Theories & methods- Methods Flashcards
(21 cards)
Positivists
-Believe sociology should adopt the methods of natural sciences like physics and chemistry to produce objective scientific knowledge about society.
-They see society as an objective reality made up of social facts that exist independently of individuals
-Don’t see Human behaviour as random but follows observable, measurable patterns shaped by external social forces.
-Like patterns in educational achievement can be linked to factors such as social class.
-Positivists aim to uncover these patterns and establish cause-and-effect relationships, much like scientists uncover laws in nature.
-Functionalist Durkheim like quantitate data that can be used to identify correlations and test hypotheses like official statistics. Macro approach top down (how society impacts the individual)
Interpretative
-Interactionalist reject positivist view os social realty as a set of objective facts simply “out there” instead see subjective meanings internal to people’s consciousness. -Argue that we can only understand society by interpreting the meanings people give to their actions.
-Need to use qualitative research methods, since only these can give us a’feel’ for what the world is like from the actor’s point of view. like unstructured interviews, participant observation and personal documents.
-Interactionalists (Becker) Micro approach bottom down (individual impact society)
What factors impact the choice of research methods
practical issues
Practical issues like how easy it is to access those being studied, time and funding available, availability of existing data. Ethical issues does it have harmful consequences, consents, accurately truthfully data.
Theoretical Positivism and interpretative use different research methods to investigate and collect information. Also impacts what is studied, the choice of research topic. (Feminists, marxists, functionalists)
Pros Secondary sources
-Durkheim see secondary data as a valuable resource for sociology. They see society as a science
-Develop hypothesis using office statistics and social facts to discover the cause of behaviour and patterns
Pros- Official statistics evaluating social policies, data in a particular area, Allow comparison to be made. cover a large area more representative better generalised.
Cons secondary data
-Interpreter lack validity, do not represent social facts, socially constructed. Maybe representing the labels people give to behaviours.
Cons- can’t be taken at face value socially constructed/ politically biased, issue with accuracy & completeness, stats based on a sample of the population may be less representative, Validity don’t always measure what they claim (Darkside of crime)
Secondary source dark figure of crime- Do not show the full extent of crime in society. The dark number (undiscovered and reported and recorded crimes.) One and four crimes reported to the police are recorded. Unreported crime
Positives of Using Laboratory Experiments
quantitative data 
Positivist sociologists value reliability the ability to replicate experiments and obtain the same results.
If when repeat the research can arrive at the same results gives more confidence that original findings are true. Laboratory experiments are highly reliable because the researcher can control the conditions, specify exact steps, and produce quantitative data that’s easy to compare. This matches the positivist approach, which aims to study society scientifically like the natural sciences.
Laboratory experiments are designed to discover causal laws they test hypotheses by manipulating an independent variable and observing its effect on a dependent variable. Isolating variables allows researcher to discover cause-and-effect relationships which positivists believe is essential to understanding how society works. This method enables predictions and supports the scientific approach positivists favor for understanding human behavior.
Negatives of using Laboratory Experiments
quantitative data 
Interpretivists argue that laboratory settings lack validity because they are too artificial. Lead to Hawthorne effect, where people behave differently just because they know they’re being studied. Participants may feel self-conscious or anxious about being in the experiment and act differently as a result. This undermines the internal validity of the findings and makes them less applicable to real-world behavior a major concern for interpretivists, who seek to understand authentic human experiences and meanings.
Ignores Human Free Will and Meaning. Interpretivists reject the lab experiment because it treats people like objects in natural science, ignoring their free will and ability to act based on meaning. Our behaviour is not ‘caused’ by external forces but can only be understood in terms of the meanings we give to events. This is a fundamental flaw for interpretivists, who argue that the complexity and subjectivity of human behavior can’t be captured through controlled, detached experiments.
Positives of field experiments
quantitative data 
High validity due to natural settings. Field experiments take place in real-life environments, making the behavior of participants more authentic. This increases ecological validity, as supported by interpretivist sociologists, who argue that studying people in their natural context provides a more truthful understanding of social reality.
