Sociology-theory and methods-quantitative research methods Flashcards
What are the three types of issues in sociological research?
PET issues: practical, ethical and theoretical
What are the practical issues?
Time, money, requirements of funding bodies, personal skills and characteristics of researchers, subject matter of the study, and the research opportunity
What are the ethical issues?
Informed consent, confidentiality and privacy, harmful effects, vulnerable groups, and covert methods
What are the theoretical issues?
Reliability, validity and representativeness (also methodological perspective)
What are the two methodological perspectives?
Positivism and interpretivism
What are interpretivists?
Those who take an interpretivist perspective prefer research methods that produce qualitative data-that is, information that gives us a ‘feel’ for what something is like. These methods include unstructured interviews, participant observation and the analysis of personal documents
What are positivists?
Sociologists who adopt a positivist perspective prefer research methods that produce quantitative data-that is, information in numerical or statistical form
What do positivists believe about sociology?
They believe that sociology can and should model its research methods on those of the natural sciences such as physics and chemistry. In their view, this will produce objective, true, scientific knowledge of society
How do positivists see society?
As an objective reality made up of social facts that exist ‘out there’, just like the physical world that natural scientists study. Like physical reality, social reality is not random; rather, it follows patterns that can be observed and measured. For example, there are clear social patterns of educational achievement and underachievement
In the view of positivists, why do patterns in society exist?
These patterns exist because society exerts an influence over its members, systematically shaping their behaviour in various ways. Positivists believe that through careful observation and measurement, they can discover laws of cause and effect that explain these social patterns, just as physicists and chemists have discovered laws that determine the patterns we find in nature, such as the law of gravity
How do sociologists uncover and explain the patterns of behaviour and their causes?
Positivists use quantitative data. For example, quantitative data on exam results may show class differences in achievement. By correlating this with other quantitative data on class differences in income, we may be able to show that low income is a cause of underachievement
What are the quantitative research methods?
Laboratory experiments, field experiments (+ the comparative method), questionnaires, structured interviews, official statistics
When are laboratory experiments used?
In many of the natural sciences they are the main means by which scientists gather data, test theories and discover scientific laws of cause and effect. Similarly, positivist sociologists, who model their approach to research on the logic and methods of the natural sciences, may also occasionally use lab experiments. However, sociologists often also use two other kinds of experiment in their research: field experiments and the comparative method
What are the key features of laboratory experiments?
Control, and cause and effect
Why is control a key feature of lab experiments?
A lab experiment is a controlled experiment. The lab is an artificial environment in which the scientist can control different variables in order to discover what effect they have. In this way, the scientist can test hypotheses about the cause of a phenomenon, with the aim of discovering a causal law
What happens in a lab experiment?
The researcher first takes a set of subjects. These must be identical in all relevant respects. They are then divided at random into two groups-an experimental group and a control group-these are both treated separately
Why is cause and effect a key feature of lab experiments?
The condition of both groups is measured before the experiment starts and again at the end. If we discover a change in the experimental group but none in the control group, we may conclude that this was caused by the different treatments the two groups received. In other words, by following the logic of the experimental method, we can discover cause-and-effect relationships. This allows us to predict what will happen under the same conditions in the future
How often are lab experiments used?
While laboratory experiments are the basic research method in most natural sciences, they are rarely used in sociology. There are a number of practical, ethical and theoretical reasons for this
What are the practical issues of lab experiments?
Open systems, individuals are complex, studying the past, small samples, the Hawthorne effect, and the expectancy effect
What is the ‘open systems’ practical issue of lab experiments?
Sociologists such as Keat and Urry argue lab experiments are only suitable for studying closed systems where the researcher can control and measure all the relevant variables and make precise predictions, as in physics or chemistry. However, society is an open system where countless factors are at work in any given situation, interacting with each other in complex ways. This makes it impossible for the researcher even to identify, let alone control, all the relevant variables. This makes lab experiments unsuitable for studying social phenomena
What is the ‘individuals are complex’ practical issue of lab experiments?
Individuals are complex and therefore it is not really possible to ‘match’ the members of the control and experimental groups exactly. While we can find identical samples of chemicals, no two human beings are exactly alike
What is the ‘studying the past’ practical issue of lab experiments?
Lab experiments cannot be used to study an event in the past, since we cannot control variables that were acting in the past rather than the present. Nor can we keep people in lab conditions for long time periods so they can be studied
What is the ‘small samples’ practical issue of lab experiments?
Lab experiments can usually only study small samples making it very difficult to investigate large-scale social phenomena. Eg, we cannot study all or even a large sample of the members of a major religion. Small samples also bring the risk that a result that appears to show one variable causing another, may in fact just be a chance correlation between the two
What is the ‘Hawthorne effect’ practical issue of lab experiments?
