Primary Data:

– refers to data that has been generated by the researcher themselves

- Collected by sociologist directly for research
- Collected data known as raw data
- First time presentation for research
- Serves the purpose of research
- Consumes some resources
- Consumes some time
- A team is needed to collect
- We need office space stationary commute

Example – Goldthorpe’s Oxford Mobility Study (10,000 men - U.K)

Strengths Limitations

1. Relevant to research 1. Cost of collecting information

2. Better accuracy 2. Time of information collection

3. Higher level of controls 3. Not always feasible to conduct

4. Up to date information 4. Compilations of processing

5. Sociologists collect it themselves 5. Researcher’s bias while collection

6. Researcher’s influence while collection

Secondary Data:
— refers that already exists in some forms such as documents
Example – Goodrich’s Comparative Case Study in UNICEF Italy

Strengths Limitations

1. Cheap and easy to access for research 1. Not collected by sociologists

2. Readily available 2. Some forms of it are unreliable

3. Not time-consuming comparison is easy with 3. Not serving current requirements

secondary data

4. Only source in certain situations 4. Epistemology issue (partial benefit)

5. Rely on collector’s knowledge (partial biased)

Quantitative data:
- One of three forms:
1. Raw numbers
2. Percentages
3. Rate or number of people 1000 in a population
- Focus on quantity of samples to touch for research
- Larger sample means:
 1. Generalisable results
2. Quantifiable approach
3. High in reliability
- No details, no depth in data
- Only the answer to what it is
Example – Goldthorpe’s Oxford Mobility Study (10,000 men - U.K)

Strengths Limitations

1. Collected from large number 1. Large number means:

- Details are missing
- Doesn’t explain reasons

2. Representation chances high 2. Already known issues

3. Reliability high 3. Doesn’t tell us about individuals’

emotions, feelings, choices, like and dislikes

4. Generalisable

5. Hard results

6. Quantifiable

7. Presentable/quotable

Qualitative data:
- Focus on quality of samples to choose for research
- Small sample:
● Detailed research
● Reason based approach
● High in validity
Construct validity – the extent to which the measure ‘behaves’ in a way consistent with theoretical hypothesis
Internal validity – the extent to which a study establishes a trustworthy cause and effect relationship between
treatment and outcome
Ecological validity – a measure of how test performance predicts behaviors in real-world settings
Example – Goffman’s mental institution study (1961 U.K)

Strengths Limitations

1. High in detail 1. Low reliability

2. Tell us about reasons of behavior 2. Not generalisable
3. Exploration of further researches is possible 3. Not quantifiable
4. High in validity 4. No hard answers
5. Not presentable/quotable

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS

Experiments:
Laboratory – Setting and situation designed to test hypothesis
- An assumption about relationship between two or more variables
- Variables can be constant or manipulated
- Results usually quantified
- Correlations and causations easier for researcher to judge

Field – take people in normal everyday settings

Strengths Limitations

1. Controlled variables 1. Experimental effect

2. Can provide quantitative data 2. Experimenter’s bias
3. Replicated 3. Unethical sometimes
4. Can be compared 4. Usually lack informed consent
5. Demand characteristics can occur
6. Laboratory experiments lack ecological
validity
7. Hawthorne effect

Questionnaires:
- A social survey is systematically collecting same type of data from a relatively large number of people
- Using self completion questionnaires
- Delivered by post, emails or hand
- List of questions that require answers
- Produces easily quantifiable data

Types of questionnaire questions:

- Closed questions –
1. Range of responses fixed
2. Answered quickly
3. Quantifiable
4. Simplest way to produce numerical data
- Open-ended questions –
1. Answered in participant’s own words
2. Respondent has more freedom
3. More appropriate for subjects like personal beliefs

Strengths Limitations

1. Cost effective way of collecting large 1. Questionnaire has a low response

amounts of data
2. Same questionnaire can be given to
all research participants
3. Answers can be directly compared
4. Quantify the results of questionnaires
rate, the findings may be biased
2. Self completion questionnaires are
inappropriate for some research
participants
3. Data produced by questionnaires
 5. Data can be analyzed quickly lacks validity for several reasons
6. Efficiently with the help of computers 4. Interpretivists / question the validity of
7. Positivists / questionnaire survey responses to questionnaires
based on a representative sample
provides data for generalizations
8. Replications allow the researchers to
check the reliability of the findings

