Research methods

1 Research Aim and hypothesis

Deciding what you want to research and predicting what you think you might find.

2 Pilot Study

A small-scale trial run of a research project to ensure it is ready for launch

3 Sampling

The process of selecting individuals or groups to take part in a research study.

4 Data Collection

Methods used to gather information during research.

5 Data Analysis

The process of working through all data gathered to see what you can learn

6 Evaluating the Project

Reflecting on the completed research and assessing whether it was successful.

Primary Research

Research methods that involve the collection of original data for a specific project. e.g. questionnaires, interviews, observations

Triangulation

Using multiple research methods to study the same thing- increases validity

Random Sampling+ evaluation

• random- give each person a number and choose at random

everyone has equal chance so rmeoves bias

may be unrepresentative

Systematic Sampling+ evaluate

Choosing every nth individual from a list to create a sample.

should be representative but may not be

Stratified Sampling+ evaluation

Dividing a population into strata and then randomly sampling from each

representative

time consuming

Snowball Sampling+ evaluation

A sampling technique where small group of peple find others to take part

draws on social groups so may be able to study hard to reach groups

lack of control leads to bias

Quota Sampling

A sampling method where they set controls to fit criteria e.g. ethnicity

ensures sample is relevant to research aim

may not be representative of general population

Opportunistic Sampling

Selecting participants who are readily available for the study.

quick and easy

unrepresentative

Positivism

The belief that sociology can be studied scientifically and objectively.

• cause and effect

• macro approach

• trends

Interpretivism

An approach that focuses on understanding human behavior from the perspective of those being studied.

• empathy

• meaning and motive

• opinions

Questionnaire

A research tool consisting of a series of questions designed to gather information.

• research response only 5% though making a financial incentive, fewer questions, relevant to them or using coloured ink improves this

Open-ended Questions

Questions that allow respondents to answer in their own words.

Closed-ended Questions

Questions that require respondents to choose from a predetermined list of answers.

Official Statistics

Data collected and published by governmental organizations.

strengths for official statistics

important for planning and evaluating social policy

Practical- easy to get as secondary so cheap to use

Representative- of whole population due to large samples, and over time.

Theories- positivists like as can see trends and compare.

Ethical issues- avoids as readily available and confidential

Reliable- easily repeatable

weakness for official statistics

soft statistics like the definition of unemployment changing

Validity- completed by government so may be biased, or not show the whole picture e.g. dfoc

Theories- interpretivists dislike as see them as socially constructed and manipulated

strengths for questionnaires

Practical- quick and easy

Ethics- consent, anonymous

Potential to be representative as can be sent out to lots of people for cheap

Reliable- easy to do so repeatable

validity- no problem of interviewer bias

Positivists like as can see trends, and can be easily quantified with closed questions

weaknesses of questionnaires

Validity- lying and right answerism where you change answers to be socially desirable, cannot explore more into an issue to understand meaning or motive

Unrepresentative- low response rate and only a certain demographic reply

Lack of flexiblity due to set questions and responses- lack of validity

Potential to answer inaccurately as cannot ask for clarification- lack of validity

Documents types and what to consider and evaluation

• public- OFSTED, health reports

• personal- letters, photographs, medical records

• historical- artifacts and paintings

authenticity: who wrote it? parts may be missing

credibility: is evidence believable? what is the motive behind it?

representative: is it typical of the time period? does it represent everybody?

meaning: what language is it in? what impacts does it have?

Practical- easy, cheap to get as large amount publicly available

Ethics- public documents have been kept confidential

Reliability- many done in systematic format so repeatable

Theories- done in different ways so pleases both

Representative- large samples

validity- provides isnight into the attitudes, values and meaning of people who produced them

Ethics- personal documents may breach confidentiality and informed consent

Validity- may present themselves in best ways so not true, meaning may have changed over time

