Term
| PROBLEMS WITH LONGITUDINAL SURVEYS |
|
Definition
• practical issues: expensive and time-consuming. Once they've started, you cannot collect retrospective info, so you have to be sure you have the right questions and identified any potential issues from the start
• theoretical issues: respondents may drop out of the survey (e.g. because they get bored) or move causing the researchers to lose track of them, if too many drop out it makes the surgery increasingly unrepresentative (views of those who remain may be significantly different from those who drop out)
- people may change their behaviour |
|
|
Term
| STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF CASE STUDIES |
|
Definition
Strengths: usually extremely detailed and provide a depth of info not normally available (e.g. Willis' study)
- Useful for coming up with new theories which can be tested in further research
Weaknesses: this intense scrutiny may risk missing wider issues. The group might not be representative and they may change their behaviour |
|
|
Term
| STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF EXPERIMENTS |
|
Definition
Strengths: allows them to find precise causes, they can be replicated to test the reliability of findings
Weaknesses: artificial environment doesn't reflect real life,
- ethical problems in performing experiments on people (e.g. Deception)
- risk of experimenter effect (harms validity)
- cannot be used to study long-term of major social change |
|
|
Term
| STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF COMPARATIVE RESEARCH |
|
Definition
Strengths: sometimes possible to identify a particular social practice/value that is they key factor in determining that issue (e.g. Durkheim - found that specific cultural differences motivated people to commit suicide)
Weaknesses: you cannot control or manipulate variables
- can't always control what data is available (if you work with what's there, may be imperfect = valid?) |
|
|
Term
| STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF COVERT RESEARCH |
|
Definition
Strengths: forbidden fruit - researchers can enter forbidden areas, be fully accepted and immerse themselves totally in the group being studied = validity!
• normal behaviour- the group will continue to act naturally unaware that they're being studied
Weaknesses: danger of discovery (may place researcher in danger, mean research has to halt)
• ethical dilemmas (consent, deception, participation/witnessing of illegal or immoral activities) |
|
|
Term
| STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF OVERT OBSERVATION |
|
Definition
Strengths: the confidante (researcher may take the role of trusted outsider)
• honesty (researcher playing open and honest role, minimises ethical issues)
• researchers can supplement their observation with other methods (e.g. Interviews)
Weaknesses: outsider (many situations where only a trusted insider will be let into the secrets of a group)
• changing behaviour |
|
|
Term
| PRACTICAL ADVANTAGES OF PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION |
|
Definition
- may not take much preparation (esp. If it involves social groups the researcher is already familiar with)
- may also make it possible to study some groups who wouldn't take part in other types of research (e.g. Criminal gangs) |
|
|
Term
| ETHICAL ADVANTAGES OF PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION |
|
Definition
- researcher is in a better position to understand the needs of the subjects than when using other methods, can ensure that they do them no harm
- may also be able to help the subjects out in various ways such as offering advice |
|
|
Term
| THEORETICAL ADVANTAGES OF PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION |
|
Definition
- allows researcher go fully join the group and see if things through their perspective, better understanding
- this type of observation can lead to generating new ideas and theories, researcher can be more open-minded
- prevents risk of ppts lying because the researcher can see the person in action
- building of rapport, may lead to opt confiding in researcher on sensitive issues
- dynamic: takes place over a period of time
- easier for the researcher to use the concepts and language of those being studied and reflect their priorities than in other methods such as questionnaires |
|
|
Term
| PRACTICAL DISADVANTAGES OF PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION |
|
Definition
• tend to be time-consuming and therefore expensive (if the research has an interest un a particular aspect of social life, they may waste a lot of time waiting to observe the behaviour they're researching)
• may be problems concerning access (researcher's age/sex/ethnicity or group may be closed to outsiders)
• recording the data: finding time and space to write up field notes |
|
|
Term
| ETHICAL DISADVANTAGES OF PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION |
|
Definition
• risk of researcher taking part in illegal or immoral acts in order to fully participate
• may be impossible to seek informed consent (e.g. If the research is covert)
• may be difficult to maintain the anonymity of those being studied (descriptions often so detailed that a reader may work out who they are) |
|
|
Term
| THEORETICAL DISADVANTAGES OF PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION |
|
Definition
• bias (observer can be drawn in and start seeing things through their eyes, risk of missing info)
• influence of the researcher
• reliability and validity (not able to replicate the research and the interpretations rely upon he individual researcher, findings rely on selective memory of researcher)
• representativeness (bc often small groups) |
|
|
Term
| ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF NON-P.O |
|
Definition
Advantages: bias and going native unlikely
- less likely to influence group decisions and activities
Disadvantages: Superficiality- merely observing leaves the researcher on the outside and may limit their understanding
- risk of ppts altering behaviour when they know they're being watched |
|
|
Term
| ADVANTAGES OF UNSTRUCTURED INTERVIEWS |
|
Definition
• greater flexibility = increases validity (opp. to build trust and rapport)
