strengths and weaknesses research methods applied to PERVERT

for 20 mark education question

questionnaires

strengths

• practical - quick and easy and cheao

• ethical - informed consent

• representativeness - as they are practical, sample can be robust

• reliable - easy to repeat using same questions

weaknesses

• validity - lying and ‘right answerism’ (social desirability)

• representativeness - low response rate means sample does not represent society as a whole

• validity - lack of flexibility due to set questions and responses, not true answers might just click closest one to responder’s situation

• validity - potential to answer inaccurately as the responder cannot ask the researcher for clarification

structured interviews

strengths

• reliability - pre-set list of questions, so repeatable

• validity - can ask fro clarification

• representativeness - controlled sample

• ethical - informed consent, deception unlikely

• positivist - identity trends

• practical - no need for skilled interviewer

weakness

• validity - cannot ask follow up questions

• practical - takes a long time, higher cost and harder to organise

• representativeness - small sample, repeated less

• validity - interviewer bias leads people to different answers. lack of flexibility in question design. social desirability means people can still lie

unstructured interviews

strengths

• validity - can ask follow up questions to clarify meaning which means answers are truthful

• validity - can build a rapport with interviewee through a more normal conversation which leads to more trust and truth

• theories - interpretivism allows for more deep questioning to get meaning so more likely to be valid as it is qualitative data

weakness

• practical - harder to organise, takes more time, and requires more skilled interviewers

• reliability - as it is less practical It may not be as easy to repeat and get the same results.

• representativeness - less practical so you will have a smaller sample which is harder to generalise

• theories - positivists would see this as a weak method as it does not provide quantitative data that can be reliably compared

• ethical - structure are more predictable and easier to give informed consent whereas unstructured are more likely to ask uncomfortable questions that are upsetting

• Validity - interviewer bias, follow up questions could be leading which makes responses less true

non-participant covert observations

strengths

• validity - researcher can take notes at the time so they will be more true. Hawthorne effect will not happen as p’s are not aware they are being watched

• validity - removes researcher bias as p’s are acting naturally

• theories - positivists value the Birds Eye, macro view that can be achieved from observing but not participating

• reliability - as it is covert and non-participating the research does not change what is being observed so easier to repeat

limitations

• ethics - no informed consent

• validity - as you are separate there may be social cues that the researcher misses which may make their inferences not truthful. researcher can’t clarify meanings behind actions

• practical - needs a skilled observer and may be hard to organise

• theories - interpretivists, cannot build empathy/understanding as it is non-participant which might means information is less valid. may observe what is happening but not why which may lead to incorrect conclusions

non-participant overt

strengths

• validity - researcher can take notes as the behaviour is happening which means the notes are more accurate

• theories - positivists value the Birds Eye, macro view that can be achieved from observing but not participating

• ethics - can get informed consent as it is overt

• practical - it is easier to organise an overt observation because participants know they are being watched so it does not need to be secret.

• reliability - as it is logistically easier it means that it can be repeated multiple times

• representativeness - as you can repeat it easily the sample will be more representative

weakness

• validity - Hawthorne effect means that because p’s know they are being watched they will change their behaviour, researcher bias

• practical - needs a skilled observer to know what to look for

• theories - interpretivists, cannot build empathy/understanding as it is non-participant which might means information is less valid. may observe what is happening but not why which may lead to incorrect conclusions

participant covert

strengths

• theories - interpretivist, can build empathy and rapport as you are joining in with the people you are observing. this makes results more valid because people are more likely to tell the truth

• validity - no Hawthorne effect as p’s do not know they are being watched. so behaviour will be truthful.

• validity - as you are involved with the p’s, this means that you are less likely to miss social cues and will have a better understanding of the motives behind people’s actions.

weakness

• validity - researcher has to write up notes later based on memory so might forget details or make mistakes which makes results less truthful

• practical - logistically harder to organise and will take longer, needs a skilled interviewer to ensure that it stays covert

• reliability - as it is logistically harder to organise it is less likely to be repeated

• representativeness - as it is repeated less it means that the results will be harder to generalise.

• ethics - cannot get informed consent as it is covert, also as it was participant as well it may be harder to reveal it was a study afterwards if you have built relationships with participants, may psychological harm them to know it was for a study

participant overt

strengths

• validity - as you are involved with the p’s, this means that you are less likely to miss social cues and will have a better understanding of the motives behind people’s actions.

• practical - as it is overt it is easier to organise

• reliability - as it is logistically easier it means you can repeat more

• ethics - can get informed consent

• theories - interpretivist, can build empathy and rapport as you are joining in with the people you are observing. this makes results more valid because people are more likely to tell the truth

• representativeness - as it is easier to repeat the sample will be more generalisable to wider population

weakness

• validity - Hawthorne effect, p’s will change their behaviour as they know they are being watched so results will be less truthful

• validity - researcher has to write up notes later based on memory so might forget details or make mistakes which makes results less truthful

• practical - needs a skilled observer to know what to look for

lab study

strengths

• reliability - it is a highly controlled environment with a standardised procedure which means it is easy to repeat

• representativeness - as you can repeat it the sample will be a true representation of the population

• validity - as it is highly controlled, this means that extraneous variables can be controlled which means you can be sure that you are testing what you want to test and nothing else it effecting the results

• theories - positivists will prefer lab as it is a standardised procedure that obtains quantitative data that allows them to make generalisations and cause and effect statements

weakness

• validity - lab experiments are artificial so it may not show what would happen in the real world

• validity - it may be impossible to identify and control every variable that could have an effect which means the study may have confounding variables that make conclusions less true

• validity - Hawthorne effect means p’s will change behaviour

• ethical - sometimes involves deception which means you cannot get informed consent

• interpretivists - claim that lab studies don’t translate to the real world and they produce low validity data

• practical - hard and time consuming to organise and expensive

field study

strengths

• validity - less artificial as it is a more real environment

• validity - no Hawthorne effect as p’s don’t not know they are part of an experiment so will act naturally and truthfully

• theories - interpretivists prefer them because they are higher in validity

weakness

• reliability - less control over variables which means that repeating would be harder

• ethical - cannot get informed consent

• validity - limited application, there are few situations that can be adapted to a field experiment and testing one factor with them is very complex

• practical - hard to organise, takes a long time to organise

documents

strengths

• validity - mostly written for personal purposes, these often have a fairly high degree of validity and provide a genuine insight into people’s attitudes

• practical - cheap and save time

weakness

• some groups are not likely to produce personal document so their views are not represented while others may be overrepresented

• some may be created after with the benefit of hindsight so don’t reflect their views in the moment

• may be written with and audience in mind and this may effect what is recored. personal bias may be present

statistics

strengths

• representativeness - official statistics are often based on a large sample so are true to the population

• reliability - can be repeated and compared e.g census

• prompts to research - good starting point for further research

• availability - they are cheap and readily available to use

weakness

• definitions - some concepts have different definitions than the sociologist wants to study so they may not exactly match which decreases validity of research

• political bias - marxists say that statistics are not valid as they reflect ruling class ideology. the definitions used, areas of social life covered and how statistics are presented are all political decision

• male bias - not valid as they are biased against women. e.g definitions of work exclude housework. women are also more likely to be counted out in unemployment figures