RESEARCH ISSUES ASSESSMENT TASK

There are many issues involved in carrying out research in the social sciences. This essay will look to explain how concepts such as Positivism, Interpretivism (or Anti-Positivism) and Realism help in the understanding of the various aims and practices of social science. It will then look at the relationship between social theory and social science, taking into account such factors as methodology and method, induction and deduction of theory, falsification and paradigm shifts. Finally, the essay will look at the problems encountered by the researcher, such as ethics, bias and professional integrity and responsibility. The social science researcher must consider what it is they want to study, what it is they believe exists and the proof they need to accept something is true. Once they answer these questions they can then decide on their methodology. The following are examples of methodologies which will reflect the beliefs (ontology) and the proof required (epistemology), as these will be important factors when deciding on the appropriate methods which need to be used to gather the data. Scientists have studied the natural world by using empirical and experimental methods and by doing so have been able to analyse, test and theorise about such phenomena as gravity, nuclear physics and electricity. Therefore, it was suggested by Auguste Comte in the early 19th Century, that if the natural sciences can be studied empirically, then so too could the social sciences. Comte introduced a positive philosophy and his ideas with regards to using quantitative and mathematical means in the social sciences are still used today and help to form the Positivist approach to research (sociologyguide.com [2011], para4). People are prone to making assumptions regarding other people s behaviour, which tend to be subjective, however, social scientists use the scientific method to study subjects such sociology and psychology in a more objective and methodical fashion. By forming their hypothesis, defining variables, conducting experiments and reporting on their findings, their aim is to use this information in order to better understand society. From the quantitative data gathered they detect patterns of behaviour which can help in finding solutions to social problems (Haralambos & Holburn [2008], p788). Furthermore, Positivists use empirical all knowledge is derived from sense experience , (definitions.net [2011]) - means to conduct their research, such as experiments and observations and discard other explanations such as personal views. This approach has clear advantages, such as control of variables, which in turn allows them to predict relationships and events (Davenport [2000], p397). However, many argue that the stringent controls relating to the Positivist approach do not resemble real life and their assumptions as to the suitability of their sample participants being representative of others in society may be unrealistic (Davenport [2000], p397). In Haralambos & Holburn ([2008], p793) they remark that sociologists, in particular, prefer to take the interpretive approach in research. Many denounce scientific approaches and claim they are not enough on their own for the gathering and analysing of data, as they believe qualitative data is

required if we are to fully understand human behaviour, as only this type of data will highlight the differences between non-conscious matter in the natural sciences and the conscious matter (human beings) in the social sciences. Those who favour the interpretive approach to social science research realise that the very nature of humans and society are completely different to those in the natural sciences, however they do still endeavour to report scientifically on their work, albeit by different methodologies. That being said, they too can use the Hypothetico-Deductive (proposed by Karl Popper) method to observe, hypothesise and theorise social phenomenon, although social scientists may be on opposite sides with regards to theories, the methodologies they use will depend on the subject matter at hand (Findlay [2011], p25). The type of methodology used which will provide us with the valid knowledge required will have an ideological aspect, that is, those conducting research will be aware of the number of different, competing methodologies which are available for them to use and whatever methodology is chosen will be dependent on their ontology. Consequently, we move on to a third methodology, that of realism. Similar to the positivist approach, realist science believes we can study social structures, however, unlike the positivist approach they are unobservable. Therefore, realism attempts to solve the positivist interpretivist debate by studying social structures, with the knowledge that these structures are by-products of relationships within society which we cannot see, such as the various types of bonds that exist, e.g. a mother and child s unique bond and that of a husband and wife(sociology.org [n.d.]). As previously mentioned, Karl Popper proposed a revision of the inductive method which had been generally used to gather and test data. In Gross (2009, p43), the problems associated with the inductive method were looked at by Popper, who then argued it was perhaps more logical to begin research by devising a theory and then testing or attempting to falsify it. In basic terms, he proposed it would be more advantageous to reduce your list of possibilities than generalising from a limited number of observations. Popper also went on to argue that the distinguishing factor in the scientific method is its manner of exposing to falsification, in every conceivable way, the system to be tested. Its aim is not to save the lives of untenable systems but, on the contrary, to select the one which is by comparison the fittest, by exposing them all to the fiercest struggle for survival (Popper (1959), p42 in Coolican (1999), p9). He argued that any scientific enquiries should be refutable, as it is a great deal easier to find support that will fit your theory. If your theory is then falsified you must reject it and move on to another, in this respect it is evident that today s scientific methods integrate both deductive and inductive approaches in order to best follow in the footsteps of the natural sciences. Scientist also work within a theory and structure which steers them in a certain direction with regards to how they collect, analyse and explain their research, and this is what is known as a paradigm, which consists of a set of beliefs shared by a group of scientists about what the natural world is composed of, what counts as true and valid knowledge, and what sort of questions should be asked and what sort of procedures should be followed to answer those questions (Haralambos & Holburn [2009], p849). Thomas Kuhn argued that science could never truly be objective in its quest for knowledge but could follow a specific scientific paradigm.

