Women’s

university In Africa
Education services centre
P O Box mp 1222
Mount Pleasant
Harare

MSC IN CHILD SENSITIVE SOCIAL POLICIES MASTERS

DEGREE

COURSE CODE : MCSSP 114

NAME : CHIGERWE TERRENCE
STUDENT NUMBER : W200924
Assignment : 01
Due date : 21 MARCH 2020
Lecturer : MR E. MARONGANYI
Lecturer’s signature: _____________________________
Obtained marks : _____________________________
lecturer’ COMMENTS : ______________________________
__________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________

ASSIGNMENT TITLE:

1|Page
Researching causes and effects is both a content and methodological minefield. In the opinion of
Cohen and Morison (2011:68) : “ Causal explanations that dwell at the level of aggregate
variables are incomplete , as behind them, and feeding into them , lie individual’s motives,
values, goals and circumstances” Evaluate this viewpoint in terms of content and methodology,
as applied to Social Sciences quantitative.

2|Page
When researching on cause and effect, researchers must address the importance of being able to
use educational research findings in the real world. The world in which we have not isolated and
controlled. So many factors and assumptions at times end up rendering the research little or no
value or find effects which are wonderful in the artificial world of laboratory and useless in the
real world outside of it. The main objective of this essay is to evaluate the view point that
“Causal explanations that dwell at the level of aggregate variables are incomplete, as behind
them, and feeding into them, lie individual’s motives, values, goals and circumstances”.
According to Cohen and Morrison (2011:98). The essay will give an argument based on content
and methodology as applied to social sciences, quantitative research.

Quantitative research, according to Black T. [CITATION Bla99 \n \l 1033 ] is a systematic

examination of social phenomena, using statistical models and mathematical theories to develop,
accumulate and refine the scientific knowledge base. These are researches which generalises
findings. Marlow (1993) defines quantitative research as those that are characterised by
hypothesis testing using large samples, standardised measures, deductive approach and
rigorously structured data collection instruments. In social sciences this term relates to empirical
methods originating in both philosophical positivism and history of statistics in contrast with
qualitative methods.

Cause and effect mean to bring about change which is a result or consequence of an action.
Casual explanations according to Berg B. L. [CITATION Ber09 \n \l 1033 ] are based on assumption
that by finding and explaining the world and what is going on it, accordingly laying bare
underlying casual mechanisms and explanation involves the logic of connections among terms
and statements. A full casual explanation requires comprehensive examination of the flow of
networks and hierarchical relationships that define a system and the context within which it
exists.

There are four main types of quantitative researches. If the researcher views quantitative research
designs as a continuum, one end of the range represents a design where the variables are not
controlled at all and only observed, connections amongst variables are only described. Thus, the
descriptive research. At the other end of the spectrum however are designs which include a very
close control of variables and relationships among those variables are clearly established. These

3|Page
are experimental researches, in the middle with experiment design moving from one type to
another is a range which blends those two extremes together. The correlational research.

In brief the four types of quantitative researches are the descriptive, correlational, casual
comparative or quasi-experimental and experimental research. The quantitative research can also
take different methodologies which are mainly the cross-sectional and the longitudinal research
methodology.

According to Morrison and Cohen [CITATION Coh11 \p 97 \n \l 1033 ] “ any cause or intervention
is embedded in a web of other causes, contexts, conditions, circumstances and effects, and these
can exert a mediating and altering influence between the cause and its effects”. However,
descriptive research seeks to describe the current status of an identified variable. These research
projects are designed to provide systematic information about a phenomenon. The researcher
does not usually begin with a hypothesis but is likely to develop one after collecting data.
Systematic collection of information requires careful selection of the units studied and careful
measurement of each variable. An example of a descriptive topic can be “A description of the
tobacco use habits in teenagers”. Using this explanation about the descriptive research we cannot
determine a cause and effect relationship from this research. For example, if a teenager talks
about their tobacco use habits and provides an in-depth account of why they think it really
affected their lungs, we cannot conclude that this encounter really damaged the teenager’s lungs.
We also have to be very careful of reactivity in this type of research. Sometimes, people and
animals to change their behaviour if they know that they are being observed. We also have to
worry about the cause and effect issue in surveys. Participants provide responses that are
considered desirable or in line with social norms. For example, if a parent is asked, “did you ever
smoke while you were pregnant with your child?”, we have to worry about parents saying, “no,
never”, because that is the most desirable answer hence the results will falsify the causes and
effects.

Correlational research is not the same as causation. Even if two variables are related to one
another, that does not mean we can say for certain how the cause and effect relationship works,
[CITATION Cra15 \l 1033 ]. The correlational research attempts to determine the extend of a
relationship between two or more variables using statistical data. Relationship between and
among a number of facts are sought and interpreted. This type of research will recognise trends

4|Page
and patterns. Cause and effect are not the basis of this type to observational research. The data
relationships and distribution variables are studied and variables are not manipulated, they are
only identified and are studied as they occur in a natural setting [ CITATION Dan90 \l 1033 ].
Sometimes correlational research is considered a type of descriptive research and is not its own
type of research, as no variables are manipulated in the study an example of the topic is “the
covariance of smoking and lung disease”