Structured interviews:
- Social surveys are based on structured interviews
- List of questions that the interview reads to the participant
- Questions designed to require little to no explanation
- Non responses:
● Failure to make contact
● Contact is made but interview cannot be conducted
● Person refuses to participate due to lack of time or interest

Strengths Limitations

1. Faster 1. Questions based on research concerns

2. Cheaper 2. Participants have little control
3. Less chance of interviewer bias 3. Interviewer bias
4. Response relatively easy to quantify 4. Reduced validity
5. Can be directly compared 5. Standardized interviews cannot provide rich
6. Responses can be coded or meaningful data
7. Can be replicated
8. Reliability high
9. Allow generalizations

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS

Semi-structured interviews:
- Particularly study based around same set of questions
- Enables interview to probe participants
- Adds depth and detail
- Accompanied by loss of standardization and comparability
- Probes are different

Strengths Limitations

1. Provides rich context 1. Reliability reduced

2. Questions can be adapted to probe the 2. Sample sizes usually small
context and meaning 3. Cannot be generalized
3. Participants are likely to give detailed 4. Cannot compare easily
information 5. More trained researchers required

Unstructured interviews:
 - Guided conversation
- Researcher uses prompts
- Informal
- Open ended
- Flexible
- Free flowing
- Less formal
- Atmosphere relaxed

Strengths Limitations

1. Offers more opportunities for participant to 1. Interviewer bias

take control
2. New and important insights for researcher
3. Suitable for discovering meanings
4. Suitable for sensitive topics
5. Interpretivists prefer unstructured interview
6. Qualitative data seen as more valid
2. People like to present themselves in a
favorable light
3. Reduces validity of data
4. Positivists deem them to be difficult to
replicate and lack reliability and
generalisability

Group interviews:
- Usually researcher asks questions and group responds
- Covers a large range of issues in discussions
- Used to save time and resources
Example – Grogan and Richards said that groups offer support and comfort for sensitive topics

Strengths Limitations

1. Comparatively less time and resource 1. Researcher must be cautious with sensitive
consuming topics
2. Well-informed wide range of information 2. Group thinking (participants’ influence on
3. Re-track the discussion each other)
4. Respondents feel more comfortable 3. Pace and direction out of control
5. Generate new ideas 4. Taking notes difficult
6. Strong rapport with group 5. Similar answers
6. Non-participating members

Focus groups:
1. Usually group responds to each others’ prompts
2. Covers a specific topic/issue in discussion
3. Used to gain extra insight into group’s overall thinking instead of saving time and resources

Strengths Limitations

1. Commonalities between participants provide 1. Less control by researchers

common ground for discussions 2. Some participants dominate conversations
2. Participant to participant interaction produces 3. Group pressure is difficult to filter
different kinds of data 4. Social desirability factor
3. Sensitive topics can easily be discussed in 5. Disagreements may arise and lock the
focus groups conversation
Observations:
Participant Observation – Researcher joins the group and getting involved in some of its activities in order to
gather data

Strengths Limitations

1. Opportunity to observe people in everyday 1. Difficult to gain entry

observations 2. Long expensive process
2. Rich in-depth qualitative data 3. Requires dedication, stamina and courage
3. Obtaining valid data 4. Observer’s effect
4. Interpretivists are concerned with the 5. Objectivity reduced
meanings and definitions that direct action 6. Difficult to replicate, lacks reliability

Non-participant Observation – Researcher observes people without directly joining them

● Researcher need not participate in order to observe people’s behavior
● Bird watcher in a hide

1. Structured observation/systematic observation – quantitative research method uses pre-set observation

schedule
2. Unstructured observation – qualitative research method which simply describes human behaviour

Strengths Limitations

1. Unaware of being observed thus researcher
won’t affect behavior
2. Interpretivists favor qualitative data provided
by unstructured non-participant observation
1. Less likely to get to know the people they
observe or see them in various contexts
2. Positivists prefer structured observation
schedule because results can be quantified
and can be easily replicated
3. Unlikely to produce consistent esults

Example – 1. John Howard Griffin was a white journalist that painted his skin black to discover life of a black
man in southern states of USA

2. Dick Hobbs was researching relationship in between criminals and detectives and had to get someone to
vouch for him to gain access to contacts

● Participant Observation has two sub-categories: Overt and Covert

Overt – Everyone knows researcher’s true identity

Strengths Limitations
 1. Recording data is easy 1. Group may refuse to give entry
2. Can ask questions 2. Hawthorne effect
3. Can gain access to all levels 3. Ethical issues
4. Hands-on experiences 4. Over–involvement risk
5. Obtains valid data 5. No replication
6. Rich in-depth qualitative data

Example – Venkatesh studied ‘Black kings’, an African-American gang in Chicago.

