Research methods Flashcards
Primary data
researcher collects data themself eg questionnaire
Primary data pros + cons
pros
- brand new data
cons
-time consuming
-unethical without informed consent
-researcher bias
Secondary data
data already collected by secondary sources eg. offical statistics
Secondary data pros + cons
pros
- quick and esy to access
- useful in comparisons
- no concern with informed consent
cons
-may not be valid or reliable
- may not find any
- research bias from og researcher
Qualitative data
words,details and opinions (subjective)
Qualitative pros + cons
pros
- detailed insight sees meaning and motive
- allows for raport between researcher and participant
cons
- not reliable
- small scale
- lacks credibility due to interpretation
Quantitative
numerical data (objective)
Quantitative pros + cons
pros
- can test hypothesis - cause and effect
- compare stats
- easy to analyse
- reliable
- large samples
cons
- stats can hide reality
- no motives or meaning
- can be politically biased
Positivism
scientific approach, argue we should treat people as objects who can be observed and measured (macro)
Positivism pros + cons
pros
- uses society to form scientific laws of how it operates
- viewed as more credible
cons
- society cant be studied scientifically
- ignores free will and individual experiences
- research affected by bias
- potential ‘male stream’ society
Who is the historical positivist?
Emile Durkheim
Interpretivism
rejects scientific sociology, focuses on how individuals make sense of social world
Interpretivism meanings + experiences
beleive socirty is socially constructed and in order to understand society we need to understand individual experiences
Interpretivism pros and cons
pros
- society cant be studied scientifically
- reflexivity allows movement away from male dominated sociological research
- truth always subjective
cons
- patterns and trends needed to confirm generalisability
- reflecivity can lead to paralysis - researcher obsessed with own assumptions they dot draw conclusions
Reliability
consistency in research