Research methods Flashcards
1
Q
which methods do positivists prefer?
A
- ‘social facts’ that can be studied objectively using scientific techniques
- lab experiements, social surveys, structured questionnaires,structured interviews, non-ppt observation, official stats, content analysis
2
Q
which methods do interpretivists prefer?
A
- people have a consciousness involving personal beliefs and meanings that influence the way they act
- researcher should gain an in-depth understanding of the world around them by putting themself in position of person being studied
- uncontrolled field experiments, open questionnaires, unstructured interviews, overt or cover ppt observation, personal documents
3
Q
examples of practical issues
A
- time and funding
- access
- researcher’s personal skills or characteristics to carry it out (desire to prove hypothesis)
- availability of existing data
- career interests and need for researchers to meet deadlines (desire for career success)
4
Q
examples of ethical issues
A
- avoiding harmful consequences
- deception
- informed consent
- respecting privacy and anonymity
5
Q
examples of theoretical issues
A
- whether a marxist, functionalist or feminist approach is used and how it will influence the topic
- whether a positivist or interpretivist approach is used - qualitative or quantitative methods
6
Q
reliability
A
whether the method can be replicated by others to check results
7
Q
generalisability
A
whether the method enables findings to be generalised to similar groups
8
Q
validity
A
whether the method provides a true, genuine picture of what is being studied
- qualitative data usually has high validity but is less reliable
9
Q
strengths of secondary data
A
- may be only available data in an area
- readily available and cheap
- often representative - official stats
- may cover long time span - show trends over time
- qualitative data eg. personal diaries, letters, newspapers - give interpretivists insight into ideologies of those who produced them
10
Q
weaknesses of secondary data
A
- may not be representative
- official stats may lack validity eg. being manipulated by government to avoid political embarrassment
- difficulties in deciding if data is; authentic, credible - biased, representative of wider social group, same meaning as time it was produced, collected using sound methods
11
Q
Hawthorne effect
A
- presence of a researcher changes the behaviour of the group
- affects validity of research
- eg. people not telling the truth in questionnaires or interviews or ‘playing up’ for the researcher in ppt observation
12
Q
laboratory experiment
A
all variables or causes are under control of researcher
13
Q
field experiment
A
conducted in real world under normal social conditions but control some element
14
Q
strengths of lab experiments
A
- controlled conditions
- easy to isolate and manipulate variables to identify causes of events
- enable comparisons between other experimental research
- detached, objective and scientific
(positivists)
15
Q
strengths of field experiments
A
- not artificial situations so more valid
- ppts may not be aware researcher is present so avoid Hawthorne effect
- producing more valid info than lab experiments
(interpretivists)
16
Q
weaknesses of experiments
A
- in sociology it’s hard to isolate particular cause of social issue
- ethical issues - need to treat one group different from the other eg. Rosenthal and Jacobson
- people may not consent to being experimented on and if researcher carries on it will be deception
- often only possible on small scale settings - unrepresentative
- risk Hawthorne effect
17
Q
the comparative method
A
- researcher collects data about different societies then compares them to identify conditions present in one but lacking in the other as a way of explaining some social event
- positivists - isolates causes
18
Q
random sampling
A
every individual in population has an equal chance of being picked
19
Q
systematic sampling
A
names selected from sampling frame at regular intervals until desired size is reached
20
Q
stratified random sampling
A
sampling frame is divided into subgroups based on characteristics according to proportions of population and random sample is taken from each group
21
Q
quota smapling
A
population is stratified, interviews find a quota of people who fit into certain categories
22
Q
snowball sampling
A
researcher find one or two people with desired characteristics and asks them to introduce them to others willing to cooperate, then asks them to find others and so on#
- not random or representative
23
Q
what does a survey need?