● A key informant was J.T to Venkatesh

Covert – Nobody knows researcher’s identity

Strengths Limitations

1. Maybe only way in some cases 1. Difficult to enter group

2. Easy to access group 2. Difficult to take notes
3. True picture of group 3. Hiding the identity
4. Hands-on experience 4. Not possible to shift position
5. More valuable insights 5. Getting out of group
6. Covert considered ethically and morally
wrong
7. No consent involved
8. No withdrawal allowed

Example – Walford was researching British secondary school and found that it took four weeks of observation
before any students misbehaved

SECONDARY METHODS

Official statistics:
- Numerical data produced by national and local governments
- Government announces after specific time
- Covers a lot of areas such birth rates, death rates, marriage rates, divorce rates, literary rates, poverty
rates, GDP and GNP per-capita income
- Usually reflects government’s viewpoint and favour

Strengths Limitations

1. Only source in many cases 1. Partial picture of situation

2. National representation 2. Does not answer questions regarding human
3. Representativeness extremely high behavior
4. Hard answer/quantitative 3. Researcher’s interpret the results
5. presentable/quotable 4. Validity issue
6. Readily available 5. Do not provide accurate measure
7. Cost little to nothing 6. Political decisions influence research
8. Conducted regularly
9. Well-planned and organized
Crime statistics:
- Widely used form of official statistics
- Published annually
- Reported by media
- Commented on by the government

Police recorded crime:

- Crimes actually reported by the police
- Based on reports by the public
- Straightforward measure
- Excluded crimes:
● Not witnessed/discovered
● Not reported to police
● Not recorded by police
- PRC stats reflect trends in crime

Documents:
- Letters, notes, diaries, autobiographies
- John Scott – four different quality control criteria:
1. Authenticity
2. Credibility
3. Representativeness
4. Meaning

Strengths Limitations

1. Cheap and readily available 1. Incomplete information

2. Great depth and detail 2. Inaccurate picture
3. Understanding behavior changes and 3. Unrepresentative information
continuities (Interpretivists prefer) 4. Difficult to generalize
4. Can be used with other methods 5. Researcher’s interpretation changes meaning
5. Non-reactive (no experimenter’s bias or 6. Not quantifiable
observer effect)
Digital content:
- Relies on the internet for distribution
- The four criteria can be applied to digital content as well

Strengths Limitations

1. Enormous amount and variety 1. Not everyone has access to the internet
2. Accessed at no cost 2. No quality control
3. Rich source of qualitative and quantitative 3. Cannot probe to find out more about the
data poster
4. Not influenced by researcher 4. Number of questions that can be explored via
postings is limited

Media sources:
- Contain both visual and written text
 - Referred to as mass media
- Radio, television, films, music, novels, newspapers and magazines

Strengths Limitations

1. Useful source of information 1. Notoriously inaccurate

2. Contains a variety 2. Unlikely to provide objective accounts of
3. No reactive effects to validity of information social life
and data

Analysis of secondary data:

● Ray Pawson identifies three main approach to analyzing secondary data:
1. Thematic
- Guiding themes of the professionals who produce mass media reports
- Focuses on motives, intentions and underlying ideologies

2. Textual
- Involves a close examination of the text to see how phrases encourage a particular reading
- Involves usage of semiology

3. Audience
- Focuses on audience and content of media
- The emphasis is on what audience make of the media they consume
- Audiences actively negotiate meaning of messages rather than passively accepting

Semiology/semiotic analysis:
- Study of signs and symbols
- Used for understanding underlying meanings
- Give ideas about different concepts of any given society
- Heavily relies on researcher’s interpretations
- Used with other methods to support results
- Does not meet positivist requirements
- Difficult to replicate

Strengths Limitations

1. Provides way of dealing systematically with 1. Time consuming

variety of personal documents
2. Formal content analysis allows for
predetermined so analysis can be replicated
3. Positivists favor formal context analysis when
suitable documentary data is available
4. Forms of content analysis not influenced
5. Audience research allows researchers to
discover meanings
2. Laborious
3. Says little about what a particular text or
image means
4. Sociologists’ interpretation of underlying
themes is subjective
5. Asking the audience has its limitations