• possibility of probing much deeper into info that may be otherwise unavailable
• ambiguities in Q&A's can be clarified, also interviewer can probe for shades of meaning
• ideas of sociologist can develop in the course of the interviews (can adjust Q's, change direction, new hypothesis may emerge)
• interviewers more able to assess the honesty and validity of replies
• group interviews/focus groups can spark off discussions and ideas which can yield more in-depth info |
|
|
Term
| DISADVANTAGES OF UNSTRUCTURED INTERVIEWS |
|
Definition
• time-consuming and expensive (may mean fewer interviews, raising issues of representativeness)
• may be less reliable - Q's may be phrased in a variety of ways and researchers more involved w/the respondents, also difficult to replicate
• success depends heavily on the personality and personal skills of the interviewer
• difficult to compare and measure he responses of different interviewees, may express themselves in different ways or even contradict themselves in the same interview |
|
|
Term
| STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF FOCUS GROUPS |
|
Definition
• can provide insights into complex problems
• allows the ppts to tease out responses from one another and allows the researcher to observe interaction
• can allow issues to be probed in depth
Weaknesses: researcher must be careful not to 'lead' the group in any particular direction
• some reserved interviewees may go unrepresented due to more dominant members of the group speaking more |
|
|
Term
| PRACTICAL ADVANTAGES OF QUESTIONNAIRES |
|
Definition
• time: relatively easy to collect large amount of data from a sizeable sample of people quite quickly
• access can be relatively easy, can contact them in number of ways
• most people might be more willing to participate in a simple questionnaire than an in-depth interview
• if it has fixed-choice questions = easy to analyse data and computer programmes can look for correlations, can see how strong statistical relationships are between different variables
(E.g. Class and educational achievement) |
|
|
Term
| ETHICAL ADVANTAGES OF QUESTIONNAIRES |
|
Definition
| • avoids many ethical issues (can be quite easy to keep anonymity of ppts, by filling them in respondents are giving consent, easy for respondents to decline so quite unlikely to harm ppts) |
|
|
Term
| THEORETICAL ADVANTAGES OF QUESTIONNAIRES |
|
Definition
• positivist tend to favour this type of method (analysis etc), can find causal relationships as well as correlations
• everyone gets same questionnaire and is responding to the same stimulus = differences in answers should reflect real differences between people
• easy to repeat and ability to use large samples (reliability)
• sample need not be located in one geographical location (representativeness)
• useful for collecting straightforward factual data (age/sex of members of social groups) |
|
|
Term
| PRACTICAL DISADVANTAGES OF QUESTIONNAIRES |
|
Definition
| • generally straightforward but just practicalities of finding a sample/writing the questionnaire/getting respondents to fill them in etc |
|
|
Term
| ETHICAL DISADVANTAGES OF QUESTIONNAIRES |
|
Definition
| • questionnaires need to respect ethical guidelines but they can be carefully considered in ad snag during the process of writing it, so no particular ethical issues unique to questionnaires |
|
|
Term
| THEORETICAL DISADVANTAGES TO QUESTIONNAIRES |
|
Definition
Often highlighted by interpretivists:
• might not reflect real differences (people interpret questions differently)
• assumes to researcher knows what's important before they start the research - therefore not looking to understand social world from their perspective but impose their own preconceptions of how it works
• difficult to develop new hypotheses - only get the info you ask for, also the operationalisation of concepts distorts social worlds by shaping concepts in line w/researchers rather than respondents' meanings
• validity can be undermined by those that deliberately lie or have a faulty memory
• researchers are distant from their subjects - difficult to understand social world from ppts viewpoint |
|
|
Term
| STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF CLOSED QUESTIONS |
|
Definition
Strengths: easy to produce statistical data and analyse, good for testing existing theories and it's reliable. Positivists see the answers as social facts
Weaknesses: no opp. for ppts to clarify concepts or explain views, poor for collecting info on sensitive issues |
|
|
Term
| STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS |
|
Definition
Strengths: more in-depth data, better for discovering complex feelings, meanings or motives
Weaknesses: answers need to be interpreted to understand the data = less objective. Difficult and time-consuming to produce statistical data from the results |
|
|
Term
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF DIFFERENT METHODS OF ADMINISTERING QUESTIONNAIRES
Face-to-face, telephone, postal and Internet |
|
Definition
Face-to-face: good response rate/can clarify Q's, but risk of interviewer bias and is time-consuming and expensive
Telephone: quite cheap, easy to access a geographical dispersed sample, no interviewer bias resulting from seeing the interviewer, but response rate may be low and can only question those with telephones. Ppts may be influenced by voice of interviewer
Postal: quite cheap, easy to access geographically dispersed sample, but response rate tends to be low and those who do respond may be atypical of the pop. as a whole
Internet: cheap and will go send to a widely dispersed sample, but response rate may be low and is limited to those with Internet access |
|
|
Term
| ADVANTAGES OF STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS |
|
Definition
• most effective way of getting questionnaires completed, better response rate
• skilled interviewers can persuade people to answer questions and problems of illiteracy are overcome
• more reliable (all ppts answering same Q's) can be compared and replicated
• useful for obtaining straightforward facts such as age/sex/occupation of ppts
• easy to put into quantitative statistical form (positivists like!)