Avoidance of the Hawthorne Effect. Since participants often don’t know they’re part of a study, their behavior is not influenced by being observed. This helps maintain the integrity of the data, aligning with positivist aims of collecting objective and reliable evidence about cause-and-effect relationships.
Negatives of field experiments
quantitative data 
Lack of control over variables. Field experiments offer less control compared to laboratory experiments, which makes it harder to isolate the effect of a single variable. Positivist theorists, who favor precise measurement and control to identify clear causal relationships, would see this as a major limitation.
Ethical concerns lack of informed consent and potential deception. Conducting experiments without participants’ knowledge raises ethical issues, particularly around deception & consent. This is criticized by interpretivist and ethical theorists, who emphasize the importance of respecting participants’ autonomy and dignity.
What are the positives of using Questionares
quantitative data 
Practical- quick, cheap, and large-scale data collection.
Questionnaires are cost-effective and allow researchers to collect data from a large number of people over a wide area. This appeals to positivist sociologists, who value the ability to gather quantitative data from representative samples to make generalizations about society.
Theoretical strength for positivism. Questionnaires are seen by positivists as scientific tools that promote reliability and objectivity, since the researcher has minimal contact with respondents. This limits researcher bias and allows for hypothesis testing and statistical analysis of correlations between variables (e.g., class and achievement).
Negatives of using Questionares
quantitative data 
Low validity due to detachment and misinterpretation
Interpretivists argue that questionnaires fail to provide valid data about people’s lived experiences and meanings. The lack of personal interaction means researchers cannot clarify ambiguous responses or understand answers in context.
Theoretical weakness according to interpretivist and feminist critiques, questionnaires especially those with closed-ended questions impose the researcher’s categories onto the respondent. This restricts participants’ ability to express their own views, meaning the results may reflect the researcher’s perspective more than the respondents’.
Positives of using structured interviews qualitative data 
High Reliability- Structured interviews are standardized each respondent is asked the same questions in the same way. This makes the method reliable, as other researchers can repeat the study and get similar results. Positivists, who value scientific methods that can be replicated to identify patterns and causal relationships.
High Response Rates and Representativeness. Face-to-face contact in structured interviews often leads to higher response rates compared to questionnaires. This helps produce more representative data, which can be generalized to the wider population. Positivists, who aim for large-scale, representative research to develop general laws of social behavior.
Negatives of using structured interviews, qualitative data
Lack of Validity closed-ended, pre-set questions may fail to capture the true meanings and experiences of respondents. Respondents might not be able to fully express their views, leading to superficial or distorted data. Criticized Interpretivists, who argue that valid understanding requires deep, qualitative insights into people’s meanings.
Imposition of the Researcher’s Framework. Structured interviews often reflect the researcher’s assumptions about what is important, which may not align with the respondent’s reality. This limits the respondent’s voice.
Criticized Feminists, like Ann Oakley and Hilary Graham, who argue that this method mirrors power imbalances and silences women’s authentic experiences.
Positives of using official statistics quantity data 
Cheap, Quick, and Easily Accessible. Official statistics are a free, large-scale source of secondary data collected by governments. They allow sociologists to access massive datasets without spending time or money on primary research. Positivists, who see this as a practical way to gather large quantities of reliable, quantitative data.
High Representativeness Many official statistics (e.g., Census data) cover the entire population or use scientifically selected samples, making them highly representative. Positivists, who value representativeness as it allows generalisations and hypothesis testing.
Negatives of using official statistics, quantitative data 
Lack of Validity. Official statistics may not reflect reality accurately. For example, truancy or mental illness statistics may reflect how institutions label people rather than actual rates. Criticised Interpretivists, who argue that these statistics are social constructions, not objective truths.
Definitions and Categories May Be Biased The state controls how things like “unemployment” or “homelessness” are defined, which can distort reality or minimize social problems. Criticised Marxists, who argue that official statistics serve ideological functions by hiding class inequalities and maintaining capitalist control.