THE STAGES OF DESIGNING RESEARCH

Research strategy:
● A research strategy distinguishes between quantitative and qualitative research strategy
● If a hypothesis is used, we can associate it with using methods that produce quantitative data
● If a research question is used, we can associate it with using methods that produce qualitative data

Research questions + hypothesis:

● A hypothesis is a supposition, hunch or informed guess to be tested
● Usually written as a statement that can be supported or refuted with evidence
● Research questions can be developed from several sources such as:
- Previous study researchers’ carried out
- New developments in technology
- Their personal lives
- Social problems

Sampling:
- Social surveys based on a sample of population under investigation
- Researchers aim to select a representative sample so generalizations can be made
- Establish a sampling unit – member of population to be studied

1. Sampling frame:
- Establish a sampling frame – list of members of population to be studied
- Sometimes a sampling frame is readily available
- Sometimes researchers have to rely on listings
- Listings have drawbacks such being outdated or having certain groups under-represented

2. Sampling techniques:
- Sampling technique is a procedure used to obtain sample
- Tim May divides sampling into two categories:
- 1. Random Probability & 2. Non Probability
- Random – member of frame has a known chance of being selected
- Non-probability – sampling frame unavailable

3. Simple random sampling:

- Gives every member an equal chance to be included
- Every name given a number
- Random numbers used to select sample
- Avoids bias in selection
- Sample supports hypothesis
- Random samples are not always representative

4. Stratified random sampling:

- Sampling frame divided into strata or groups
- Possible solution to the problem of representativeness
- Researchers included strate that is essential to research

5. Quota sampling:
- Type of stratified sampling in which selection of people in stratum is not random
 - Sample not randomly selected from sampling frame
- Researcher simply fills their quota first from available people
- Simpler, quicker and cheaper
- Not representative
- Interviewer bias is present

6. Snowball sampling:
- Used when researchers have difficulty obtaining samples
- Use a network of like-minded individuals when sampling frame unavailable
- Not representative
7. Volunteer sampling:
- Made up of people who volunteer to participate
- Volunteers keen to participate and interested in topic
- Not representative because self-selected
- May have grievances or strong views to express

8. Opportunity sampling:
- Choosing a sample with best possible chances of accurately testing hypothesis
- If hypothesis false for this group, probably false for other groups too
- Goldthorpe’s sample consisted of highly paid car assembly workers from Luton (hypothesis: working
class becoming similar to middle class)

Pilot studies:
● Small scale feasibility study to check suitability of the methods to be used in the main research
● Small sample of main group used
● Members of a pilot study not included in main study

Operationalisation:
● Put into a form that can be measured
● Alice Sullivan – students’ knowledge of the dominant culture in four schools in England; in her
questionnaire, she operationalised the concept of cultural knowledge by including 25 famous cultural
figures
● Difficult to assess whether operational directions measure what they’re supposed to measure through
valid measurements

Conducting research:
● The next stage in the research process involves carrying out the research in an organized manner to
collect the raw data
● In practice, a researcher may use one or more quantitative or qualitative methods, or a combination of
these
● They may use primary or secondary sources of data, or both of these
● The raw data provide the researcher with evidence to help explain the social world and contribute to our
knowledge about society

Interpreting results:
● Next stage involves collecting raw data (conducting the research)
● Present main findings from data obtained
● Sociologists assess quality of research by presenting it to a panel of other sociologists
 ● This is known as peer review
● Used as a form of quality control
● Evaluation of research based on: validity, representativeness, reliability and generalisability

APPROACHES TO RESEARCH

Case study:
- A detailed study of a particular instance (individual or community)
- Usually based off of qualitative methods
Example – Westwood’s 12 month participant observation of female workers in factory

Strengths Limitations

1. Rich details 1. Limited

2. New insights 2. Unrepresentative
3. Useful information for a larger project 3. Huge amount of time needed
4. Important warning against generalizations in 4. Highly skilled researcher required
larger studies 5. No hard answer
5. Uncover people’s meaning 6. Not presentable nor quotable
7. Not generalisable

Ethnography:
- Studying a way of life
- Ethnographer immerse themselves in daily lives of the people being studied
- Use several qualitative methods

