Combined Units PDF - Research in Social Sciences RSC2601

 TABLE OF CONTENTS GENRAL INTRODUCTION TO RSC2601.................................................................................. 1 1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................

 TABLE OF CONTENTS GENRAL INTRODUCTION TO RSC2601.................................................................................. 1 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... 1 2 OVERVIEW OF RSC2601.................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Purpose..................................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Outcomes.................................................................................................................................. 1 3 STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY GUIDE................................................................................ 2 4 ACKNOWLEDGING CONTRIBUTORS............................................................................... 4  Learning unit 0 | RSC2601 General introduction to RSC2601 GENRAL INTRODUCTION TO RSC2601 1 INTRODUCTION Welcome to Research in Social Sciences module. In this module, we will introduce you to the basic principles and process of conducting research in the social sciences. We hope you will find the module stimulating and relevant to the current and future social sciences research and methods trends. 2 OVERVIEW OF RSC2601 2.1 Purpose In the social sciences, researchers often grapple with human issues and questions. Hence, this module aims to introduce students to the basic principles of conducting research in the social sciences. We want students to understand how social scientists collect information to answer questions and what they do with it. This module provides an overview of research processes in the social sciences and is designed to benefit all students studying human sciences. 2.2 Outcomes The module has been designed to provide students with basic principles and processes of conducting research in the social sciences, forming the foundation for research methodology courses in Communication Sciences, Health Studies, Psychology, Social Work and Sociology. After completing this module, you should be able to: Describe the scientific approach and strategies for acquiring knowledge in social science research. Explain the role and importance of theory in research. Demonstrate an understanding of scientific research. Demonstrate an understanding of the research designs used in research. Explain the importance of ethics in social research. Differentiate the sampling methods and techniques used in social research. Compare the different methods used for data collection. Explain the methods used to analyse and interpret qualitative and quantitative data. Discuss what research writing, evaluation and report entail. 1  Learning unit 0 | RSC2601 General introduction to RSC2601 3 STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY GUIDE For this module, the study guide is the primary source of information as it contains all the content you need to know about conducting research in social sciences. In other words, there are NO prescribed books for this module, students only need to download and read the study guide to complete assignments and the semester examination. It is important to note that each study unit starts with a number of learning outcomes. The learning outcomes indicate what is expected of you to understand, know and be able to apply once you have worked through the study unit. The learning outcomes will also help you to structure your learning. There are activities included in each study unit and these should assist you with grasping the content of each study unit of the study guide. Please note that no study unit or section is less or more important than another. Research is a process and should be approached as such, with all steps and phases equally important. When reviewing the study guide, you will see the specific research areas covered in this module. In other words, you must: 1. Begin by thinking about social research and exploring key issues such as what is actually meant by scientific research, theory, underlying assumptions, and research ethics. 2. Then research planning is explored; this includes things such as deciding on a topic; focusing on a problem; considering the time available and the purpose and scope of the research; choosing a research design; deciding what information we need; and selecting the participants (sampling). 3. We shall then focus on the practicalities of collecting data (that is, actually doing the research). 4. Finally, the processes of making sense are considered. In other words, how the data are interpreted and presented. Here is the brief summary of the content of each study unit: Study unit 1 (Strategies of Acquiring Knowledge in Social Sciences Research) introduce you to the scientific approach to social research by exploring the strategies of acquiring knowledge, error in human inquiry, the role of science in social research, dominant and recent paradigms adopted by social scientists and, lastly, stages of research in the social sciences. Study unit 2 (The role of theory in research) discusses the relationship between theory and research. The learning unit defines and describes theory with reference to its purpose, the forms of explanations it provides, its scope and the domains of social reality it 2  Learning unit 0 | RSC2601 General introduction to RSC2601 deals with. Additionally, attention is given to conceptualisation with a specific focus on identifying a suitable research topic and problem and formulating a hypothesis. Study unit 3 (Scientific research) introduces and empower students to demonstrate an understanding of scientific research. The learning unit describes different types and approaches to research, as well as time dimensions in research. Study unit 4 (Ethics in research) aim to answer this one central question: What ethical requirements must we keep in mind when doing research? We answer this question by first considering the meaning of the concept “ethics”, and we then deal with the different ethical issues as these relate to (1) people, (2) different research approaches, and (3) our professional capacities as researchers. Study unit 5 (Research design) aims to demonstrate an understanding of the research design process in research in the social sciences. To provide context, the concept of research design was introduced in learning unit 3, highlighting its fundamental role in scientific research. A research design helps us plan a study to answer our research question. Please revisit learning unit 3 to ensure that you understand what scientific research is. Study unit 6 (Sampling) describes the process of taking any portion of a population as representative of that population. The importance of sampling is discussed and key issues such as probability versus nonprobability sampling, sampling techniques and sampling size are explored. Study unit 7 (Data collection) introduces you to how measuring is used to collect data. We deal with how questioning can be used to collect data; and how researchers use observation as a method of collecting data. Although we deal with the three data collection methods separately, they are often used in combination. We also explain how data can be obtained using interviews, questionnaires and observations. Study unit 8 (Data analysis and interpretation) introduces you to fundamental methods used to analyse and interpret quantitative and qualitative data in the social sciences. The unit outlines basic steps and techniques used to sum voluminous data into meaningful and easily comprehendible information, emanating from a research study. In brief, we induct you to comprehensive and essential quantitative data analysis techniques such as descriptive statistics, frequency distribution tables, graphs, measures of central tendency, and correlations between study variables. We also introduce you to methods used to analyse and interpret qualitative data, which include, among others, thematic analysis; constant comparative analysis; narrative analysis and phenomenological analysis. 