Objectivity And Values In Sociology Flashcards
What are the social influences that change the nature and direction of research?
- The desire of researchers to prove their own hypotheses right and for experiments to succeed.
- Whether the research area is one of current interests or lucrative for financial backers
- Whoever is paying for the research
- Pressures to publish and publishers’ deadlines
- The current state of knowledge and the availability of existing data
- How useful the research is seen e.g. to governments, to private companies, to other researchers
- Desire for promotion and career success
- Time and money available to do research
- Theoretical perspective - paradigm of research
- Values of researcher - whether the subject is seen as interesting and important or not
What are the approaches to values being in sociology?
- Value-free sociology - Kept out
- Value-laden sociology - Kept in
- Committed sociology - Kept in
What is value free sociology?
- Value-free sociology: One of the key ideas that sociologists or positivists, like Comte and Durkheim and Marx, have taken from the physical sciences is the importance of objectivity in research. Like the natural scientist the sociologist studies phenomena that exist totally externally to the individual. The ‘social facts’ positivists refer to are the statistics obtained by direct observation or, where this is impossible, through quantitative methods such as questionnaires, structured interviews and the use of official statistics. Such methods are objective to positivists as they are untainted by personal opinion and preference and simply count what exists, prior to research, in social world. According to O’Connell, Davidson and Layder, personal biases and political opinions of researchers are irrelevant, provided that the research is well designed and there is no attempt to distort or alter the findings.
What is value-laden sociology?
- Value-laden sociology: This school of thought believes that sociology cannot be value free - even if it wants to be. A number of areas show how it is impossible to keep values out of the picture:
- Funding - Like other sciences, sociology relies on funding from various sources and it is important to question why a certain piece of research has been commissioned. Sociologists working for British government departments, for instance, usually have to sign an agreement that if the department doesn’t like the ideas or findings, then it has the right to prevent publication. They point out that scientists allow their findings to be manipulated by public relations companies, operating for the benefit of the founders - even when the findings do not necessarily support the funders’ claims.
- Career progression - Sociologists have personal ambitions and career aspirations. Reputations can be made and these desires can intrude into research (knowingly or subconsciously).
- Personal beliefs - As sociologists we are human beings and consequently it is impossible to escape from our personal beliefs no matter how hard we try when conducting research. Choice of topic in the first place is often a result of personal interests we have. According to Gouldner, all researchers have to make basic assumptions - which he calls “domain assumptions” about social life. These include beliefs about whether people are rational or irrational, assumptions about whether humans are predictable and about whether society requires planned intervention by governments.
Similarly, sociologists find certain areas of study ‘interesting’. Why are they drawn to these areas in the first place? Often they reflect personal issues and a desire to explore something important to them. This makes it more difficult to extricate personal values from the research process itself. An example of this is the work of Ken Plummer, who has published widely on sexual issues and is a sociologist associated with ‘queer theory’. He makes it plain that his own sexual preference encouraged him to become interested in gay issues. Similarly feminist writers are often drawn to subjects of particular interest to women. Often these are topics that men have not researched because, as Harding argues, male sociologists may be biased in their choice of subject matter and they often neglect subjects that affect women’s lives more than men’s.
What is committed sociology?
Some sociologists argue that sociology cannot and should not be value free and rather as a subject it should have values guiding research.
In the 1970s there was a big debate between Gouldner and Becker. Both agreed that sociology should openly ‘take sides’ as it were in research:
Gouldner believed that:
- Sociologists cannot ignore their values when doing research.
- Sociologists need to hold on to their values or they risk ‘selling out’ to the highest bidders when conducting research.
Becker argued that sociologists should argue from the side of the underdog (criminals, mentally ill patients etc) because little is known about their position.
Gouldner argued the opposite and suggested that sociologists should focus on the really powerful groups as these create the structures of oppression. Gouldner is critical of Becker’s position which he sees as an over-sentimental view of disadvantaged groups. Instead, Gouldner advocates a Marxist position in siding against the powerful, exploitative groups in society.
Feminists argue with this idea of exposing exploitative groups, but see the key issue being the patriarchal nature of society - how males dominate and control society.
Left realists are also committed to the rights of exploited groups - but unlike Marxists, they do believe change can occur within capitalism.
What does Weber think?
For Weber values, unlike facts, cannot be disproved and he saw an essential role for values in sociological research.
Values as a guide to research: - values are essential to help us choose which aspects of social life we want to study.
Values and data collection: - when collecting data Weber believed we should keep our values out of the process.
Values and data interpretation: - values are important again when we interpret what the research is telling us. We need to put the findings within a theoretical concept. We need to tell others about our values so that our interpretations can be made in context.
Values and effects of research: - Weber believed that as sociologists we have a responsibility to look at the effects of research. We cannot hide behind ‘objectivity’ at this stage - particularly if our findings can cause harm.
What is the relationship between values and methods?
There is a link between the beliefs of value freedom/laden approaches and the methods chosen to study social behaviour. Those who believe a value free approach is possible - such as positivists tend to favour methods generating quantitative data which are seen as reliable, objective and offering the chance to look for correlations etc.
For those who believe that values cannot be ignored and those who warmly welcome their input - qualitative methods are preferred where depth, validity, verstehen etc. are seen as important.
What is the relativist view?
The relativist position argues that there are many different versions of ‘truth’ - the sociologists research is just one of these. As we have already seen this is the position of the postmodernist.
Others disagree and say that there is a real factual world out there and sociologists can observe, record and report on what is going on out there irrespective of their values.
