SOC200 - Qualitative Field Research (Chapter 10 + 16) Flashcards
Inferential Statistics & Statistical Significance
whether or not the relationship seen in sample is generalizable to the whole pop
low SE, more confident relationship you are seeing is not due to sampling error
nonprobability methods – high sampling error – misleading statistical significance values, might not accurately reflect relationship
Statistical Significance
refers to chances that relationship observed could actually be a result of a sampling error + therefore doesn’t reflect relationship that actually exists in the population
Statistical Significance
chances high that result of sampling error - not statistically significant
chances low that result of sampling error - statistically significant
Logic behind Statistical Significance
Using EPSEM, accurate conclusions about pop from this sample (no relationship exists)
Logic behind Statistical Significance
not drawn using EPSEM, showing relationship that does not exist in pop
The Dilemma – How do we Decide which Sample Reflects the Population?
Same relationship in the two samples, but only one accurately reflects the true relationship in the population
often don’t know relationship in population
we wouldn’t know which one is accurate
Reduces the issue to two decisions
- sample is unrepresentative (relationship detected in sample appears because sample was not collected representatively (sampling error)
Reduces the issue to two decisions
- sample is representative, reflects an actual relationship in whole population
Statistical Significance Values
various probabilities associated with various degrees of sampling error (sample unrepresentativeness) (# of samples taken, size of sample, assumed distribution of pop parameter)
Statistical Significance Values
Researchers use these probabilities to ascertain whether sampling error in sample is small enough to accept relationship as generalizable to the pop.
statistical significance expressed as a probability: ranges from 0 to 1.
Statistical Significance Values
.05 (p=.05): relationship didn’t really exist in the population, probability of occurring in 5 of 100 samples
lower the p values, the lower the type I error
once sample large enough, everything is gonna be statistically significant
substantive significance: is the differences really meaningful in research?
statistical significance value of .01 (p=.01)/.001 (p=.001)
1 of 100 samples to show relationship seen in sample because of sampling error
1 of 1000 samples to show relationship seen in sample because of sampling error
Field Research
Observing/participating in social behaviour to understand it through deliberate + conscientious collection of data on behaviour
involves the natural activity of observation, most of us have engaged in activities that resemble field research
Field Research
Non-social science researchers (journalists & reporters, social workers, police detectives)
in the social science: greater degree of thoroughness
theory-generating activity – creating a theory based on what you’re seeing
Field Research
anthropologists
can yield quantitative data: # of interactions or behaviours
research right where it happens
deeper understanding of phenomena – greater validity of data
probing life in its natural habitat
observations cover wide range – wherever there’s social interaction
Appropriate Field Research Topics
topics that cannot be easily quantified: change in vocal tone/sudden shift in body language inherent to understanding attitude/behaviour
studying attitudes & behaviours that cannot be understood outside of their natural setting: Native American rain dance
Appropriate Field Research Topics
studying social processes over time: making sense of processes as they happen instead of retrospectively reconstructing them
social development through university experience
several observations of given event/several observations over time
to draw inferences: might require multiple observations
Lofland et al.’s Typology of Appropriate Field Research Topics: Practices
(talking, driving, walking, waiting on someone)
Lofland et al.’s Typology of Appropriate Field Research Topics: Groups & Cliques
small/closely knit groups like sports teams, clubs, work groups, friendship circles
how ppl interact
Lofland et al.’s Typology of Appropriate Field Research Topics: Social & Personal Relationships
studying behaviour “normal” for sets of roles (how are friends supposed to act, how is a father supposed to act towards his son?)
