Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Extensive and Intensive Research

Extensive and Intensive Research

Ratings: (0)|Views: 5,746|Likes:
Published by William Molnar

More info:

Published by: William Molnar on May 16, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





William Molnar 
Think about extensive and intensive research. Remember, this is a research question, not a personalone. Discuss “extensive” and “intensive” in terms of research.1. For each, describe the benefits and drawbacks that are most salient to you.2. Can, or should, they be used at the same time?
There are both benefits and drawbacks that are salient to me in using intensiveand extensive research. At the methodological level, Sayer is careful to describe thedifferences between the extensive techniques required for generalization and the intensivemethods associated with concrete research (Sayer 1992, 241-251). Sayer states that thenature of the object of interest must be kept in the back of the mind when designingconcrete research. The questions surrounding intensive research versus extensive researchdo differ although, according to Sayer, the distinction is more along the scale of depthversus breadth. Intensive research is concerned with causal process and how it works outin a certain number of cases. In extensive research, which, according to Sayer is morecommon, concerns itself with finding out common properties and patterns of a populationas a whole. Extensive research methods include descriptive and inferential statistics alongwith numerical analysis. In addition, it includes a questionnaire that is formal and large-scale for a population or representative sample of the population.Each research design also works with different conceptions of groups. For example, in extensive research, the focus is mainly on groups that share similar characteristics but don’t have the need to connect with each other. Each member of thegroup is only of interest in the fact that they represent the population as a whole.Intensive research however, focuses on groups whose members can be similar or different but do relate to each other. The individual’s identity is of interest. A causality is studied
William Molnar 
 by exploring actual connections. The criteria of the samples must be decided in advancein extensive research and supported consistently to ensure complete range of samples.But in intensive studies, the individual do not have to be typical and can be selected one by one during the research procedure. In intensive research, the researcher does not haveto specify the entire design and who or what is going to be studied in advance; this can beestablished as the research is progressing so that this allows the researcher to learn aboutthe object in question and gives them the opportunity to create a picture of the structuresand the causal groups they are a part of. In extensive research, the use of a standardizedquestionnaire and interview surveys is possible because by asking each individual thesame question under a controlled condition, then a comparison is possible and bias is keptto a minimum. For this reason, where extensive research may rely on standardizedinterviews among representatives of a class of subjects, intensive research is notconcerned with the representing of research subjects. Techniques such as rollinginterviews, in which each interview subject might lead the researcher to the next subject,may be preferred. The result is an explanation of events that may not be generalizable toother cases, but which provides an explanation of the causes of the case in question.Unfortunately, when applying this process to characteristic samples of social science suchas a heterogeneous group, the techniques forfeit explanatory diffusion in the name of ‘representativeness’ and getting a large enough sample. Sayer makes it a point to statethat consistency that disregards the differences in types of respondents can makecomparisons meaningless because the researcher does not realize that the same questioncan have a different significance to a different person. If the researcher uses a lessstandardized kind of interview, he/she will increase their chances at learning from the
William Molnar 
interviewee what the different significances of circumstances are for them. Using a lessstandardized interview does not force the interviewee to respond into what Sayer calls a“one-way mode of communication”. Using a less standardized interview also allows theresearcher to build on prior knowledge about characteristics of the interviewee.There are different types of tests that are appropriate only for intensive or extensive research. With regards to intensive research, a distinction must be made as tohow the findings are in the wider population and to decide if the discovery of resultsapply to the individual that were studied. Sayer gives an example of an intensive study atan institution. He states that the researcher should connect with others at that institutionto agree with the information about common practices. But then to test in another institution, a switch to an extensive study would be needed.Sayer states the extensive studies are weaker because of the formaldiscovery within the relations with regards to similarity, dissimilarity, and correlation, asopposed to causal, structural and substantial relations of connection. Causality is difficultto determine as mentioned by members of the class in week 10 discussion question. Thereason for this difficulty of determining causality is due to the “interactions betweenobjects that are often recorded in a total or whole made up of different parts in which thespecific individuals entering into relations cannot be identified” (pp 246-247).Additionally, extensive methods abstract from the “actual forms” that individuals or  processes interact even though these processes cause a difference to the outcomes. As aresult, few social scientists, in relation to the explanations of specific phenomena thatextract from form, do not recognize the problem although variations in form are animportant feature in the failing of causal mechanisms leading to a production of major 

Activity (18)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Rahul Jain liked this
falberos liked this
Let Berlin liked this
Jalal Libya liked this
Jalal Libya liked this
Tom Smith liked this
Eft Abd liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->