3  Learning unit 0 | RSC2601 General introduction to RSC2601 Study unit 9 (Writing and evaluating research reports) looks at the importance of reporting our research work. There are many different types of reports that we can use; each type has a distinct use and the type of report we choose will dictate how we report our research findings. In this study unit, we also provide some criteria on how to evaluate a research report. 4 ACKNOWLEDGING CONTRIBUTORS We acknowledge to the writers of the initial study guide that was published in the year 2010. I would also like to extend gratitude and a special thanks to the following academics who contributed to the revision of this study guide as it is implemented in the year 2024. Learning unit 1: Mr. Percyval Bayane — Department of Sociology — Coordinator Learning unit 2: Mr. Tshepo Maake — Department of Sociology Learning unit 3: Prof. Gisela van Rensburg — Department of Health Studies Learning unit 4: Mrs. Therise Davie — Department of Communication Sciences Learning unit 5: Dr. Errolyn Gordon — Department of Psychology Learning unit 6: Prof. Gisela van Rensburg — Department of Health Studies) Learning unit 7: Mrs. Therise Davie — Department of Communication Sciences Learning unit 8: Dr. Bongani Mtshweni — Department (s) of Psychology and Social Work and Dr. Maditobane Lekganyane Learning unit 9: Mrs. Therise Davie — Department of Communications Sciences) 4  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. TABLE OF CONTENTS LEARNING UNIT 1: STRATEGIES OF ACQUIRING KNOWLEDGE IN SOCIAL SCIENCES RESEARCH............................................................................................. 3 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 3 2. LEARNING OUTCOMES...................................................................................................... 3 3. DEFINING KEY CONCEPTS................................................................................................ 4 4. SOURCES OF ACQUIRING GENERAL KNOWLEDGE...................................................... 4 4.1 Tradition.................................................................................................................................... 4 4.2 Authority.................................................................................................................................... 5 4.3 Mysticism and religion............................................................................................................... 5 4.4 Common sense......................................................................................................................... 6 4.5 Media myths.............................................................................................................................. 7 5. ERRORS IN HUMAN INQUIRY AND HOW SCIENTISTS AVOID THEM............................ 7 5.1 Inaccurate observation.............................................................................................................. 7 5.2 Overgeneralisation.................................................................................................................... 8 5.3 Selective observation................................................................................................................. 8 5.4 Illogical reasoning...................................................................................................................... 9 6. THE DOMINANT PARADIGMS IN SOCIAL RESEARCH.................................................. 10 6.1 Positivism................................................................................................................................ 10 6.2 Interpretivism........................................................................................................................... 11 6.3 Critical theory approach........................................................................................................... 12 6.4 Feminist approach................................................................................................................... 14 6.5 Postmodernism........................................................................................................................ 14 6.6 Postcolonialism........................................................................................................................ 15 7. STAGES IN RESEARCH.................................................................................................... 17 8. CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................... 18 9. SELF-EVALUATION ASSESSMENT................................................................................. 18 10. ADDITIONAL LEARNING EXPERIENCES........................................................................ 19 11. REFERENCES............................................................................................................... 19 2  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. LEARNING UNIT 1: STRATEGIES OF ACQUIRING KNOWLEDGE IN SOCIAL SCIENCES RESEARCH Percyval Bayane 1. INTRODUCTION For society to progress, new knowledge must be generated. Science is a process of inquiry, whereby we gain knowledge by observing how things are and using our minds to logically think about what is observed. Inquiry is part of our everyday life. When we are sitting in a room and the light suddenly goes off, we go to the main electricity box to check if there is a fault or check our load-shedding schedule, to see if we are affected by load-shedding in our area. When we see black clouds building up in the sky, we know that we can expect rain. These are physical things for which we need physical evidence to answer our questions. Since we are human beings, we are more likely to interrogate what happens in the social world rather than physical things. It is therefore the social world that we constantly question, to gain a better understanding about ourselves and the world. What is the social world? Examples are provided below to help you understand what we mean by the social world: 1. When a group of employees are running to the assembly point in panic, this tells us that something bad might be happening in the building or offices, i.e., a fire. 2. When someone smiles while talking to us, we assume that they want to tell us good news or relay a positive message. The above examples deal with the interaction of people and the implications thereof. It can be concluded that the social world refers to a part of our existence that deals with how people interact with one another. In this learning unit, we aim to introduce students to the scientific approach to social research by exploring the strategies of acquiring knowledge, error in human inquiry, the role of science in social research, dominant and recent paradigms adopted by social scientists and, lastly, stages of research in the social sciences. 