Kuhn went on to add that when a paradigm shift occurs, it is not simply a case of there being adaptations made to a scientific theory, rather it is a complete rethink of how science perceives the world. His idea that a paradigm follows basic, underlying principles until one day, something or someone comes along and changes how we look at the same information but in entirely different ways can best be viewed by means of an example. If you look back to the early days of science, such as Ptolemy and his view of the universe, a paradigm shift occurred when Copernicus came along and changed it slightly, then Galileo who altered it some more until eventually there had to be a paradigm shift as there was far too much evidence against the original. He also pointed out that the new paradigm after the shift is at all times better than the one it replaced (experimentresources.com [2008], para3-10). Further problems can arise when two competing theories have insufficient evidence to allow us to decide which belief it is we should hold. In other words, the lack of data available prevents us making a decision between two (or sometimes more) theories. An example of this type of problem would be the following if I all I know is that you spent 10 on apples and oranges and that apples cost 1 while oranges cost 2, then I know that you did not buy six oranges, but I do not know whether you bought one orange and eight apples, two oranges and six apples, and so on (plato.stanford.edu [2009], para1). This problem of underdetermination has become increasingly more widespread in the social sciences, as well as being extremely common in the natural sciences, as is seen in quantum physics. We have seen there are many research issues to consider when deciding to research subject matter in the social sciences, and perhaps one of the most important issues for consideration is that of ethics. This is a particular branch of knowledge that concentrates on the levels of what is acceptable to members of the public, including moral issues and has differed over the years due to public opinion (Davenport [2000], p378). Psychologists, in particular, must adhere to the codes of conduct described in The Ethical Principles for Conducting Research with Human Participants published by the British Psychological Society. Some of the most important aspects they must consider when conducting research is that of consent/informed consent, deception, debriefing and protection of participants (Gross [2009], p869). The guidelines instruct investigators to consider all ethical implications and psychological consequences for the participants in their research (Gross [2009], p869). These guidelines have become increasingly more stringent over the years, as experiments conducted decades ago left many of the participants (who had been unaware they were actively taking part in an experiment) in states of distress and anxiety. An underground study conducted by Piliavin et al in 1969, in which student experimenters collapsed in the subway cars to see if they would be helped, did not debrief those who were involved in the experiment basically everyone who came on or off the subway car and so many may have been left with feelings of guilt and anxiety at not helping the person in need (Piliavin et al [1969] in Gross [2009], p518). In more recent times the guidelines point out that in order to avoid exposing the participants to unnecessary stress, anxiety or harm, they should be fully informed as to what they are participating in, give their informed consent and should be debriefed afterwards (Davenport [2000], p379).

Furthermore, the participants should be made fully aware that they are able to withdraw from the experiment at any time and under the Data Protection Act (1984) all information relating to the participant and research should remain anonymous, unless the participant has given his consent for the information to be made public (Hill [2009], p26). Unfortunately hidden observational tests are more ecologically valid as participants who are unaware they are being observed, will act more naturally but this raises issues of an invasion of privacy (Hill [2009], p27). Likewise, the results will be more likely to be biased as demand characteristics and expectations from experimenter interfere with results (Hill [2009], p31). Similarly, researchers have to be equally responsible and remove any personal bias they may have from their work. However, in Coolican [1999], p12, it is argued that scientists are biased about their theory, as they interpret ambiguous data to fit their particular theory as best they can . In conclusion, in order to conduct social science research, the scientist must be aware of the vast amount of research issues they are faced with. From the beginning, when they first decide on their beliefs which dictate which methodology is best for them, to the methods they use to conduct the research as well as considering ethical implications along the way, the researcher must constantly be aware of and address all issues related to research responsibly.

References Coolican, H. (1999) Research Methods and Statistics in Psychology, 3rd ed. London: Hodder & Stoughton. Davenport, G. (2000) Essential Psychology, 2nd ed. London: Collins Educational.

Experiment Resources (2008) Paradigm Shift, [online] Available at: http://www.experimentresources.com/paradigm-shift.html [Accessed: 15th December 2011]. Gross, R. (2009) Psychology The Science of Mind and Behaviour, 5th ed. London: Hodder Arnold. Haralambos, M. and Holburn, M. (2008) Sociology: Themes and Perspectives, 7th ed. London: Collins. Hill, G. (2009) AS & A Level Psychology, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sociology Guide (2011) Auguste Comte, [online] Available at: http://www.sociologyguide.com/thinkers/Auguste-Comte.php [Accessed: 12th November 2011]. Sociology.org (n.d.) Is Science Scientific?, [online] Available at: http://www.sociology.org.uk/methsci3.pdf [Accessed: 22nd November 2011]. Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (2009) Underdetermination of Scientific Theory, [online] Available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-underdetermination/ [Accessed: 11th December 2011].