Representative- often only of the person who wrote it

context analysis

produces primary quantitative data from study of qualitative secondary sources

content, categories, code, count, conclude

strengths of context analysis

relatively cheap

reliable and easy for others to check

shouldn’t be distorted by changes in behaviour as no involvement with people

weaknesses of content analysis

based on categories decided by the researcher and their interpretation

some items may not fit in categories

only describes, does not explain

Longitudinal Study and evaluation

Research that follows the same subjects over an extended period. e.g. 7UP- 14 kids since 1964

very detailed information about participant, can explore patterns of change through their situations

attrition- ps may cease to take part in a longitudinal study, only representative of that specific group

life histroy and evaluation

case study that focuses on one individual through interviews or personal documents

in depth but not representative

Ethnography

The detailed study of people and cultures in their natural environment.

e.g. sampson studied international seafarers for 42 days, swedish and filipino

Field Experiment and example

Experiments conducted in real-world settings where people are in their natural environment e.g. office, school

e.g. being sane in insane places, david rosenhan

• how staff labelled people as mentally ill

• sane patients faked symptons of schizophrenia then admitted into hospital where they were diagnosed

• reversed experiment telling staff to expect fakes but they were actually geniune patients

strengths of field experiment

Validity- as it is in their natural environment, Ps will act more genuinely and data is from a real world situation.

Interpretivists like- can understand meaning.

weakness of field experiment

Validity- cannot control all the variables so cannot directly know cause and effect.

Ethics- usually don’t get informed consent in order to have no hawthorne effect

Representative- not of wider groups (hard to gain access to some loactions)

Practical- hard to organise, stay undercover etc.

strength of lab experiment

researcher able to have complete control over variables

easy to replicate the experiment by following the same procedures

easy to quantify behaviours

Lab Experiment and example

Controlled experiments conducted in a laboratory environment.

e.g. milgram experiment

• asked to shock learners if they could not rmember word pair- electric shock was fake

• 65% continued to 450 lethal volts

weakness of lab experiment

participants know they are being studied so may alter their behaviour (hawthorne effect)

researcher may have to deceive participants in order to ensure valid results

Non-participant Observation

Observation where the researcher does not engage with the subjects but takes notes e.g. OFSTED

Participant Observation, evaluation and example

Observation where the researcher actively engages and participates in the group being studied.

• impractical to takes notes at the time so often written later menaing they are largely based off memory so less accurate

e.g. black like me, john howard

• used medications and sun lamps to change his skin colour

• when white: whites treat him with respect, blacks with fear

• when black: whites treat him with contempt, black with warmth

• races do not understand each other- racism is a result of socialisation

researcher can build rapport/ use empathy to make connections, provides access to multiple perspectives

can be dangerous, risk of going native and crossing line

Covert Observation and examples

A research method where the subjects are unaware they are being studied and researcher’s identity and purpose is concealed

e.g. glasgow gang observed, james patrick

• members became suspicious as he held back from fights

overt observation

sociologists are honest about what they are doing and make purpose known

strengths of overt, non-participant

Validity- can take notes as you go along and can ask open and upfront questions

Theories- more Positivist as objective and bird’s eye view

Ethics- will have got informed consent

weakness of overt, non-participant

Practical- have to organise, have a skilled observer

Validity- despite not participating you are in the room so due to the hawthorne effect you may change people’s behaviour, and people may lie

Theories- interpretivists dislike as you cannot understand meaning behind behaviour

strength of covert, non-participant

Validity- can take notes as you go along and there is no hawthorne effect so more true to life, gets insight into group behaviours

Theories- Positivists like, as it is objective so can get a bird’s eye view

Reliability- as it is covert and non-participant the research does not change what is being observed so it is easier to repeat

weakness of covert, non-participant

Ethical- deception as cannot get informed consent, may have to engage in crime

Validity- distance means you cannot fully understand a situation, and due to being covert you may not be able to take notes so have to rely on memory

Practical- need a skilled observer and a way to be hidden

Theories- interpretivists dislike as cannot build empathy/ understanding due to being non-participant- so less valid

strengths of covert, participant

Validity- gain first hand knowledge by building a relationship of trust so can gather more in depth date. Sociologist will not influence group as undercover so no Hawthorne effect. Can adapt as you go along to include new issues.

Practical- takes time but may be easiest to do e.g. criminals won’t be interviewed but you could study them this way

Theories- interpretevists like as can generate rich data

Reliability- as it is covert it is easy to repeat

weaknesses of covert, participant

Ethics- taking part without them knowing that you are researching so deceiving meaning no informed consent.