2. LEARNING OUTCOMES After the completion of this learning unit, you should be able to: Define the relevant key concepts such as research, scientific research, ontology and epistemology. Identify the five sources of acquiring knowledge. 3  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. Explain the errors in human inquiry. Give your own examples of the four errors in human inquiry. Differentiate between research paradigms used in social research. Outline the stages of research. 3. DEFINING KEY CONCEPTS Research refers to a scientific and systematic inquiry into the nature of, reasons for and consequences of any particular set of situations, whether these circumstances are experimentally controlled or recorded as they occur. In other words, research implies that the researcher is interested in the search for and producing knowledge about a specific phenomenon (see Babbie, 2021; Kothari, 2004). Scientific research consists of steps which the researcher follows to investigate and answer specific questions of interest about the world. In other words, scientific research begins with the researcher seeing something, formulating questions and hypotheses of interest. Once hypotheses and objectives are formulated, the researcher begins with the experiment or investigation, and writes a report and conclusions about what has been found (Kothari, 2004). Ontology refers to what a researcher considers to be reality or what exists. In other words, it is the researcher’s position which influences how they understand the world or a particular phenomenon (see Neuman, 2014). Epistemology refers to how we know what we know or the most valid ways to reach the truth about something. In other words, epistemology is the study of knowledge or concerned with the procedure used to generate knowledge (see Neuman, 2014). 4. SOURCES OF ACQUIRING GENERAL KNOWLEDGE 4.1 Tradition Each one of us inherit a culture that contains accepted knowledge of how the world operates and values guiding our participation in it. In other words, we accept what people tell us and know about the world and, by doing so, we avoid starting from scratch in search of understanding. Knowledge is cumulative and the body of knowledge we learn from the previous generations enables us to gain more information and make sense of the world. For instance, if we know that binge drinking alcohol reduces one’s driving ability, why should we disregard that and start our own investigations? Instead, we can use the knowledge that we have inherited from the previous generations to gain a better understanding of something and even find solutions to those issues, such as binge drinking alcohol and driving ability. 4  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. Although traditional knowledge enables us to learn the basics of how the world operates, it can be harmful to human inquiry. Traditional knowledge leads us not to question how information was obtained. In other words, the source of learning is not questioned and, if it appears correct and traditionally accepted, we do not see a different understanding. As such, traditional knowledge may limit us from seeing things from different perspectives and positions. Scientific thinking, therefore, has an ambiguous relationship with tradition. It is one of the norms of science that we must always be willing to re-examine our traditions and, therefore, science is critical of unthinking adherence to tradition. However, we can only get to know the world from the perspective of a tradition. In every scientific discipline, students are taught the ideas of founding thinkers and their thoughts form the basis upon which new knowledge and perspectives are discovered. Therefore, scientific discipline is based upon a tradition of thought, which builds to the development of new knowledge. 4.2 Authority As human beings, we accept knowledge and ways of doing things when we are told this by someone in position of authority. In other words, we are relying on the authority and status of a person, as a source of knowledge, about society and ways of living. A person in a position of authority is anyone who has earned that authority based on their experience and, therefore, may offer us reliable knowledge. For instance, an educator is expected to know more about their subject and assessments and can, therefore, guide learners on how to pass or excel in that subject. But relying on authority can lead to overestimating the expertise of a persons in authority; in other words, experts are sometimes wrong. Therefore, when we do not know how experts arrived at their knowledge, we should be cautious in accepting their conclusions and guidance. Let’s take an example: you want to understand why learners are failing a particular subject and decide to approach the subject educator, because they are teaching the subject and deal with learners. You may therefore accept the educator’s opinion and disregard learners’ perceptions on the matter. However, if you do consider the learners’ views, you may discover that the learners are more knowledgeable about their issues than the educator. This often happens when we unquestioningly accept authority as our source of knowledge, without thinking carefully. 4.3 Mysticism and religion Religion is accepted as a type of knowledge based upon authority of sacred texts such as the Bible and Qur’an or other supernatural sources. In African societies, traditional healers and diviners occupy a central space in the governance of people, because chiefs depend on their wisdom and guidance. Although religion is useful in providing 5  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. our lives with meaning and understanding of our place in the world, it is not a reliable guide to knowledge about the actual state of the world. In the Western world, science and religion has come into conflict a number of times. The well-known case of such conflict was that of the Italian astronomer, Galileo. In 1633, he was forced, under threat of torture by the Roman Inquisition, to retract his statement that the earth revolved around the sun, and not the sun around the earth. It was already known by the Ancient Egyptians and the Greeks that our naïve observation that the sun moves around the earth is in fact incorrect. This knowledge was lost to the Western world with the fall of the Roman Empire. Then the Church started to articulate the naïve notion, based upon the authority of a text in the Old Testament, where Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, so that daylight could last longer, while he was defeating his enemies. However, through careful observation of the movement of celestial bodies, such as the planets and the stars, as well as disciplined thinking about this, it became clear to astronomers, such as Copernicus and Kepler, during the 1500s and early 1600s, that this interpretation of the sun’s movement was incorrect. The Catholic Church, at the time, interpreted these views as a challenge to their authority and the authority of the Bible, and tried to suppress their views through torture and the threat of torture. One of the results of this episode is that it became clear that, for scientific progress to take place, scientists must be allowed the freedom to pursue knowledge to wherever it may lead, even though doing so may overturn some cherished beliefs (Findlen & Marcus, 2017). 