Lofland et al.’s Typology of Appropriate Field Research Topics: Organizations
formal organizations such as work organizations, hospitals, schools, associations, lobby groups, etc.
formal + informal
Lofland et al.’s Typology of Appropriate Field Research Topics: Settlements & Habitats
study of villages, ghettos, neighbourhoods, communities, tribes
Lofland et al.’s Typology of Appropriate Field Research Topics: Subcultures & Lifestyle
studying how large numbers of ppl adjust to life in groups labelled such as “poor”, “rich”, gay, biker, goth, nerd, emo
unique contexts
Lofland et al.’s Typology of Appropriate Field Research Topics: Roles & Social Types
analyzing behaviour associated with positions ppl occupy
Lofland et al.’s Typology of Appropriate Field Research Topics: Encounters
(close interaction, like a store purchase, pickup at a club, a restaurant order)
may be mundane
Lofland et al.’s Typology of Appropriate Field Research Topics: Episodes
(arrest, divorce, illness, car accident, a presentation)
Field Research is a Theory-Building and Theory- Drawing Activity: Phenomenology
the social “constructedness” of social life - can’t be meaningful without somebody giving it meaning
Some objects have social significance to one group, but not another
Field Research is a Theory-Building and Theory- Drawing Activity: Ethnomethodology
using social interactions to make sense of a person’s social reality
Field Research is a Theory-Building and Theory- Drawing Activity: Grounded Theory
deriving theory from analyzing patterns in data you observed - no preconceived notions
Don’t place personal meaning on observations
Keep open mind – stay objective
place our ego + interpretations on everything we look at
It can be very difficult
Two Common Data Gathering Techniques: Ethnography/Participant Observation
focuses on describing rather than explaining phenomenon
Used by researchers with different orientations with diff social questions
General agreement: multimodal gathering + at natural setting
Two Common Data Gathering Techniques: Ethnography/Participant Observation
observing any phenomenon in its natural social situation
observation & understanding of entire cultures/subcultures
activities researchers engage in while in the field
Two Common Data Gathering Techniques: Case Studies
detailed, specific observation + analysis of single instance of social phenomenon
Can describe + explain: idiographic explanation
Two Common Data Gathering Techniques: Case Studies
used in medicine, law, social work
both qualitative + quantitative research:
detailed social instant
Piece everything together – how, why, when accurately
Some Aims of a Case Study Design
- Principal aim provide a rich + thorough understanding of instances through focusing on specifics
Always a tension between the depth and breadth of cases. many instances = less depth than focusing on 1 instance.
trade off betw degree of understanding + generalizability of that understanding
Some Aims of a Case Study Design
- Often Exploratory: ideal for ascertaining suitability of more detailed study involving several instances of phenomenon
Valid understanding of social interactio – rich + thorough understanding
Case studies aren’t a method, just a way of gathering data
Field Research: The Roles of the Observer and Relations to His/Her Subjects
No Involvement: Detached observation with no direct/ indirect involvement with interaction being studied ( observing without subjects’ knowledge)
Field Research: The Roles of the Observer and Relations to His/Her Subjects
Complete Participant: genuinely involved with phenomenon being studied/covertly engaged in participation for purposes of observing
This Spectrum of Participation Raises a Variety of Concerns that Need Weighing: For the “No Involvement” Observer
subjects have right to know they’re being observed?
Do you have a responsibility to break your role as a detached researcher if you see someone who needs help?Do you intervene or ignore? - detached
Can you adequately understand the phenomenon if not more involved in it?
This Spectrum of Participation Raises a Variety of Concerns that Need Weighing: For the “Complete Participant” Observer
Do you have right to hide purposes of participation from others? This can emotionally affect relationships you build during your research
don’t hide your purposes, you might have a serious reactivity problem: responds differently that makes research less valid
This Spectrum of Participation Raises a Variety of Concerns that Need Weighing: For the “Complete Participant” Observer
Do you have responsibility to disclose role as researcher if you see someone who needs help?