Strengths Limitations

1. Same strengths as participant observation 1. Difficulty in accessing group

2. Rich detailed data 2. Maintaining trust is difficult
3. Useful insights 3. Risk of being exposed as researcher
4. Ethical dilemmas
5. Over-involvement
6. Loss of objectivity

Longitudinal studies:
● Snapshot studies – show what is happening at a particular point in time (cross-sectional)
● Longitudinal studies concerned with change over time
● Usually use both qualitative and quantitative methods
● Bryman – identifies two types of longitudinal designs:
1. A cohort study – a whole cohort of people or random sample
2. A panel study – sample selected from the whole population

Strengths Limitations

1. Provides picture of social trends 1. Raises ethical concerns regarding informed

2. Focuses on continuity and change consent
 3. Data valid as participants not asked to recall 2. Sample attrition: reduction in size of original
prior experiences sample
3. Less representative
4. Funding needed for a long period of time
5. Involvement changes participant’s behavior
as they find out aim of research

Social Surveys:
- Systematic collection of the same type of data from a large number of people at one point in time
(‘snapshot’)
- Questionnaires and structured interviews used
Example – The Nepal demographic and health survey

Longitudinal surveys:
- Carried out at intervals (referred to as ‘waves’)
- Researcher remains removed from study groups
- Contact with subjects only on a limited basis at set intervals

Strengths Limitations

1. Identify and track personal and social 1. Sample attrition

changes over long periods 2. Reduced representativeness
2. Revealing trends 3. Cannot be generalized
3. Large representative sample 4. Quick look at behavior only
4. Can be used to suggest correlation and 5. Lacking depth
causal relationship 6. Lacking validity

MIXED METHODS APPROACH

Methodological pluralism:
- Those research projects involving more than one method
- Combining methods that produce quantitative and qualitative data
- Involves considering how to collect data with the highest possible levels of reliability and validity,
regardless of the methods or data types used

Triangulation:
- Means through which methodological pluralism is put into practice
- Various ways in which a researcher can attempt to improve research reliability and validity
- Denzon – this allows researcher to offset the weaknesses of one method with the strengths of another
- Researcher could compare the results from two different methods used on the same people
- Involves two or more researcher employing two more methods
- Triangulation relies heavily on researcher’s interpretations to generate data
- Researchers from different ethnic, age gender and class groups can help check for observer and
interviewer bias that may lower reliability and validity
- Data triangulation involves gathering information through different sampling strategies
Examples – Barker used overt participant observation, questionnaires and semi structured interviews to
research on the Unification Church
● Hey studied girls’ friendship using participant observation and personal documents
● Johnson Ayodele’s study of crimes amongst females
 POSITIVIST APPROACH

Main principles:
- Positivists believe scientists should study social world like a natural science
- Institutions represent behavior at the macro level of society
- Social action decided by structural forces

- Makes sense to look at structures forces for causes of human behavior

- Importance of objectivity, reliability and generalisability

- Involves a value-free approach

- Value-freedom – ability of researchers to prevent their own values from influencing their research
- Do not participate in behavior being studied

- Prefer quantitative methods

- Quantitative data = collection of objective and reliable data
- Based on factual knowledge and testable results

Example – Durkheim’s study on suicide

Auguste Comte:
- Wanted to produce a science of society that would reveal invariable laws
- Behavior in social and natural world are both predicted by external stimuli
- Behavior should be measured in forms of numbers and measurements
- Statistical analysis of quantitative data to discover possible correlations

Emile Durkheim:
- Natural science methodology appropriate for study of human behavior
- Social facts – institutions, norms and values of society
- Social facts can be objectively measured, quantified and subjected to statistical analysis
- Correlations can be drawn between social facts
- Critical questions whether social facts can be treated as things
- Humans have consciousness and behave differently than inanimate objects
- Dukheim adopted structural perspective
- Put more emphasis on structure rather than human agency
- Critics think this downplays human agency and free well

Example – Douglas’ study of multiples meaning of suicide

Deductive approach (top-down theory):

1. Statistical techniques applied to numerical data
2. Measure possible causal relationships
3. Develop hypothesis or prediction
4. Observation used to accept or reject hypothesis
5. Confirmation, modification, or rejection of theory

Inductive approach (grounded theory):