4.4 Common sense Common sense is another way of making sense of the world 1. In other words, common sense refers to the ordinary reasoning and relates to what people know through their instincts, such as when to trust a person. People make judgement about the world or something based on what ‘feels right’ for them. People might not be able to explain their feelings in a way that makes sense to others, but they believe their feelings, which guide their way of living. Therefore, common sense is valuable in everyday life, as it helps us reach decisions and solve daily problems. However, common sense consists of illogical reasoning, because it depends on individuals’ personal understanding and feeling about an issue and does not systematically consider how ideas are related to each other. Finally, common sense does not collect information systematically; hence, it originates from traditional knowledge, which is what we learn or are taught about the world and ways of living. 1 Refer to Bless et al. (2013). 6  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. 4.5 Media myths Each one of us learns about the world and develop our concepts of social reality according to what we see, hear and read in the media. Mass media, which includes television, films, newspaper, magazines and the internet, have a powerful influence on how we see and understand things, and create knowledge. The primary purpose of the media is to entertain, not present the accurate reality; hence, writers, who adapt real life for television shows and films, distort reality and often rely on tradition, authority and common sense. Newspapers and magazines writers have deadlines, which limit their information, and they cannot be specialists on every topic they write about. Mistakes may therefore be made because of ignorance. Public thinking can be changed through selective emphasis, and this can lead people into error. Activity 1.1 In your own words, write a paragraph where you define each of the five sources of acquiring knowledge and give examples to supplement your understanding of the sources of knowledge. 5. ERRORS IN HUMAN INQUIRY AND HOW SCIENTISTS AVOID THEM We have now learned where we gain basic knowledge or how we know what we know about the social world. However, we often make errors in our inquires and science helps us to guard against these errors. Babbie (2021) provides the following types of errors in human inquiry: 5.1 Inaccurate observation Prior to understanding the way things work, we must have something to understand. In other words, we need to know the what before we can explain the why. However, people tend to be careless when it comes to observing everyday events. We may not see things happening right before our eyes or, mistakenly, think we have seen something happen. An example of this is in the case of a road accident, witnesses will have different accounts of what happened. In contrast to our human and ordinary inquiries, scientific observation is a conscious activity, because, in science, we observe events deliberately. Additionally, there are both simple and complex measurement devices to prevent us from making inaccurate observations, and this will be discussed further in learning unit 8, which deals with qualitative and quantitative data collection methods. 7  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. 5.2 Overgeneralisation Overgeneralisations refers to us arriving at a general conclusion about something that we only observed a few times or in small number of cases. The use of a few and similar events to make a conclusion about something is wrong, because it means we ignore the possibility that observing additional cases may bring about different findings to our earlier observations. We all tend to overgeneralise, especially when we are under pressure, but even when we are not pressured to make a conclusion about something. For instance, students registered for a module can read other students’ informal comments about how difficult the module is and conclude that the module is indeed difficult. There is also what we call the “halo effect” which is when we look at one very good aspect of something and then overgeneralise. For instance, because we respect someone, we then overgeneralise by saying that this person is “wonderful” in all respects, giving them a proverbial ‘halo’. We prejudge their work and do not approach it by considering its merits and its faults. Whenever any form of overgeneralisation occurs, it can distort the process of inquiry. Scientists therefore guard against overgeneralisation by involving a sufficiently large sample of observation – to be explained in a learning unit focused on sampling. Furthermore, scientists use replication, which means repeating a study to check if the same results are obtained. If we obtain the same results, we can therefore generalise the findings of the study. However, if we get a different results, it will help us to avoid overgeneralisation and making incorrect conclusions. 5.3 Selective observation Overgeneralisation can lead to selective observation. When you make a conclusion about an event and why it happened in a certain way, you tend to pay attention to future events following the same pattern of events as the earlier one. In other words, you tend to overlook the situations that conflicts with the pattern of events. For example, you may find a group of students complaining about an institution and this is caused by not receiving feedback on their e-mails. Based on this, you then assume that all students at that institution, who are complaining, are facing the same problem – not receiving feedback on their e-mails. As a result, you fail to investigate what is actually happening between the institution and students, because there may be other reasons why students are complaining or not receiving feedback, such as, students sending e-mails to the incorrect department or lecturer. Science, therefore, guards against selective observation by using a research design, which specifies the number and kind of observations needed before making a conclusion. Conclusions are based 8  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. on an analysis of all the observations detailed in the research design. This will be well explained in learning units dealing with scientific research and research design. 