Practical- hard to accurately record information while undercover

Representative- only studying a small group of people

Ethics- may be put in danger or witness unpleasant things

Evidence e.g. Chelsea headhunters

Validity- may become so involved you are biased ‘going native’

strengths of overt, participant

Validity- gain first hand knowledge by building a relationship of trust so that you can gather more indepth data. Can adapt to include new topics.

Theories- interpretivists like as generates rich data with meaning

Ethics- have informed consent

weaknesses of overt, participant

Validity- Ps know you are there so may show social desirability bias due to hawthorne effect making behaviour less valid. May become so involved you go native, and become biased.

Practical- time consuming.

Representative- only a small group

structured interview

set questions asked in a set order, asked same to each person

strengths of structured interview

Reliable- set questions so repeatable

Validity- can ask for clarification over misunderstandings, less likely to lie

Representative- can control the sample, and can get a larger sample rate than questionnaires as could overcome illiteracy

Ethics- get informed consent

Positivists like- see trends and data is comparable

Reliability- set questions means less intervewer bias

Do not need a skilled interviewer- more practical and reliable so little issue of interviewer bias

weaknesses of structured interviews

Validity- cannot ask follow up questions so lacks real truth which may limit what the respondent can say as the interview cannot probe beyond basic questions so limits understanding

Practical- logistically challenging, time consuming and costly

Takes time so repeated less and group not as representative

Validity- interviewer bias, not suitable to explore personal or sensitive topics as there is less chance to build trust and encourage interviewee to open up

Practical/ validity- limited question design, more time consuming and costly than questionnaire

Social desirability- lack of validity

unstructured interviews

interviewer has loose plan of what to ask but can probe deeper or change course

e.g. dobash and dobash, domestic abuse

strengths of unstructured interviews

group interviews or focus groups can lead to more discussions

Validity- can ask follow up questions to clarify meaning, and build rapport with the interviewee through a more normal conversation to create trust leading to in-depth answers

Theories- interpretivists like as it allows for deeper questioning to get meaning through qualitative data so more likely to be valid

weaknesses of unstructured interviews

group interviews or focus groups can lead to peer pressure which means a lack of validity

Practical (TLC)- harder to organize, takes more time and requires more skill on the part of the interviewer so is less practical

Reliable- less practical so not easy to repeat so less reliable

Representative- as it is less practical, it is harder to make it representative

Theories- positivists dislike as there is no quantitative data to compare

Ethical- more likely to be unethical as could ask inappropriate questions which you did not get informed consent for- could make people upset

Validity- interviewer bias because they are more involved so respondents may reflect differences in nature of interviewers , may ask leading questions

focus group

small groups of 10-12 people

• researcher discusses certain topics and observes interactions

• individuals guide conversations after the initial question is asked

• this increases empathy, trust and openness as individuals are more comfortable

interviewer bias

TPractical- time, logistics (complexity of organising), cost (longer=more expensive)

Ethical- whether it is morally acceptable (anonymity, bias, confidentiality, informer consent, danger, deception, data protection-GDPR)

Reliability-

• high: questionnaires, structured interviews, lab experiments

• low: observations, unstructured interviews, field experiments

Validity- whether data is true or not

Evidence- use well known case studies or examples

Representativeness- whether it represents the population fairly in size and make up

Theories- how do Positivists and Interpretivists feel about the methodhe response may be influenced by personality, facial expression, age, ethnicity, sex, tone of voice, status difference

• this may be consciously or subconsciously influence their answer or give leading question which encourage interviewee to give a certain answer

• interviewees may adapt their answers to impress the interviewer by giving answers they think the interviewer wants to hear

ways to overcome: not offer opinions, match social characteristics, telephone interviews

PERVERT

Practical- time, logistics (complexity of organising), cost (longer=more expensive)

Ethical- whether it is morally acceptable (anonymity, bias, confidentiality, informer consent, danger, deception, data protection-GDPR)

Reliability-

• high: questionnaires, structured interviews, lab experiments

• low: observations, unstructured interviews, field experiments

Validity- whether data is true or not

Evidence- use well known case studies or examples

Representativeness- whether it represents the population fairly in size and make up

Theories- how do Positivists and Interpretivists feel about the method