Research Methods 🎀 Flashcards
primary data and secondary
info collected by sociologist for own purpose which may be to obtain a first-hand ‘picture’
info already collected or created by someone else for own purpose but which the sociologist can then use
quantitative and qualit
info in a numerical form e.g. official stats on how many girls passed 5 or more GCSEs
gives a feel for what something is like for example what it feels like to get good GCSE results
factors influencing choice of method
practical issues
-time and money - large-scale surveys employ dozens and be faster but costly but small-scale survey less costly but take long e.g. several years
-some methods require specialist skills of observing, fitting in a group or estab rapport
-subject matter - may be difficult to study one group with one method than other e.g. a male sociologist may struggle to research a group of women by participant observation but questionnaires may be easier
ethical
- confiden and privacy - info to be kept secret to prevent negative effect
- harm to participants - need to be aware of possible effects on those they study
theoretical
-validity - valid method = one that produces an authentic pic of what something is really like
-reliability - another word is replicability, it is a method that can be repeated and same results can be obtained
lab experiments
reliability - one conducted, others can replicate it = highly reliable since original experimenter can specify the steps + it is an detached method - personal feelings or opinions do not alter the outcome
practical problems
- impossible to identify and let alone control all variable that have influence over lets say child’s ed achievement, - cannot be used to study something in the past
-small scale = difficult to investigate large-scale phenomena like religion = reduce representativeness
ethical problems
- lack informed consent = difficult to obtain from severe learning difficulty groups who may be unable to see purpose of exp.,
- deception - like milgram’s study of obedience to authority - he lied about the purpose of research in which they had to administer shocks when learner failed to answer qs correctly , purpose - ppl’s willingness to obey rules and inflict pain = 65% prep to administer shocks of 450 volts
field exp
- subject’s natural surroundings
- involved = unaware of experiment
-researcher manipulates one or more variables to see effect - rosenhan’s ‘pseudo patient’ exp, researched present self as hearing voices in 12 Calif hospitals, each admitted + called schizo, in hospital = ceased to complain but still treated as ill = not patients’ behav lead to treat as sick but the label schizo
methods in content (MIC)
lab exp and teacher expectations
- several lab exp to test teacher expectations e.g. harvey and slatin examined the potential presence of preconceived ideas of pupils. sample of 96 each shown 18 photographs from diff class backgrounds, results - lower class = favoured less favourably especially by more exp teachers = the aim was met.
- ethical problems - lab exp no use of real pupils like harvey and slatin but if they were used this raises ethical issues due to vulnerability + limited understanding of what is happening = more deception, no consent etc
-artificiality - may be argued it tells us little about the real world of education e.g. harvey and slatin used photographs not real pupils
MIC
field exp and teacher expectations
-rosenthal and jacobson pygmalion in the classroom = shows difficulty with field exp to study teacher expec. CALIF primary school - given IQ test, teachers told - it enables to identify the 20% who are likely to ‘spurt’ in next year but it was not true, and it was a random selection of students = no reason to expect improvement unless teacher expec is the reason, all retested 8 months later and all gained 8 points but spurters 12 points
- ethical issues - ‘spurters’ benefitted from this study, others not which may lead to being held back due to getting less attention from teacher
- reliability - rosenthal and jacobson’s relatively simple to repeat, within 5 years, repeated no less than 242 times BUT there’s diffs between classes, teaching styles etv so not really possible to replicate exactly
questionnaires advan
practical
- quick and cheap means of gathering large amounts of data from large numbers of people e.g. helen connor and sara dewson posted c4k questionnaires to students at 14 higher ed institutions in country
- no need to train people as the respondents complete it themselves and send it back
reliability
- reliable since if repeated it would get similar results
- questionnaire is a fixed yardstick that can be used by any researcher to obtain the same results
representative
- since large amounts of people = better chance of being truly rep of wider pop
- + researchers tend to pay more attention to the need to obtain a rep samples
questionnaires disadvan
practical
- data tends to be ltd and superficial due to need to be fairly brief as most are unlikely to complete a long, time consuming questionnaire
- although pretty cheap, sometimes need to offer incentives e.g. prize draw entry to persuade completion
low response rate
- questionnaires have high potential of large gathering but few bother
- hite’s study of love passion and emotional violence in america sent out almost 100k but 4.5% responded
inflexibility
- once finalised, researcher is stuck with those decided questions and cannot explore any new ideas
questionnaires MIC
operationalisation of concepts
- turning abstracts ideas into a measurable form
- difficult when making a qn for pupils due to less of a grasp of abstract ideas than adults
access and response rates
- schools may be reluctant to allow sociologists to distribute qns due to disruptions in lesson
- or they can object to topics such as under-age sexual activity
- response rate may be higher in school as once head has given consent others may feel pressured to be part of it = rep data
interviews
types
- structured (interviewer given strict instructions on how to ask qs, repeated on same way wit same qs, order, tone etc)
- unstructured (like guided conversation, complete freedom to vary qs, wording, order etc.)