 1. Data
2. Analysis
3. Patterns and relationships
4. Theory

Falsification:
- Developed by Karl Popper
- Theories that survive falsification not necessarily true
- Theories that cannot be falsified are non-scientific
- Process:
1. Start with a theory
2. Use data to test theory
3. Disprove + falsify theories

INTERPRETIVIST APPROACH

Main principles:
- Social reality is formed through the interaction of people who have consciousness
- People are able to exercise free will over the choices they make
- Unpredictability is constructed through meanings
- People create and re-create a sense of the social system on a daily basis
- Humans have agency
- Free will and determination exists
- Discovering subjective experiences
- Tend to use qualitative methods
- Objective detachment valued by positivists is explicitly rejected
- Emphasis on validity rather than reliability

Max Weber:
- Viewed Sociology as an understanding of social action
- Action that is subjectively meaningful to actor
- Main approach interpreting meaning and motives that direct individual action
- Verstehen – empathetic understanding
- Accepted that social structures exist
- Structures created by actions of individuals
- Objectivity is not possible
- Discovery of meanings cannot be value-free

DEBATE ABOUT SOCIOLOGY AND SCIENCE

Defining science:
- Way of producing a particular kind of knowledge
 - Factual and objective
- Involves identifying a problem to study
1. It is reliable (possible to check accuracy of research)
2. It is valid (describe what it claims to measure or describe)

Scientific ethos:
- Merton – scientific ethos is required as there must be rules governing the general conditions of a
scientific research
1. Knowledge must be evaluated using objective and universally agreed criteria
- Personal values play no part in this process
- Criticism should focus on identifying weaknesses in the research

2. Scientific knowledge is public knowledge

- Must be freely shared
- Scientists must be able to work on others’ work
- Must make their work available for peer review

3. Researchers should not have a personal interest in the outcome of their research
- Disinterest not being there can cause researcher’s bias
- Reduces validity of the research and its findings

4. Research is not beyond criticism

- A skeptical attitude is necessary to evaluate scientific knowledge
- Skepticism separates science from other forms of knowledge such as faith

Debate in itself:
- Earliest sociology was positivist
- Belief that social world can be explored in the same way as natural world
- During the Enlightenment period, sociologists believed that their values should not influence their
research

- Later, they realized it was not always appropriate to use the same methods as natural science
- Scientific methods are not appropriate for sociology as they do not delve into meanings
- Methods preferred by interpretivists are seen by positivists as lacking reliability because they cannot be
replicated
- For interpretivists, validity matters more as it allows researchers to see what social actions mean to
those who carry them out

- Therefore, sociologists should be open about their values

- Those reading the research must be able to determine how far the values have influenced the research
itself

- Feminists are critical of the ‘value-free’ scientific claims of ‘malestream’

- Sociology, arguing that it is at best sex blind and at worst sexist, serving as an ideological justification
for the subordination of women
- Anne Oakley – ‘Sociology reduces women to a side issue from the start.’
- Gomm argues that social research always has social and moral implications
 - Therefore, Sociology inevitably has a political nature

Role of values:
- Objectivity – value freedom, impartiality and lack of bias
- Subjectivity – individuals’ values and beliefs
- Until 1950s, sociologists’ believed that value free sociology was possible
- Alvin Gouldner – “Value free sociology is a myth”
- Researchers should avoid asking leading questions
- Sociologists now recognise that objectivity is not possible
 CONSIDERATIONS INFLUENCING RESEARCH

1. Theoretical:
- Ackroyd believes that research methods are not tools that are somehow appropriate for particular tasks
as they do not have a clear and straightforward purpose
- Intended audience of the research influences the topic choice
- The purpose of the research
- What is considered worthy of being studied is influenced by researcher’s personal values
- The extent to which the researcher is interested in the topic
- Universities and governments and how willing they are to fund in a particular topic
- Every theoretical position sees certain aspects of society as particularly important
- Marxists will choose topics such as class inequality, class conflict and class identity
- Feminists will focus on gender issues such as gender inequality
- Feminists may use unstructured interviews to reduce power relationships or imbalances between
participant and researcher
- Interactionists tend to avoid using statistical method (not trying to establish causality)
- Positivists are more likely to take the opposite view (not interested in descriptive accounts)
- Researcher’s beliefs about reliability and validity
- Decisions may reflect researcher’s value judgments
- Researcher unlikely to choose a method that he finds unethical or methodologically invalid