A
- hypothesis
- to operationalise concepts - putting an abstract idea into a form which is measurable
- pilot study
24
Q
longitudinal studies
A
an on-going survey where people are selected and data is collected at regular intervals over a period of years eg. 7 up
25
longitudinal studies strengths
- ethical issues avoided as requires informed consent of selected ppts
- positivists - can compare data over time - discover patterns
- more valid - data about the past doesn't rely on memory
26
longitudinal studies weaknesses
- funding - long term financial commitments
- getting sample of ppl willing to participate over time is difficult, may drop out
- Hawthorne effect
27
the imposition problem
risk of researchers imposing their own views on the ppts
28
closed questionnaires weaknesses
- interpretivist - The Imposition problem - researchers may be imposing their own views by only giving set choice of answers that may not apply to ppt
- literacy
- questions may not be clear to ppts
- extra questions can't be asked to explain fully
29
strengths of closed questionnaires
- quick and cheap
- produces easily classified quantitative data - positivists
- high reliability
- enable comparisons between groups - answering same questions
- few ethical problems
30
strengths of open questionnaires
- more valid - can use their own words to express what they mean - interpretivists
- more detailed
31
weaknesses of open questionnaires
- lots of different answers - hard to quantify/compare results
- meaning of answers unclear
32
strengths of postal questionnaires
- cheap - large representative sample
- results quickly
- people reply at their leisure - more thoughtful answers
- more likely to get answers on sensitive subjects
- no interviewer bias
- positivists - detachment and objectivity
33
weaknesses of postal questionnaires
- low response rate
- those who respond may be unrepresentative - more educated, interested in topic
- no one present to explain questions
- no way of knowing right person completed it
34
strengths of structured interviews
- good response rate - persuade to answer questions
- reliable - results compared, replicated
- positivists - quantitative data
- reduced risk of interviewer bias as little involvement with ppt
- few ethical problems - choice
35
weaknesses of structured interviews
- time consuming, costly, interviewers trained and paid - smaller less representative sample
- interpretivist - imposition problem - reduces validity
- interviewer bias
36
strengths of unstructured interviews
- interpretivist - flexibility enables greater insights and opportunity for ppts to be more open
- questions can be clarified
- interviewer can change direction if new ideas come to mind
- rapport can be built up - more valid answers on sensitive topics
37
weaknesses of unstructured interviews
- time-consuming, costly, takes longer to analyse
- time/cost may mean fewer interviews
- positivists - less reliable, not standardised
- success depends on personality and skills of interviewer
- positivists - hard to compare and measure responses
- group interviews - peer pressure
38
practical issues with ppt observation
- being accepted into group
- overt: helps gain info that may be hidden if they had something to gain in the group, ask direct question
- covert: reduces Hawthorne effect, hard to gain insight without raising suspicion, ethics
- risk of getting involved in acts they don't agree with
- note-taking
- leaving group without damaging relationships
- becoming detached to write an impartial account
- confidentiality of group
39
ethical issues with ppt observation
- observing and reporting activities in secret (if covert) without informed consent
- deception can be overcome afterwards
- deception may be justified to protect researcher eg. Patrick - Glasgow gang
40
theoretical issues with ppt observation
- reliability - positivists - data rarely quantifiable, depends on personal characteristics of researcher so hard to replicate
- validity - relies on memory, observational and interpretive skills of observer, selective observation - their interpretation of what is significant in a group
41
strengths of ppt observation
- studies normal everyday behaviour over time rather than the 'snapshot' of questionnaires or interviews
- in-depth, valid qualitative data
- hypotheses can emerge as research goes on
- insight into meanings of social activity by seeing it through their eyes
- only practical method for researching closed groups eg. gangs, religious sects
42
weaknesses of ppt observation
- time-consuming, expensive
- stressful
- positivists - data lacks validity and reliability, no way of checking findings, evidence is subjective
- overt roles - hawthorne effect
- 'going native' - too involved, objectivity is lost
- covert - ethically unsound
43
strengths of non-ppt observation
- less time-consuming, cheaper
- replicate and check findings
- reduced risk of hawthorne effect - researcher is detached
- positivists - comparisons can be made - qualitative data
- consent can be gained
44
weaknesses of non-ppt observation
- not practical to observe all groups - hard to observe all incidents
- categorisation of behaviour is subjective
- presence of observer - hawthorne effect eg. ofsted
- covert - ethics, spying
- only small group can be observed - lacks representativeness
45
case study
- an in-depth study of a single example
- eg. Willis - anti-school subculture
- interpretivist qualitative methods most common eg. unstructured interview, ppt observation
46
life history
- case studies of the overall life of an individual or small group
- favoured by interpretivists - emphasis on person's own interpretations and explanations
47
case studies strengths
- can be used to study wider theories
- useful for generating new hypotheses
- valid, in-depth detail and understanding from POV of individual or group
- can be collected by positivist or interpretivist techniques
48
case studies weaknesses
- not representative - positivists - findings not generalisable
- not reliable or valid - eg. life histories view the past from POV of present, facts may not be recalled correctly, might generate reinterpretation of past
49
personal documents
- usually private documents for a person's own use
- eg. diaries, letters, emails, photos, videos, school reports, medical files
50
public documents
- produced for public knowledge available to all
- eg. government, charity, council, businness and media reports - newspapers, TV, novel, autobiography
51
criteria for judging value of documents
- authenticity - is it genuine or forgery?
- credibility - is it honest, biased, exaggerated? Who is it written for?
- representativeness - is it typical for the time? is there any missing, does it reflect a minority who can read and write?
- meaning - do they have the same meaning now as when they were produced?
52
content analysis strengths
- cheap - readily available documents
- reliable - quantitative statistical data easily checked
- enables discovery of things not obvious or considered
53
content analysis weaknesses
- positivists - not reliable - depends on categories they choose and how they interpret, differs between researchers
- describes what's being studied, doesn't explain it
54
official stats strengths
- useful for evaluating social policies
- may be only source for particular area
- cheap easy to access
- positivists - objective and reliable - usually collected with statistical rules publicly available
- cover long time-span, use large samples or whole population - discovery of patterns
- useful for time or cultural comparisons
- useful background data eg. poverty and exam results
- publicly available - ethical
55
weaknesses of official stats
- collected for administrative purposes not sociological - definitions and classifications may not be suitable
- produced by state - biased to avoid political embarrassment
- may not be accurate or complete - not valid picture
- interpretivists - not objective, simply social constructs, product of process of interpretation, decision making by authority eg. crime stats - unreported crimes