5.4 Illogical reasoning Illogical reasons occurs when we jump to premature conclusions about something. We often feel that we have an answer about something, especially when we have access to pieces of evidence and do not seek additional evidence or information to validate our conclusions or assumptions. For example, students often do not consult the module lecturers about assignments and examination guidelines, but make conclusions or assumptions, relying on what their fellow students say. In this case, the students would have made premature conclusions and assumptions about module assignments or the examination, without seeking additional information from the module lecturers. Although all of us are prone to embarrassingly illogical reasoning in our daily life, scientists avoid this by using systems of logic consciously and explicitly. Science attempts to protect us from common pitfalls of ordinary inquiry, because accurate observation and understanding of reality is not an obvious matter in research. The four errors discussed above may lead to what is known as a premature closure of inquiry. This means that we ask questions for a short while, obtain some answers and stop our investigation too soon. As a result, our attempt to understand something stops before our understanding is complete and, therefore, the evidence for sound conclusions is inadequate. Science guards against the premature closure of inquiry with the requirement of a thorough review of the literature on the topic being researched. The review reveals the complexity of a subject and presents a wide range of information, which tends to prevent the researcher ending the inquiry before he or she has thoroughly explored all options. At its base, science is an open-ended enterprise, in which we constantly modify our conclusions. Experienced scientists expect established theories to be overturned eventually, and new conclusions to be reached as research projects progress. Activity 1.2 Which errors of human inquiry do each of the following observations represent? 1. You observe that a person from a different racial group is much more reserved than many of the friends in your own racial group. In future contacts, you continue to observe characteristics of reserve in the other racial group. You ignore more expressive behaviour, while at the same time ignoring more reserved behaviour in your own group. As a result, you end up believing that people from the other racial group tend to be more reserved than people from your own racial group. 9  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. 2. You value a theory which supports the significance of early experience on child-rearing practices. Without considering the impact of current experience, you reveal findings which indicate that early experience does indeed have a significant effect on child- rearing practices. You continue to believe your theory. 3. You are pressed for time to submit a research assignment on students’ attitudes to study methods. You interview two students you know and come to certain conclusions on the basis of their information. 6. THE DOMINANT PARADIGMS IN SOCIAL RESEARCH By now, you should know the sources and strategies of acquiring knowledge and how science helps us to be logical and avoid errors in our inquiries or research. Research is diversified, because of the complexity of social reality. In other words, we can look at a house that is burning, but have different explanations of how and why it is burning, and this will be informed by our positionality and view of things in the world, as researchers. It is therefore significant to consider researchers’ ontological 2 and epistemological 3 assumptions when doing research. In this section, you will learn about the different approaches, also referred to as paradigms 4 that inform researchers’ observations, understanding and analysis of a particular phenomenon. We are identifying paradigms that guide social scientists research and, by doing so, we will have a better understanding of the social research and get a better idea of the key issues in social sciences research. Knowing and understanding different approaches will allow you to compare these approaches systematically. There are dominant approaches to social science research namely, positivism, interpretivist and critical approach. These are traditional approaches to social sciences research, but there are additional and recent approaches that will also be discussed, namely feminist, postmodernism and postcolonialism. In this section, you are introduced to the basic arguments and positions in different paradigms and approaches to social science research. 6.1 Positivism The term, ‘positivism’, comes from 19th century writers, such as Auguste Comte, who believed that scientific truth could be positively verified through empirical observations and the logical analysis of what we observe. Positivists argue that reality exists 2 Ontology refers to what a researcher considers to be reality or exists. In other words, it is the researcher’s position which influences how they understand the world or a particular phenomenon (see Neuman, 2014). 3 Epistemology refers to how we know what we know or most valid ways to reach the truth about something (see Neuman, 2014). 4 Approaches and paradigms are used interchangeably, because the two words speaks to the similar thing. Paradigm is a model and framework for observation and understanding that shapes what we see and how we understand it (see Babbie, 2021). 10  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. independently of humans, as it is not influenced by our sense, but governed by immutable laws. What this means is that, as individuals, we do not have an influence on what is observed or happens in the world. The ontological position of positivists is realism, and they strive to understand the social world like the natural world. The natural world is focused on the cause-effect relationship and, once identified, it is used to predict human behaviour and the future. The epistemological position of positivists is objectivism, meaning researchers are objective in studying something that exists independently of them, and they do not have an impact on what is being observed (Rehman & Alharthi, 2016; Babbie, 2021). So, positivists believe the above applies in the social world. In other words, they believe that social sciences should be studied in the same way as natural sciences. Positivists argue that reality is context free, as multiple researchers can conduct a research project, at different times and in different places, but will come to the same conclusions about what is being studied (Rehman & Alharthi, 2016; Babbie, 2021). For positivists, all knowledge is based on facts, which are empirically established, and it is crucial for researchers to approach social reality in a neutral, value-free, detached and systematic way. Methodological tools are developed to collect evidence that is observable and measurable. Standardised procedures are followed to study particular events and learn about their interconnections. These procedures further ensure a detached approach that will represent social reality accurately and free from bias (Babbie, 2021; Leavy, 2017). In simple terms, positivists believe that social sciences and the world should be perceived and studied in the same way as natural sciences. However, positivism has been criticised as a paradigm, because others believe that social reality is made of human existence and experiences. In other words, researchers have an impact on how a phenomenon is studied and reported, because of their position and influence on what is observed. Furthermore, positivism methodology, which is normally quantitative, is also criticised for relying on experimentation and generating numerical data, rather than in-depth experiences and perceptions of human beings of the social world (Rehman & Alharthi, 2016). The criticism of positivism paradigm is the reason we have other approaches/paradigms, such as interpretivism, discussed below. 