Unit 1 - Classic Research: Bowlby (1944) ‘Forty-four juvenile thieves: their characters and home-life’ (evaluation of methodologies and procedures)

Why is the use of case studies in this research a weakness of Bowlby’s methodology?

They were largely based on the recollections of the parents.

Why may the case studies being based on the parent’s recollections a weakness?

For 17 thieves and 2 of the control group, their mothers were frequently absent so may not have had enough accurate information about their child.

Why could the parents not having accurate information be a weakness?

The research could be viewed as unreliable where their data may have been false due to social desirability issues.

Therefore, why can the use of case studies be viewed as a methodological weakness.

Due to a lack of reliability/validity.

Why is the use of qualitative data a weakness of the methodology?

It may be biased.

What evidence is there to suggest that the qualitative data may be biased?

In the final report there were 56 pages and 25 of them were discussing the case histories of the 44 thieves.

Why is this amount of detail about the participants a weakness?

The data is limited as it is based on the view of one person (Bowlby) whose perception may have been biased by his beliefs, known as researcher bias.

Therefore, how is the use of qualitative data a weakness?

It may be subject to researcher bias.

Why is the sample a weakness of Bowlby’s procedures?

It lacks population validity.

Who did Bowlby’s sample consist of?

88 emotionally disturbed children, selected by opportunity sampling.

Why is this sample an issue?

This causes issues of generalisability to arise as not all children are emotionally disturbed, meaning that findings cannot be applied to the target population.

Therefore, why is Bowlby’s sample a weakness?

The findings cannot be generalised to children who are not juvenile delinquents.

Why is the research weak on the whole, and why is this a procedural weakness?

It is not a true experiment.

How is Bowlby’s experiment not a true experiment?

He didn’t manipulate variables within his research as he used non-experimental methods such as case studies and interviews to collect his data.

What does his research not being a true experiment mean?

He cannot establish the direct cause of stealing behaviours as correlation does not mean causation.

Therefore, why is Bowlby’s research not being a true experiment a weakness?

This threatens the internal validity of the study as other factors could have contributed towards the emotional disturbance.