A lab experiment is an artificial environment and any behaviour that occurs in it may also be artificial, in particular if the subjects know they are being experimented on. This may make them act differently. This is the experimental, or Hawthorne, effect, named after the experiments in 1920s at the Hawthorne factory where it was first observed. This ‘subject reactivity’ will of course ruin the experiment, as it reduces validity
What is the ‘expectancy effect’ practical issue of lab experiments?
The expectancy effect is a form of experimenter bias. It refers to the fact that what a researcher expects to happen in the experiment can affect its actual outcome. This can occur by the experimenter consciously or unconsciously treating the subjects in such a way that it influences how they respond and produces the result in the experimenter expected
What are the ethical issues of lab experiments?
Informed consent, and harm to subjects
What is the ‘informed consent’ ethical issue of lab experiments?
Researcher needs informed consent of subjects of the experiment, meaning gathering their agreement to take part, having first explained to them in terms they can understand, the nature and purpose of the experiment, what risks and effects there may be, and the uses to which the findings will be put. However, sometimes explaining the aim beforehand will be self defeating, so for the experiment to work the subjects must be perceived to stop the Hawthorne effect
What is the ‘harm to subjects’ ethical issue of lab experiments?
Research should not normally harm the participants. However, some argue minor or temporary harm may be justified ethically if the results yield significant social benefits. Research should also seek to do good. Where an experiment is seen to be benefiting the experimental group, there is an ethical case for halting the experiment and making the same treatment available to the control group. This is done in medical experiments, and also in sociological experiments eg in education with different teaching methods to see which is more effective
What are the theoretical issues of lab experiments?
Reliability and hypothesis testing, representativeness, internal validity, and interpretivism and free will
What are positivists view of lab experiments?
For positivists, lab experiments have a major theoretical strength-their reliability. However, in other respects they suffer from important limitations even from a positivist perspective
What are interpretivists views of lab experiments?
They criticise lab experiments as lacking validity and as unsuitable for studying actors’ meanings
What is a reliable method?
One that can be replicated-repeated exactly in every detail by other researchers to obtain the same results. Positivists see reliability as important because it enables us to check the work of other researchers by repeating it. If we can repeat the research and arrive at the same results, we can have more confidence that the original findings are true
Why do positivists regard lab experiments as highly reliable?
The original experimenter can control the conditions and specify the precise steps that were followed in the original experiment, so others can easily repeat these steps to re-run it. It produces quantitative data so results can be easily compared to the original. It is a very detached and objective method; the researcher merely manipulates the variables and records the result, their subjective feelings and values have no effect on the conduct or outcome of the experiment
Why are lab experiments good for hypothesis testing?
Because lab experiments can isolate and control any variable tat is of interest to the researcher, they are also an effective way to test hypotheses and predictions. If we believe a particular variable is the cause of a phenomenon, we simply set up an experiment where an experimental group is exposed to that variable and a control group is not, and then compare the outcomes
What do positivists say about representativeness?
For positivists, representativeness is important because they aim to make generalisations about how the wider social structure shapes individuals’ behaviour. However, with lab experiments there is a danger that their findings lack external validity. That is, we cannot be confident they are true for the wider population-there are two reasons for this
What is the first reason why lab experiments lack representativeness?
Because experiments can only study small samples, there is a greater risk that they are not a representative cross-section of the population the researcher is interested in. If so, the findings cannot be generalised beyond the experiment itself
What is the second reason why lab experiments lack representativeness?
Lack of external validity arises out of the high level of control the experimenter has. Control over the conditions in the experiment is valuable, because it enables us to establish that a particular variable causes a particular effect. On the other hand, however, the higher the level of control we have over the experiment, the more unnatural the circumstances this creates-which may not be at all true of the world outside the lab
What is the ‘internal validity’ theoretical issue of lab experiments?
Lab experiments may also lack internal validity. That is, their findings may not even be true for the subjects of the experiment itself, let alone the wider world. One reason for this is he artificiality of the lab environment. This may encourage the Hawthorne effect, where the subjects react simply to being studied, and do so in ways that produce invalid results
What is the ‘interpretivism and free will’ theoretical issue of lab experiments?
Interpretivists argue human beings are fundamentally different from plants, rocks and other natural phenomena that natural scientists study. Unlike these objects, we have free will and choice. Our behaviour is not ‘caused’ by external forces, so it cannot be explained in terms of cause-and-effect statements, a positivists believe. Instead, our actions can only be understood in terms of the choices we freely make on the basis of the meanings we give to events. For interpretivists, therefore, the lab experiment, with its search for causes, is a fundamentally inappropriate method for studying human beings
Why were lab experiments and the comparative method developed?
To seek to identify causes, but they aim to overcome the unnaturalness and lack of validity of lab experiments