6.2 Interpretivism Interpretivism, also referred to as constructivism, was introduced in response to the over-dominance of positivism. Interpretivists believe that social reality is inherently meaningful. People have the ability to interpret a situation and decide how to act in response to this situation. By consciously participating in a situation, they attribute 11  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. meaning to that situation. Meaning is constructed through human beings interacting with each other and playing a central role in defining a situation, to make sense of it. These meanings are generated in a social process and shared intersubjectively. Intersubjective literally means to be shared between subjects and by subjects – by this we mean conscious individuals, that is, people who are aware of what happens around them and who can act with a purpose in mind. Patterns and regularities in behaviour emerge from the social conventions established by purposefully interacting human beings. These patterns emerge from an intersubjective understanding of the meaningfulness of a situation (Leavy, 2017). Interpretivists argue that the purpose of research is to make social reality intelligible and reveal its inherent meaningfulness. Meaningful actions need to be understood from within. This requires studying how social reality is experienced, interpreted and understood. In this respect, interpretivists claim that there is no external social reality, separate from the consciousness of people. Social reality is created through the conscious actions of human beings. For instance, interpretivists believe that researchers are part of the social reality being researched and not detached from the subject being studied. This is unlike the natural world, which exists, irrespective of whether there are people around or not. Interpretive social scientists argue that there is no basis for using the same methods as the natural sciences. They insist that social reality differs fundamentally from natural reality and, to explain social actions, we need to first understand the meaningfulness of social reality (Rehman & Alharthi, 2016). But, how do interpretivists access the meaningfulness of social reality? They argue that researchers have to be sensitive to the social context in which meaning is produced. Social reality is approached from the perspective of the human beings, who actively construct reality. One useful strategy is to pay attention to common sense, because it provides insight into human beings’ own understanding of their situation. Paying attention to human beings’ understanding of their own situation enables researchers to see how people construct and understand these situations intuitively. Value-freedom, neutrality or detachment is of little use to the interpretive researcher, since there is no external reality independent of the particular context in which meaning is attributed. Interpretivists see values as an integral part of social reality and emphasise that they should be acknowledged as such (Leavy, 2017; Rehman & Alharthi, 2016). 6.3 Critical theory approach Critical social scientists believe that social reality is multi-layered. In other words, there are more dimensions to social reality than what initially appear to us. Therefore, it is 12  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. crucial to move from the way social reality present itself to the underlying mechanisms by which social reality is maintained. We need to penetrate the layers of social reality and uncover the underlying relationships that shape society. These relationships are the mechanisms that result in inequality and exploitation within a society, but they are frequently masked by external appearances. The reason why we do not ordinarily see the real, exploitative nature of society is that we perceive it through a framework constructed for us by institutions such as the mass media. The mass media serve the interests of the wealthy and powerful in society. As a result, our attention is diverted from the real problems of society. We are led to believe that the inequalities of the world are natural, and that there is nothing we can do about them. How then can we get to know this multi-layered social reality? Critical social scientists argue that positivist social scientists’ emphasis on discovering objective facts that are observable and measurable is misguided, because social reality cannot be taken only at its face value. Critical social scientists claim that observable surface structures seldom coincide with reality. This is why critical social scientists rely on theory. Their theory provides models that reveal the hidden structures that determine the key characteristics of social reality. By using the logic and reasoning of theories, researchers can work out the implications of the underlying, hidden dynamics of social reality. They can then predict how the consequences of these hidden dynamics will reveal themselves in observable surface structures. According to critical social scientists, empirically observed patterns are the evidence that points to the underlying mechanisms. When observations confirm the predictions made by theory, researchers are more confident that these unobservable structures do, in fact, exist. Note that critical social scientists do not reject facts, but argue that the truth of social reality goes beyond empirical (observable) facts (Rehman & Alharthi, 2016). Critical social scientists also believe that the interpretive approach perpetuates the myths of social reality by reducing it to common sense interpretation and understanding. This is because common sense understandings are contaminated by a false consciousness, according to critical social scientists. They do not reject attempts to understand common-sense ideas, but they warn that these are only partial and incomplete. For critical social scientists, understanding of the subjective experiences of human beings cannot be the end goal of social science. Instead, science should examine the unexamined, taken-for-granted reality in which we live and critically reflect on it. Hence, critical social scientists believe that critical and reflective researchers should actively engage on a subject matter. Objectivity is not a goal, because researchers are committed to challenging inequalities and domination. In order to emancipate human beings from the ideology that sustains their false consciousness, they need to be made aware of the underlying mechanisms that structure their daily 13  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. lives. This awareness of the real nature of social reality will empower human beings to work towards meaningful social change and transformation (Sarantakos, 2005). 