• less of a problem with interviewer bias - little involvement beyond basic politeness |
|
|
Term
| DISADVANTAGES OF STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS |
|
Definition
• interview schedule may impose limits on what the respondent can say, limited depth of understanding of what the respondent may mean
• not suitable for exploring highly personal or sensitive topics - no opp. to build rapport and trust
• more time-consuming and expensive than postal and other self-completion questionnaires (interviews often slow and interviewers have to be paid), may risk smaller, less representative samples being used
• still possibility of interviewer bias |
|
|
Term
| GENERAL PROBLEMS OF INTERVIEWS |
|
Definition
VALIDITY!
• interpretivists argue interviews are an artificial setting - may not reflect real feelings and behaviour of ppts.
• Risk of lying/misleading interviewer.
•Interviewer is a stranger possibly asking questions that involve very personal/embarrassing issues. Ppts unlikely to give honest answers
• interviews involve words and phrases, meanings may vary between social groups (e.g. Slang)
ALSO RISK OF INTERVIEWER BIAS |
|
|
Term
| PROBLEMS OF SECONDARY SOURCES |
|
Definition
• sociologists must be aware that the person who first created the source did so for a specific reason = may create bias (e.g. A diary - one-sided)
• official statistics: may have been constructed to shed a positive light on the activities of the gov
- may not include the data sociologists are interested in
- may use categories or concepts that don't fit with sociological theories
- categories may change = comparisons over time are difficult
• work of previous sociologists may contain errors and biases and use concepts that later sociologists may not see as relevant and useful |
|
|
Term
| STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF OFFICIAL STATISTICS |
|
Definition
✔️ - often provide far greater scale and detail than a sociologist could manage
- much cheaper to work on statistics already collected
- comparisons can often be made over a long period of time
✖️ - the stats are collected for administrative reasons and the classifications may omit crucial info for sociologists
- stats may be influenced by political considerations (such as when they're used to assist current gov) |
|
|
Term
| PROBLEMS OF REPORTS AND GOV INQUIRIES |
|
Definition
• although they gather much info on social issues, they're constrained by their 'remit' which states the limits of their investigations
- the government and other powerful bodies therefore able to exclude discussion of issues that they don't want to be brought to public attention
(E.g. Gov discussions on issues related to drugs - often carefully controlled so legalisation is not discussed) |
|
|
Term
| PROBLEMS OF DIARIES AND LETTERS |
|
Definition
• writers may have distorted views on what happened
• writers may well be justifying/glorifying themselves in their accounts (etc. Politician's memoirs) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
• they are fiction and will exaggerate actions and values for the sake of the story
• writing books is typically a middle or upper-class activity, may limit the insight that can be gained about the particular group featured |
|
|
Term
PROBLEMS OF ORAL HISTORY AND FAMILY HISTORIES
(Recordings, cine-film, family photos) |
|
Definition
• events may be reinterpreted by older people or by families to throw a positive light on their actions and to hide any harm they did to others
• memories may be faulty |
|
|
Term
PROBLEMS OF THE MEDIA AND CONTENT ANALYSIS
Example of study that was criticised in this area: The Glashow University Media Group's portrayal of the 1991 Iraq war (selective in choice of material and applied their own interpretations to the selections) |
|
Definition
• so much material is available that one major problem lies with the selection of material: on exactly what grounds are items included or excluded? (Researchers have to be careful not to be bias in selection)
• media: issue of how we interpret the material (factors such as our own beliefs and attitudes towards the subject we are reading about/viewing)
- must not assume that what we read or see is the same as it was for the original readers or viewers |
|
|
Term
| STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONTENT ANALYSIS |
|
Definition
Formal content analysis: provides objective statistical data allowing patterns to be uncovered, but the classification of data may be somewhat subjective and doesn't directly reveal meaning behind content
Thematic analysis: makes it possible to exams messages behind media coverage in order to look for ideological basis, but messages are open to interpretation (audience may not interpret same way as researchers)
Textual analysis: provides in-depth interpretation of the content of the media, but doesn't provide overall analysis of the media content and is therefore rather subjective |
|
|
Term
| EXAMPLES OF OBSERVATIONAL RESEARCH |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| EXAMPLES OF QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