Cross section studies also fall under quantitative research methodologies. Cross section research
cannot demonstrate cause and effect it can provide a quick look at correlations that may exist
within variables. These surveys are undertaken at one point in time, rather like a photo taken by a
camera. If the similar survey is repeated, we can get good measures of how society is changing.
The participants in this study are selected based on particular variables of interest, cross-sectional
studies are often used to develop psychology but can also be utilised in social sciences. They are
observational in nature and are known as descriptive research not casual or relational meaning
that one cannot use them to determine the cause of something such as a disease. Researchers
record information that is present in population but they do not manipulate [CITATION Coh11 \l
1033 ]. This type can be used to describe characteristics that exist in a community but not to
determine the cause and effect relationships between different variables. This method is often
used to make inferences about possible relations or gather preliminary data to support further
research and experimentation. According to Farrimond H. [CITATION Far13 \n \l 1033 ] causation
is a dynamic rather than static. It is a process rather than a single event and it involves motives,
violations, reasons, understandings, perceptions, individuality, conditions and context and the
dynamic and emerging interplay of factors more often than not over time.

Mohan, B. A. [CITATION Moh12 \n \l 1033 ] suggest that there is more than one casual explanation
at work in a situation. It is the task of a researcher to uncover these and examine the causation
through the eyes of those imputing causation. However, most methodologies in quantitative
research do not necessarily establish unequivocal direct causation. They may establish the “what
of causation but not the how?”, [CITATION Coh11 \p 99 \l 1033 ]. For example, one might assume
that A and B cause C and that C causes D. It is the causal model and one might measure the
effects of C and D. However, causation here lies in the model rather than the statistical tests of
the model and the causal assumptions that lie behind the model.

5|Page
Statistics alone do not prove causation, rather causation is embodied in the theoretical
underpinnings and assumptions that support the model and the role of statistics to confirm
challenge, extend and refine these underpinnings and assumptions. Behind statistics that may
illuminate causation lie theories and models. It is in the contrast of validity of these that
causation lies [ CITATION Max12 \l 1033 ]. It is in the mechanisms of causation, the how and why
that might concern the researchers rather than solely numbers and statistical explanations, the
what.

Some quantitative research design tries to suggest the cause and effect relationships. The casual-
comparative or Quasi-experimental attempts to establish cause and effect relationships among
the variables. These types of design are very similar to true experiments, but with same key
differences [ CITATION Moh12 \l 1033 ]. An independent variable is manipulated by the
experimenter and the effects of the independent variable are measured. The researcher does not
randomly assign groups and must use ones that are naturally formed or pre-existing groups.
Identified control groups exposed to the treatment variable are studied and compared to groups
who are not. When analysis and conclusions are made, determining causes must be done
carefully as other variables both known and unknown could still affect the outcome. Causation
must be thoroughly assessed before firm relationships among variables can be made.

True experiments use scientific methods to establish the cause and effect relationship among a
group of variables that make up a study. Just like casual -comparative the key here is to isolate
the variable we are changing, so that it is the only difference between the groups [CITATION
Pay04 \l 1033 ]. This means one group serves as a control group, or a group that serves as a
comparison. The only thing being systematically changed is the manipulation, experiments need
to be repeated to continue obtaining new information. This research design allows us to
determine the cause and effect relationship. True experiments are often designed based on
descriptive research or correlational research to determining underlying causes. Just like
experiments, longitudinal studies are more likely to suggest cause and effects. Researchers here
conduct several observations of the same subjects over a period of time, sometimes lasting many
years [ CITATION Max12 \l 1033 ]. This argument therefore brings about the idea that it is often
dangerous to say that such and such is definitely the cause of something. Causation is much more
tentative and maybe probabilistic rather than deterministic, Cohen and Morrison [CITATION

6|Page
Coh11 \p 99 \n \l 1033 ] . There is more often more than one casual explanation at work in a
situation. Action narratives and agency are important in accounting for causation and effects and
because there is multiplicity of action narratives and individual motivation in a situation there is
multiple pathways of causation rather than simple input and output models. In understanding the
process of causation, the power of quantitative data is immense and indeed mixed methods
maybe useful in establishing causation.

In conclusion the researcher has to decide whether the research is investigating the cause of an
effect, the effect of a cause or both when causation is demonstrating the methodologies that cater
for these must be chosen. Causal processes, with high granularity are often closer to identifying
the operations of the causes and effects and the links between them and the qualitative data might
hold pre-eminence in educational research. There is also an important role for numerical
approaches, for examining the regularities that might be evidenced in survey approaches, and in
the isolation and control of variables in experimental approaches. The power of mixed
methodologies and mixed methods in investigating and establishing causation is commended.

7|Page
References
Berg, B. L., 2009. qualitative research methods for social sciences. 7th ed. s.l.:Pearson
International .
Black, 1999. Doing Quantitative research for the social sciences. London: Sage Publications
Ltd.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & & Morrison, K., 2011. Research methods in education. 7th ed. London:
Routledge.
Crano, W. D. B. M. B. &. L. A., 2015. Principles and methods of social research. 3rd ed.
London and New York: Routledge.
Dane, F. C., 1990. Research Methods. California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company..
Farrimond, H., 2013. Doing ethical research. Basingstoke UK, New york, US: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Maxwell, J. A., 2012. Qualitative research design : An interactive approach. london: Sage.
Mohan, B. A., 2012. Qualitative research methods in second language assessment. In: R. C. &.
M. W. In L. V. Hedges, ed. Research methods and methodologies in eduction. thousand oaks :
CA Sage, pp. 752-767.
Payne, G., and Payne, J., 2004. Key concepts in social research. london: Sage.

8|Page