Emotional strain if ppl overidentify
Relations to Subjects
whether or not there is direct contact with subject, researcher’s attitudes, precepts + biases about what he/she is observing will affect how they report observations
Relations to Subjects
affect the relations researcher has to the subjects, should research be participatory
“are we observing subjects with open mind + withholding judgements”
Are you being careful about language you use in your notes
Major Frameworks for Conducting Field Research: Grounded Theory
researcher begins with area of study + after observing patterns + common themes in data, allows theory to emerge
theory “grounded” in data
Taking raw observations + categorizing them
Slowly detailed then aggregate
3-step graduated approach to coding the observational data
Coding Stages of Research based on Grounded Theory: Open coding
early stage of coding
Read through data several times + create tentative labels for chunks of data that summarize what you see happening (based on the meaning that emerges from the data)
Record examples of participants’ words + establish properties of each code
Coding Stages of Research based on Grounded Theory: Open coding
types of body language, force, swearing, reaction
Creativity + close observations to create categories
Coding Stages of Research based on Grounded Theory: Axial coding
identifying relationships among open codes. connections among the codes? Specific concepts + categories refined
verbal, physical behaviour
Coding Stages of Research based on Grounded Theory: Selective coding
categories may be integrated, focus moves to relationships among a few particular categories.
Figure out core variable that includes all of data.
reread transcripts + selectively code any data that relates to core variable you identified
no firm boundaries/mutually exclusive
Major Frameworks for Conducting Field Research: Extended Case Method
exposing contradictions
used to expose flaws in existing social theories so they can be modified
makes in- depth knowledge of the literature essential
Major Frameworks for Conducting Field Research: Extended Case Method
specify as clearly as possible what you expect to find
help expose ways your observations conflict with existing theories so the existing theories can be improved
Case that falls outside of theory (deviant) that identifies the limitation of theory
Extended Case Method
theory that children of poorer families tend to have more behavioural problems: Might study children of a poor family where no behavioural problems exist
Might study children of a wealthy family where behavioural problems exist/study how such family wealth reshapes the “problem”
Major Frameworks for Conducting Field Research: Institutional Ethnography
observing + recording personal experiences of individuals (especially subordinated groups), to expose how practices of institutions shape their realities + experiences. Focuses on understanding social relations from perspective of “ruled”
Major Frameworks for Conducting Field Research: Institutional Ethnography
Newer approach
individual is the unit of observation, but the institution is unit of analysis
individual’s experiences merely become a point of entry for observing the power relations constructed by institution
Major Frameworks for Conducting Field Research: Participatory Action Research
inclusive form of research: status + power differences betw researcher + subject are minimized
researcher merely acts as resource for subject - has complete control to define his/her problems + desired remedies + take lead in designing research
Major Frameworks for Conducting Field Research: Participatory Action Research
origins in criticisms of classic social science research, which is seen as elitist by some
belief that research should be tool for positive change + higher consciousness
researchers act as a resource to disadvantaged groups + guide them in doing research
Field Observation Form
Notes: What you know + what you think
Prepare standardized notetaking methods in advance
Trusting memory is bad thing: issue of window of memory
Convienient categorization
Sketching
Questions + issues
Strengths of Field Research
Permits unprecedented depth in understanding: very hard by any other means to capture subtle nuances of behaviour imperative to understanding phenomenon/properly understand social process
Strengths of Field Research
Flexibility: design can be modified at any time (unlike quantitative research like surveys/secondary data analysis
Strengths of Field Research
Relatively Inexpensive: just need a researcher, a notebook, + pencil, but this depends on the size + location of your project
Strengths of Field Research
Provides superior validity: richness of first hand accounts + observations can cover depth + breadth of meaning in concept better than few questions on a survey
Weaknesses of Field Research
Generalizability: not very appropriate for making statistical descriptions of a large population
might not have a lot of cases to study
Definitely not random sample
Weaknesses of Field Research
Questionable Reliability: personal + contained nature of field research observations can make them somewhat subjective. How one person perceived something may not be the same as how another views it.
problem is that the researcher’s observation of others may depend highly on his/her own reference point.