Positives of structured interviews
Qualitative data
High Reliability- Structured interviews use standardised questions in the same order for every participant. This makes them replicable, meaning other researchers can repeat the study and check for consistent results. Positivists, who value reliability and objectivity in research. They argue structured interviews are scientific tools that can identify patterns in behaviour.
Quantifiable and Easy to Analyse. Responses can be easily coded and quantified, which allows researchers to analyse trends, identify correlations, and test hypotheses. Positivists, who seek to establish cause-and-effect relationships and generalisable laws of human behaviour using statistical methods.
Negatives of using structured interviews qualitative data 
Lack of Validity because questions and answer options are pre-set, they may not reflect the interviewee’s true thoughts or feelings. This can result in superficial or misleading data. Criticised Interpretivists, who argue that structured interviews fail to capture the meanings and insights of participants’ lived experiences.
Structured interviews may impose the researcher’s categories on participants, limiting their ability to express themselves in their own terms. Criticised Interpretivists and Feminists (like Oakley), who argue that this method reinforces power imbalances and lacks empathy, especially when researching sensitive issues.
Positives of using observations qualitative data 
High Validity through Verstehen. Participant observation allows the researcher to immerse themselves in the participants’ natural environment. This enables them to gain deep insight into people’s meanings, motives, and behaviours through empathy or verstehen. Interpretivists, who argue that this method provides valid, qualitative data that reveals the lived experiences of social actors. For example, William Whyte’s study of street gangs provided insights that would have been missed using surveys.
Flexibility and Exploration. Observation allows researchers to adapt to new situations and develop new lines of inquiry as they arise. It is especially useful when little is known about a group or topic. Grounded Theory (Glaser and Strauss), which suggests researchers should generate theories from observations rather than test fixed hypotheses. It suits interpretivist aims of exploring meaning, not imposing structure.
Negatives of using observations quantitive data
Lack of Reliability and Objectivity. Observation, especially participant observation, is often unstandardised and based on the subjective interpretation of the researcher. This makes it difficult to replicate the study or test for reliability. Criticised Positivists, who argue that scientific research should be reliable and objective. They favour structured non-participant observation, where behaviour is recorded systematically using pre-defined categories.
Ethical and Practical Issues. Covert observation can involve deception and lack of informed consent, raising ethical concerns. Additionally, observation can be time-consuming, emotionally demanding, and dangerous, especially in deviant or hard-to-access groups. Ethical theorists and feminist sociologists like Oakley may argue that this method risks violating trust and exploiting participants, especially if the researcher becomes too involved or fails to disclose harmful findings.
Positives of documents qualitative data
High Validity and Insight into Meaning. Documents, especially personal ones like diaries or letters, can provide rich, qualitative data that offer insight into the author’s worldview, thoughts, and meanings. Interpretivists, who value documents for their ability to reveal the subjective experiences and social meanings of individuals. For example, Thomas and Znaniecki’s (1919) study, The Polish Peasant in Europe and America, used personal letters to explore migrants’ experiences, helping to uncover how they made sense of social change.
Documents can be a cost-effective and time-saving source of data. They are especially useful when studying the past, where historical documents may be the only available source. Practical considerations and historical sociologists, who rely on such secondary sources when primary research is impossible. Interpretivists also appreciate the flexibility and accessibility of diverse documents to construct qualitative narratives.
Negatives of documents, qualitative data
Documents may be forged, exaggerated, or inaccurate, especially if written long after events occurred or with a personal or political agenda (e.g., a politician’s autobiography). Positivists argue that such flaws undermine the reliability and scientific value of documents.
Lack of Representativeness. Documents may not reflect the experiences of the wider population. For example, those who are illiterate, marginalised, or too busy are less likely to produce written records. Criticised Positivists, who stress the importance of representative samples for making generalisations. Since documents are often unique and selective, they argue they are unsuitable for scientific sociology and comparative research.