2. Practical:
- Large-scale research carried out over a long period of time may be expensive
- Those who commission and pay for it also have a say in the topic choice
- Practical considerations are usually based on two factors:
● Access to research subjects
● Their cooperation in research
- If both of these factors are denied, a researcher might still do the research and opt for ethically
questionable research methods like covert participation
- Ease of access to research site also matters
- Permission is needed from gatekeepers to research in sites such as schools, asylums and prisons
- The topic being studied is important to consider as some topics lend themselves more easily to one
method than another
- Some methods are more time-consuming than others
- Researcher’s time is limited
- The amount of funding available may directly influence a researcher’s choice of method
- Funding bodies have their own priorities
- Financial considerations also influence choice of methods
- Research is expensive and costs of travel, stationery and transcribing interviews must be covered by
funding bodies
- Funding levels also influence the size of a research time and thus, directly impact their efficiency
- Some methods are less suitable than others for studying certain groups
- Opportunity and access towards the research subjects and research methods
- Skills and characteristics of a researcher also influence choice of method as some methods are more
strenuous to carry out than others
- Physical characteristics of researcher such as age, ethnicity and gender must be considered when
selecting methods

3. Ethical:
- The researcher must decide whether it’s ethical to research what they want to research
- Level of researcher’s involvement also has a direct impact on choice of methods employed
- Researcher may choose to avoid immersive methods when studying criminal behaviors
- Anonymity must be maintained where it’s promised
- Confidentiality of the information provided must be maintained
- Researcher must consider their responsibilities to both victims and criminals
- Participants should be made aware of the possible consequences of their cooperation
- A researcher should gain informed consent of those being researched
- Relationships need to be based on trust and personal honesty
- The physical and psychological safety of everyone involved must be guaranteed
- A researcher must care not to cause upset or distress to potentially vulnerable participants at the end of
the study (must not leave the elderly participants without proper closure)
- A researcher must not falsify or fabricate data to unnaturally produce a certain result out of study
- Researchers must not plagiarize and should be honest in regards to ownership
- The research should be wise and should have a greater impact for the good of society

SOURCES OF BIAS

1. Bias linked to research design:

- Sociologists must choose one or more research methods, each of which could be potentially subject to
bias
- Sociologists using non-random sampling technique may result in sampling bias occurring
- Researchers using their own judgment when selecting non-random samples
- Sampling bias is linked to non-response when people in the sample cannot be contacted or refuse to
participate
- Sampling bias is also linked to the use of an inadequate/out-of-date sampling frame
- Researcher’s presence could impact on the participants and the findings
- Bias can arise from the social desirability effect which may invalidate the findings
- The way a survey is administered also makes a difference
- Leading questions’ impact participants’ answers
- Coding errors introduced when researcher utilizes responses to questionnaire surveys

2. Researcher’s values:
- Researcher’s more like to study something they consider to be important
- A sociologist’s values may lead them to take sides
- It may influence how they analyze interview data
 - Researchers argue that values affect the whole research process from the choice of topic to the
collection and interpretation of data to the final conclusions

3. Funding:
- Public funding bodies might identify a skills shortage in one method and may opt for the other
- They have research priorities
- Researchers will need to tailor their proposal to these priorities
- Funding bodies may pressurize sociologists to research topics and produce findings in which the
impact is visible in the short term

ASSESSMENT OF VALUE OF DIFFERENT RESEARCH METHODS

Validity - Concerns whether the method used to gather data actually

measures what it is intended to measure
- Validity improved by participants providing rich and detailed
data
- Qualitative methods are more valid
- Validity reduced by social desirability effect as participants more
likely to lie

Reliability - Concerns whether the method produces the same or consistent

results the second time around
- The study must be able to get replicated and receive the same
data as before
- If different answers obtained, then the study is unreliable and
any conclusions drawn from it may be limited
- Reliability can be improved by standardization of research
process
- However, reliable results may lack validity

Objectivity - Concerns whether the method produces impartial and unbiased

data and whether the researcher’s value intrude
- If a method reduces objectivity and prevents an impartial view,
it is also likely to affect validity of research

Representativeness - Concerns whether the sample is typical of the population that it

is drawn from
- Ability to generalize observations made about relatively small
sample group to the much larger target population
- Possible to generalize from a representative sample

Ethics - Concern whether the researcher conducted the research and

used the methods in ways that comply with ethical guidelines
on informed consent, confidentiality, privacy, deception and
harm