chapter 4

Structuring of Inquiry: ART 2 2 Quantitative and Qualitative

Leaning Objectives

Upon completion of this chapter, you should be able to:

Discuss the role of exploration, description, and explanation in social research.
Discuss the logic and procedures of idiographic explanation.
Name and discuss the legitimate and false criteria for nomothetic explanation.
Distinguish between necessary and sufficient causes, providing examples.
Identify common units of analysis in social research and explain why these concepts are important.
Identify and describe common study designs based on the time dimension.
Explain and illustrate some advantages of mixed-mode designs.
Identify and discuss the key elements in designing a research project.
Describe the elements and structure of a research proposal.
Provide examples to illustrate how research design can present ethical implications.

Introduction

Science is inherently focused on discovery and inquiry. Though there are various modes of inquiry to determine answers to questions, this chapter emphasizes the need for a coherent plan—research design—before observations and analysis occur. The research design effectively outlines what you wish to study and how you will pursue that study.

For example, if you are interested in assessing whether a new automobile model, the Burpo-Blasto, is suitable for you, you could approach this question through different methods:

Buying the car for personal experience.
Interviewing current owners of the Burpo-Blasto.
Reviewing classified ad trends showing the resale value of the vehicle.
Consulting consumer magazines or online reviews.

Scientific inquiry parallels this in exploring different methodologies which can yield various perspectives on any given topic. As noted by Jeffrey Ross (2004), the study of terrorism showcases a range of qualitative and quantitative approaches, including firsthand accounts of victims and statistical modeling of occurrences.

Chapter Overview:
This chapter serves as an introduction to the complete research design process, which is interconnected across all sections of this book. It will specifically explore the three main objectives of social research: exploration, description, and explanation.

Three Purposes of Research

Understanding the main purposes of social research involves distinguishing three focuses: exploration, description, and explanation; although most studies embody multiple purposes, analyzing them individually illuminates their different implications for research design.

Exploration

Many social research endeavors seek to explore unknown topics, typically initiated when the subject matter is new or uncharted.

Example: Taxpayer Revolt

Assume a sociopolitical upheaval arises, such as a taxpayer revolt. You might investigate the extent of dissatisfaction, community support levels, organization, and active participants within this movement.

Methods for exploration might include contacting tax collectors for figures, studying the movement's literature, attending pivotal meetings, and interviewing leaders from the revolt.

While exploratory studies are valuable for gaining insight, they often do not yield definitive answers to research questions due to representative biases. Thus, researchers must understand that findings might not reflect broader populations.

Types of Exploratory Research

Common settings include:

Focus groups, often used in market research.
Feasibility tests for larger studies.
Development of methodologies for future studies.

Description

Research can also focus on describing observations derived from scientific inquiry.

Example: The U.S. Census

The goal of the Census is to meticulously describe the United States' demographic characteristics, which is indicative of general descriptive studies.

Many qualitative studies aim towards description, such as ethnographies that study specific cultural groups, although these often transition into exploratory analyses of underlying patterns or causes.

Explanation

While descriptive research answers "what" and "how," explanatory studies delve into the "why" behind observations. For example, if voter intentions are given, explanatory analysis would seek to understand why individuals choose specific candidates.

Example: Attitudes Toward Marijuana The legalization of marijuana highlights an explanatory inquiry.

Based on the 2016 General Social Survey data, 65 percent of men favored marijuana legalization compared to 56 percent of women.
The data suggest that factors such as gender and political orientation influence public attitudes toward marijuana.

This chapter will move ahead to introduce key elements and structures of a research proposal, an essential tool for laying detailed plans prior to executing research.

Idiographic and Nomothetic Explanation

Idiographic explanation seeks to provide exhaustive understanding of the causes influencing events within singular cases. For example, examining a student protest would require one to assess analysis of the university's history, organizational dynamics, and external influences. Success in this analysis rests more upon experience than statistical validation.

Nomothetic Explanation

This approach aims towards identifying a few independent variables that can elucidate variations of broader phenomena while accounting for the likelihood of misinterpretation inherent in correlations.

