Topic 1: Quantitative methods

Explain how laboratory experiments work

Control: Makes “cause and effect” analyses easier, by isolating variables (by removing variables that aren’t the subject focus, eg if investigating class, have every student of the same age, same ethnicity etc). This group is then divided into (below):

Experimental vs control group: Exposed to the an independent variable, the factor researchers are studying.

Cause and effect: Not exposed to the independent variable, and their conditions are kept constant.

Conditions between the two are measured at the state, and if conditions are different between the two at the end, it can be concluded the independent variable had a causal effect.

Outline the pros of laboratory experiments

Theoretically:

• Positivists see them as highly detached, with the researcher merely changing the variables and recording the results, and thus by decreasing the researchers influence, validity is increased

• Is formulated on a clear step-by-step basis, so can be easily repeated, increasing reliability

Outline the cons of laboratory experiments

Practical:

• Keat & Urry: Only suitable in study closed systems, in which every variable can be controlled, eg for chemistry experiments. However, society is an open system with countless factors at work in every situation. This makes it impossible to identify, let alone control all these variables, making LBs practically unfeasible

• Can only isolate things on small-scales, therefore cannot be used to investigate mass social phenomena such as religiosity

Ethical:

• Informed consent: Participants must be informed on the details and aims of the study in order to consent to take part. However, informing the participants of the experiments goals can be-self defeating. For example, Harvey and Slatin used LBs to investigate teacher labelling in regard to class by showing 18 photographs of children from different class backgrounds, before asking them to rate the child’s likely attainment. Informing them would have defeat the goals of the study, highlighting the way in which the ethical and theoretical goals of LBs come into conflict

• Harm: Milgram in which participants believed they were administering electric shocks to the learner, causing distress and anxiety to said participants However, 83.7% gave retrospective informed consent

Theoretical:

• Weber: No Verstehen

• Shipman: Imposes meaning, Glasser and Strauss Grounded theory

• Postivists to small scale, not representative

Explain what field experiments are

They follow the same logic as laboratory experiments, seeking to identify, but increase validity by taking place in the subjects natural environment (rather than artificial lab) and involve participants who do no know they are the subjects, both preventing the influnce of the Hawthorne Effect

Outline the pros of field experiments

Theoretical:

• By taking place in the subjects natural environment (rather than artificial lab) and involve participants who do no know they are the subjects, they prevent the influence of the Hawthorne Effect, increasing validity

Outline the cons of field experiments

Theoretical:

• The more naturalistic and realistic the situation, the less control the researcher has, decreasing reliability

Ethical:

• Harm to subjects: Rosenthal & Jacobson randomly picked 20% of the students in a class, and told their teachers they were “spurters”. On return 1 yr later, 47% of those identified as “spurters” had made significant progress. However, this may have educationally impact those who werent given said postive label

Explain the comparative methods

Works as a thought experiment:

1. Identify two groups that are comparable in all aspects bar one

2. See if this one difference has any effect, using secondary data

3. The most famous example of this was Durkheim’s study of Suicide, which analysised official statistics using this method

Outline the pros of the comparative method

Practical:

• Can be used to study the past when no other methods are available

Theoretical:

• Avoids artificiality

Ethical:

• No danger of harming or deceiving participants

Outline the cons of the comparative method

Ver little control over variables

Outline the pros of questionnaires

Practical:

• Quick and cheap, They are quick and cheap, allowing large amounts of geographically diverse data to be collected. Connor and Dewson posted almost 4k questionnaires across 14 higher education institutions for students in their study of class and university choice

• No need to recruit or train interviewers

Ethical:

• No obligation to answer intrusive questions (though this must still be made clear)

• Anonymity can be guaranteed

Theoretical:

• Positivist sociologists see them as particularly beneficial as they can be used to test cause-and-effect hypothesis (eg by comparing answers to questions on family size and academic attainment to see if the former influences the latter

• Detached - less chance of right answerism. Even more so with postal or online questionnaires, no researchers present

• Representative: Because they are so standardised, they can be conducted quickly and easily, increasing the feasible sample size, increasing representativeness

• Repeatable: Can be repeated, increasing representativeness

Outline the cons of questionnaires

Practically:

• Usually have to be brief to increase the volume of participants, damaging validity

