qual vs quan

qual 1

E: Weber- qualitative methods allow you to probe for detail and gain verstehen (empathy) of individual perceptions = high in validity 

R: Bunsel- studied female bodybuilders and used unstructured interviews to gain insight into painful experiences of harassment → if unable to probe for detail would’ve lacked understanding and participants would have been uncomfortable  

C: Durkheim- favours quantitative as data can be more widespread = quantifiable and representative 

qual 2

E: Glaser- qualitative methods allow for clarity → interpretivists emphasise how people's actions are shaped by their individual meanings 

R: Jackson- used open questionnaires to study lad culture and experiences of harassment → comes down individual perceptions of harassment and society

C: Comte- society can be viewed as an objective factual reality 

quan 1

E: Comte- positivists favour quantitative methods as they’re time saving, cheap and can create larger data sets = representative 

R: Willmot and Young- conducted 933 structured interviews when studying symmetrical family = more representative and quantifiable

C: Strauss- lack validity and verstehen   

quan 2

E: Comte- positivists sociology should be treated scientifically as society is an objective factual reality → social laws can be developed by collecting data- therefore use quantitative data 

R: Durkheim- used official statistics to study suicide → found its rates were higher amongst protestants than catholics which he claimed was due to catholicism being better at integrating individuals = claimed to have discovered a real law that different levels of integration meant different suicide rates = belief society can be studied scientifically

C: Graham- objective data provides distorted view as it lacks reasoning behind actions