- semi (same set of qs but can probe deeper e.g. cicourel and kitsuse always followed up with how do you mean)
-group (upto a dozen or so people together, paul willis used group int for study into ‘lads’ and schooling)
structured
practical issues
-training is fairly simple and inexpensive but more costly than just posting qns
- cover quite large numbers of people with ltd resources and cheap and cheap but still does not match potential of postal qns
response rate
- numbers studied are lower but higher response rate e.g. Willmott and Young approached 987 but only 54 refused to be interviewed (maybe due to finding it harder to turn down a face-to-face request) but those who have time maybe untypical aka lonely or have time on their hands = unrep results and undermine validity
reliability
- seen as reliable since it is easy for researcher to standardise and control them and it provides a recipe for repeating the research, same questions = easy to compare and identify similarities or diffs
advan of unstruc
- rapport and sensitivity (nothing needs to be said is is self explanatory) e.g. labov study on language of black american children which adopted a structured interview method which lead to them being uncomfortable but when adopting a more relaxed approach they spoke freely
- flexibility - no restrictions or set questions, researcher can probe wtv seems necessary at the given time
disadvan
- practical problems like time and sample size. in dept exploration means each interview takes several hours and the small sample size means there is little amount of info gathered whilst taking a long time
-representativeness - small sample size likely means lack of rep
-reliability - low as every interview is unique and not standardised meaning it is virtually impossible to replicate
interviews MIC
practical
young ppl have less developed linguistic and intellectual skills = less articulate or more reluctant to talk, not understand long, complex questions or abstract concepts
- these factors may lead to misunderstanding and incorrect or incomplete answers and thus undermined validity of the data obtained = unstruc is more suitable
reliability and validity
- struc produce reliable data due to being standardised: same qs, order, tone etc buttt this may be untrue since young ppl are unlikely to respond favourably to such a formal style e.g. Di Bentley started interview by showing them a ‘jokey’ image of her fooling around with her daughter + kept a relaxed atmosphere BUT this cant be standardised due to being a specific way of interview style
access and response rate
- school = hierarchical and as Powney and watts note - the lower down the hierarchy the interviewer is the more approvals have to be obtained
-schools reluctant due to disruption of lessons
- parental consent might be required
observation
-non participant - observe a group without involvement
- participant - take part in everyday life of group
- overt - true identity and purpose of study is revealed
- covert - opposite of overt
participant observation
getting in - must gain entry into a group (some easier than others)
- making contact - dep on personal
skills, right connections or even pure chance - patrick joined glasgow gangs since he looked quite young and knew one of members from having taught him in approved school (young offenders institution previously)
- acceptance - win trust e.g. griffin was a white man who used meds and a lamp to change skin colour and pass as black, travelled around deep south usa exp first hand impact of white racism
staying in - must be able to stay in the study = problems since have to be involved to understand but remain detached from group
- over involvement - gonna lead to issues but some may remain detached but this risks having a useless study with invalid results
getting out
- worst comes to worse researcher will just abandon the study e.g. patrick and glasgow gangs - was sick of violence so he just abandoned the study abruptly
overt
several advan
- avoids ethical problems of obtaining info and deceit
- allows asking naive but important qs only an outsider would ask e.g. why do you rob and steal?
2 major disadvan
- refusal to participate
- risk of hawthorne effect - undermined validity
covert
practical issues
- minimises risk of hawthorne effect
- requires keeping up an act and cover may be blown easily - patrick bought his suit cash not credit and fastened middle button not top (things gangs wont do)
ethical issues
- immoral to deceive and pretending to be a friend just to get info
- may need to lie as to why they are leaving a group but patrick just left without explanation
- may need to participate in illegal acts
advan of participant
- validity - obtain rich qualitative data provides a pic of how they really are
- flexibility - no need to start with a fixed hypothesis - new situations = new explanations can be formed
- practical - enables to build rapport + gain trust = successful for delinquent groups, thieves etc
disadvan of participant
practical
- time consuming e.g. whyte’s study was 4 years
- need training to recognise sociologically relevant situations
- personally stressful or demanding
- not everyone possesses observational skills
ethical
- deceiving
- illegal or immoral activities
representativeness
- small sample = does not provide a sound basis for generalisation
documents
public
- produced by organisations like gov departments, schools, welfare agencies etc.
- ofsted reports of school inspections
personal
- letters, diaries, photo albums etc
- first hand accounts of events or personal exp
- e.g. william thomas and znaniecki - the polish peasant in europe and america study of migration and social change
assessing documents
- authenticity - is it what it claims to be? are they missing pages, if a copy is it error free?
- credibility - is it believable? was author sincere? politicians may write diaries intended for publication that inflate their own importance
representativeness
- is the evidence in the document typical? cannot answer q? we don’t know if it is safe to generalise from. not all docs survive are the surviving docs typical of ones that get destroyed or lost
advan
- personal docs enable the researcher to get close to the social actor’s reality, giving insight through their detailed qualit data
- cheap since someone else has already gathered the info
stats MIC
practical issues
- data is published saves time and money e.g. gov collects stats on over 30k primary schools and 4k secondary = too costly to do if collecting info themselves. can also make comparisons between the achievements of diff social groups based on ethnicity, age and class
representativeness
- some stats on ed are highly rep e.g. every 3 years school census which gathers info on attendance, ethnicity and gender etc
validity
- schools may manipulate attendance figures by re-defining poor attenders as being on study-leave or additional work exp due to pressure to present oneself in best possible light = undermines validity of ed stats.