6.4 Feminist approach The primary goal of feminist researchers has been to demonstrate how academic research in the social sciences is male-orientated. Women are usually invisible and marginalised, and this relates to power. Feminists claim that much research in the social sciences is done by the powerful, for their own benefit. Male perspectives do not only influence the way social reality is defined, but also how it is known. Researchers, who examine the social world from a feminist paradigm, have called attention to aspects of social life that other paradigms do not reveal (Parry, 2020; Kiguwa, 2019). In fact, feminism has established significant theoretical paradigms for social research and focus on gender differences and how it relates to the social organisation. The feminist paradigm draw attention to the oppression of women in many societies. Feminist paradigms do not only focus on the treatment of women or female experiences of oppression, but they also point out the limitations in how other aspects of social life are examined (Babbie, 2021). It can be suggested that feminist researchers are critical of the positivist approach. What alternative do feminist researchers provide? Ontologically, feminists introduce “gender” as a key category of social analysis. By emphasising gender, feminists are hopeful to bring the power and subordination aspects of the relationships between women and men into play. This allows women’s issues to be introduced into academic discourse and serve as a basis for fostering the emancipation of women. Many feminist researchers attempt to approach their studies in an inclusionary, collaborative and non-impositional way (Parry, 2020). Hence, feminist research, to an extent, cut across interpretative and critical social science approach, because it considers the role and influence researchers have in how the social world and reality is viewed and understood (Kiguwa, 2019). 6.5 Postmodernism Postmodern research is an approach to research that claims that there is no such thing as absolute truth, and no particular theory of method is better than another in determining the truth. The broad postmodern movement in the arts, humanities and social sciences questions the core values, goals and bases of analysis that have guided research and have been assumed to be universally valid, at least in the past century. Postmodernism challenges the belief in the rationality, certainty and progress 14  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. associated with science. All three of the dominant approaches to social science, discussed above, are located within the realm of modernity 5: 1. Positivists aim to discover the causal patterns in an independent external reality. 2. Interpretivists make sense of intentionally constructed and intersubjectively shared meaning systems in social contexts. 3. Critical social scientists uncover the multiple layers of social reality, to reveal its true nature and, thus, facilitate transformation. In this respect, they assume that it is possible to examine and explain the structure and meaning of social action. These approaches to research believe that it makes little sense to conduct research, if we cannot assume that there is some pattern or regularity that we can make sense of. Postmodernists, however, argue that there is no “stable” or “coherent” subject matter to study. Postmodernism challenges any research that attempts to provide a general or “better” explanation of social reality. Postmodernists claim that social scientists’ understanding, and explanation of social reality, cannot claim greater validity than any other view of social reality. In other words, postmodernism offers an emphasis on difference, which means the belief that we should provide scope for everybody to offer their narratives of how the world has developed and is progressing. Therefore, postmodernism rejects reason as a foundation of knowledge. The diversity and fragmentation of discourses on social reality is celebrated, and postmodernism makes no claims of objectivity or a universal truth. Rather, there are multiple truths and all discourses, i.e., views, debates and opinions, are seen to be culturally constituted within particular social and historical contexts. Science is therefore one of many discourses and cannot claim to give us final “answers” about the social world and reality. 6.6 Postcolonialism To understand postcolonialism, we begin with postcolonialists’ view of social reality. Postcolonialists believe that the colonial experience of conquest and domination, in which European countries colonised people on the continents of Africa, Asia and the Americas, is central to our understanding of social reality. This history created an unequal relationship between the colonist and the colonised, which continues today, despite the fact that there are no longer any colonies left in the world. Europeans (the colonisers of a previous age) see themselves and their culture as the norm, against which all other cultures are defined. 5 Modernity is a belief in rationality and progress associated with confidence in science and technology. 15  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. Europeans justify this view with reference to the rise of the modern world in Europe, in the 18th and 19th centuries. This change came about as a result of the Enlightenment – a philosophical movement emphasising reason, as opposed to tradition and religion, as the basis of our view of the world. The Enlightenment also placed the individual person at the centre stage, and defended the rights of the individual, relative to that of the group. This thinking found expression in the French and American revolutions, which created the first democratic societies in which all citizens had the right to vote. These changes, combined with the industrial revolution, which started in England and led to an enormous increase in productivity, due to the employment of new power sources such as coal and electricity, and the use of machinery. The Enlightenment, democracy and the Industrial Revolution, together, created complex changes that later became known as modernity (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2014). In other words, Europeans see modernity as their own creation. Colonised groups are defined as lacking modernity and, therefore, deficient when viewed against Europeans (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2014). This simplistic view of the world reduces it to sets of binary opposites, with European reason contrasted with the mythical and traditional thinking of the colonised, European democracy contrasted with the autocracy of the colonised, and European progress compared with the stagnation and backward-looking nature of the colonised. Postcolonial theorists believe that this view is oversimplified and an unfair characterisation of the previously colonised people. Much of the knowledge that has been created up to now in the social sciences is biased, because it represents the views of the colonisers about the colonised. The colonisers were the subjects of knowledge, those who make the knowledge, and the colonised were merely the objects of knowledge, in other words, the people about whom the knowledge was formulated, without them having any role in creating this knowledge. Postcolonial thinkers believe that this has to change, so that those who have been marginalised can become subjects (creators) of knowledge in their own right. For this to happen, it is necessary, however, that the power relations in knowledge institutions such as universities are decolonised, so that Eurocentric knowledge is no longer regarded unquestioningly as the dominant kind of knowledge (Bhambra, 2014; Mamdani, 2019). Activity 1.3 In your own words, write at least two paragraphs defining each paradigm or approach to social science research, and focus on the primary characteristics, such as their ontological and epistemological views of the social world and reality, and research (knowledge production). 