• Inflexible. Cannot be altered once set out, so emerging themes cant be pursued, damaging validity

• With postal votes, there is no guarantee the person whom it was addressed to completed it (could be parent instead of student for example), damaging reliability

Theoretical:

• Interactionalist critiques:

  • Weber: Detached nature prevents development of Verstehen, damaging validity

  • Shipman: By pre-determining the questions, they impose researcher meaning, rather than revealing the views of respondents, damaging validity

  Feminist critques:

  • Graham: Imposing the researchers catagories on women, thus distorting the responses, damaging validity

  • Oakley: Researcher takes on the active role, deciding the questions, while the participant takes on a passive role, a mere object of study to be milked for information - with no role in deciding the subject of direction of interview. This mirrors the gender divisions of wider patriarchal society

• Those that do respond may not represent society as a whole eg may be an older demographic that are retired and have the time to respond, compared to those of working age, thus skewing, and damaging reliability

What are the 4 types of interview?

• Structured/formal: Standardized, eg same set of questions to each interviewee, same order etc

• Unstructured/informal/discovery: Freedom to vary questions, order etc

• Semi-structured: Same set of questions, but can probe for more info

• Group: Not 1-to-1

Outline the pros of structured interviews

Practical:

• Willmott and Young only saw 54/987 people refuse to take part in an interview, as face-to-face interactions are harder to turn down, increasing response rates, and thus reliability

• Training interviewers is relatively straightforward and inexpensive, as they just follow a set of instructions

Theoretical: Postivists

• Detached: Only set, pre-determined questions can be asked, preventing the development of rapport creating detachment that prevents the researcher influence participant response, increasing validity

• Quantifiable: Closed-ended questions allows the data to be quantified, making the establishment of cause-and-effect relationships easier

• Repeatable: Interviews can be trained to conduct each interview in precisely the same way - same questions, tones, voice , etc - increasing reliability

• Representative: Because they are so standardised, they can be conducted quickly and easily, increasing the feasible sample size, increasing representativeness

Outline the cons of structured interviews

Theoretical:

Interactionalist critques:

• Weber: Detached nature prevents development of Verstehen, damaging validity

• Shipman: By pre-determining the questions, they impose researcher meaning, rather than revealing the views of respondents, damaging validity

Feminist critques:

• Graham: Interviewer-interviewee relationship as problematic, with the interviewers position of power (particularly over women), created added pressure for right-answerism and imposing the researchers catagories on women, thus distorting the responses, damaging validity

• Oakley: Researcher takes on the active role, asking the questions, while the participant takes on a passive role, a mere object of study to be milked for information - with no role in deciding the subject of direction of interview. This mirrors the gender divisions of wider patriarchal society

Outline the pros of official statistics

Practical:

• Free source of huge volume of data

• Potentially only source of info, eg Aries studies of childhood in the past

• Have a finical and legal scope now study could have. Eg 2021 census surveys every household in the UK, asking questions that only government could ask (eg over protected characteristics such as religion or sexuality), increasing validity

Ethical:

• Detached, so no ethical dilemma

Theoretical:

• Large sample (97% of households responded to 2021 Census) = more representativeness. Thus they can establish “Social Facts” (Durkheim)

• Collected at regular intervals, allows temporal comparison, adding another layer of analysis and thus validity

Outline the cons of official statistics

Practical:

• Designed for governments/organisations needs, not sociologists. May not be info for topic your studying (eg Durkheims study of suicide, where government didnt collect data on the religion of suicide victims)

• Gov definitions may be different (eg of poverty, Marxists would define it differently) + can effect temporal comparison (eg gov definition of unemployment has changed 30x in the 80s & 90s)

• Access, eg MIG not subject to Freedom of Information Act (2000)

Ethical:

• Official stats can potential expose certain groups (eg exposing where minorities are concentrated can put them at risk, eg 2024 Summer Riots)

Theoretical:

• John Irvene - Marxists: Beneficial to r/c. Eg in 1984 unemployment reached 12%, simultaneously definition of unemployment changed 30x through 80s & 90s

• Good for measuring “hard” stats (eg TFR), but not with “soft” stats, eg every racist incident in school isnt measured. Eg Yearnshire found women suffered 35 DA before reporting to the Police