural and realistic a situation is, the less control the sociologist has over the variables that might be operating Hawthorne effect if participants notice a change to their environment

Question 40

Comparative method advantages

Answer 40

Avoids artificiality Can be used to study past events Poses no ethical problems

Question 41

Comparative method disadvantages

Answer 41

Less control over variables therefore difficult to determine if the experiment has actually determined the cause of something