The significance of criteria for nomothetic causality encompasses the need for correlation, temporal precedence, and non-spuriousness, collectively ensuring valid causal relationships.

Undefined Concepts within Nomothetic Causality

Correlation: Established by statistical relationships inspired by observations.
Time Order: Requires cause occurrence prior to effect manifestation.
Nonspuriousness: Effect must not be accountably explained by ancillary variables.

Units of Analysis

The unit of analysis represents the entity that a researcher aims to study, and while individuals typically comprise the primary focus, collections of roles, groups, organizations, or social artifacts may also serve as units of analysis. Strategies can employ both units and aggregates, thereby either generalizing about populations or delving deep into specific instances.

Common Units of Analysis

Individuals: Most common; represents individual attributes.
Groups: Can encapsulate shared attributes and act as entities to derive conclusions.
Organizations: Corporations or institutions that may be analyzed for broader societal constructs.
Social Interactions: Instances of exchange or interaction among individuals.
Social Artifacts: Products of human activity, such as literature and artistic endeavors.

Science is all about discovering new things and asking questions. Before we start looking for answers, we need a solid plan, which we call research design. This plan outlines what we want to study and how we will do it.

For example, if you're curious about whether a new car model, the Burpo-Blasto, is right for you, you could:

Buy the car and try it out.
Talk to people who already own the Burpo-Blasto.
Look at online ads to see how much people are selling it for.
Check consumer magazines or website reviews.

Research works similarly by using different methods to understand a topic from various viewpoints. For instance, when studying terrorism, researchers might gather personal stories from victims or analyze statistics about incidents.

This section introduces the whole research design process, which is a theme throughout the book. We'll specifically look at three main goals of social research: exploration, description, and explanation.

Three Goals of Research

To understand social research, we need to know its three main goals: exploration (finding out about new topics), description (providing detailed accounts), and explanation (understanding why things happen).

Exploration

Some research focuses on exploring brand new topics. For example, if a community faces a tax revolt, you might check how many people are upset, how much support there is, and who is involved.

You could gather information by contacting tax offices, attending meetings, reading about the movement, or interviewing leaders.

Description

Other research aims to describe things in detail. For example, the U.S. Census gathers information about the country's demographics, giving a clear picture of who lives there.

Explanation

While description tells us "what" and "how," explanation digs deeper into "why". For instance, if we know how many men and women support legalizing marijuana, we might ask why they feel that way.

Based on a survey, about 65% of men support it compared to 56% of women, suggesting that gender and political beliefs might affect these views.

Next, we’ll talk about important parts of a research proposal, a plan that helps us outline our research before starting it.

Idiographic vs. Nomothetic Explanation

Idiographic explanation looks deeply at individual cases for a complete understanding. For instance, studying a student protest involves analyzing the university's history and outside factors affecting it.
Nomothetic explanation tries to find common factors that explain broader trends while being careful not to misinterpret data. For example, to understand the causes of social issues, researchers look for correlations and ensure that the relationships they find are valid and not due to outside influences.

Units of Analysis

The unit of analysis is the specific topic or entity a researcher studies. While individual people are often the focus, groups, organizations, or cultural artifacts can also be studied. Researchers can generalize findings about populations or look closely at specific examples.

Common Units of Analysis

Individuals: The most common focus in research.
Groups: Collections of people with shared traits.
Organizations: Companies or institutions viewed for their societal impact.
Social Interactions: How individuals connect with one another.
Social Artifacts: Physical items created by humans, like books and art.

While nomothetic explanations focus on establishing valid causal relationships, it is crucial to recognize criteria that can lead to erroneous conclusions. False criteria for nomothetic causality include: - Coincidental Correlation: Instances where two variables show correlation not due to any causal relationship but purely by chance. - Ignoring Confounding Variables: Failing to account for other variables that may influence both the independent and dependent variables, leading to spurious associations. - Post Hoc Reasoning: Assuming a cause-and-effect relationship simply because one event follows another in time ("after this, therefore because of this"). - Misinterpretation of Aggregate Data: Drawing conclusions about individuals based on group-level data can result in inaccurate assumptions about causal mechanisms. Understanding these false criteria helps researchers maintain rigor and integrity in their analyses.