16  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. 7. STAGES IN RESEARCH In the study guide, we will be taking you through steps and stages of conducting research in the social sciences. The research process and steps are guided by the research problem at hand and best research results are achieved, based on a careful planning of the whole process. Accordingly, the research process involves four stages, which we present in the subheadings and diagram below. These four stages overlap and influence one another. They begin with a plan and end with a report of results. 1. Stage 1 involves the definition of the problem. 2. Stage 2 involves obtaining the information. 3. Stage 3 involves analysing and interpreting the information. 4. Stage 4 involves communicating the results. STAGE 1 Unit 9 Unit 1, 3, & 4 REPORT PLAN STAGE 4 Research problem Unit 8 Analysing and interpreting qualitative data Literature review Describing and interpreting Theory STAGE 3 quantitative data Assumptions Hypothesis Data collection Unit 2 & 5 Unit 7 Research questions Unit 6 Sampling Ethics STAGE 2 DIAGRAM 1.1 Stages in research Stage 1: Defining the problem — research problem — literature review 17  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. — theory — assumptions — research design or plan — hypothesis — research questions — Ethical considerations Stage 2: Obtaining the information — sampling — data collection Stage 3: Analysing and interpreting information — describing and interpreting quantitative data — describing and interpreting qualitative data Stage 4: Communicating results — This involves writing the research report. 8. CONCLUSIONS In this learning unit, students were introduced to the scientific approach to social research. As human beings, we gain basic knowledge about the social world from sources such as tradition, authority, mysticism and religion, common sense and media myths. We have learned that the above sources help us to know what we know about the social world. However, we often make errors in our inquiries and this include making inaccurate observations, overgeneralisations, selective observations and using illogical reasoning. Hence, science and the scientific approach to social research helps us to guard against making such errors, which lead to premature closure of an inquiry in research. The learning unit further introduced students to the dominant and recent paradigms or approaches in social research, which guide researchers in the process of inquiry. It is important to remember that ontology and epistemology guide researchers to analyse and understand what is being studied in the process of inquiry. 9. SELF-EVALUATION ASSESSMENT This section aims to test your level of understanding of the content presented in this learning unit. Are you able to define and discuss, in your own words, the five sources of acquiring knowledge? Are you able to differentiate between the five sources of acquiring knowledge? 18  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. Are you able to define and discuss the four errors in human inquiry? Are you able to give your own examples of the four errors in human inquiry? Are you able to differentiate between ontology and epistemology? Are you able to define and discuss the dominant and recent paradigms in social research? Are you able to differentiate between the research paradigms or approaches in social research? Are you able to list the stages of research? Are you able to list all the steps under each stage of research? 10. ADDITIONAL LEARNING EXPERIENCES This section aims to enhance your learning experience on some of the learning outcomes addressed in this learning unit. Please use the links below, to watch the YouTube videos, after reading the learning unit and answering the self-evaluation assessment questions. YouTube links https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QkVqT3EPyk – Positivism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FybkUMplAlI – What is interpretivism? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xx9JM1gcc3E – Critical theory paradigm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkcqGU7l_zU – Ontology, Epistemology and Paradigm OERs/Articles http://41.89.240.73/bitstream/handle/embuni/3797/2155.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y 11. REFERENCES Babbie, E. 2021. The practice of social research (15th ed.). Boston: Cengage. Bless, C., Higson-Smith, C., & Sithole, S. L. 2013. Fundamentals of social research method: An African perspective (5th ed.). xxx: Juta. Bhambra, G.K. 2014. Postcolonial and decolonial dialogues. Postcolonial Studies, 17 (2): 115- 121. DOI: 10.1080/13688790.2014.966414 Kiguwa, P. 2019. Feminist approaches: An exploration of women’s gendered experiences. In: S. Laher, A. Fynn & S. Kramer (Eds.), Transforming research methods. Johannesburg, South Africa: Wits University Press. 19  Learning unit 1 | RSC2601 Strategies of acquiring knowledge in social sciences research. Kothari, C.R. 2004. Research methodology: Methods and techniques (2nd ed.). New Delhi: New Age International Publishers. Findlen, P & Marcus, H. 2017. The breakdown of Galileo's Roman network: Crisis and community, ca. 1633. Social Studies of Science, 47(3): 326-252. Leavy, P. 2017. Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based and community-based participatory research approaches. New York: The Guilford Press. Mamdani, M. 2019. Decolonising universities. In: Jansen, J.D. (ed.), Decolonisation in universities: The politics of knowledge. Johannesburg: Wits University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.18772/22019083351 Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S.J. 2014. Global coloniality and the challenges of creating African futures. Strategic Review for Southern Africa, 36 (2): 181-202. Neuman, W.L. 2014. Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approach (7th ed.). Edinburgh Gate: Pearson. Rehman, A.A & Alharthi, K. 2016. An introduction to research paradigms. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 3 (8): 51-59. Parry, B. 2020. Feminist research principles and practices. In: S. Kramer, S. Laher, A. Fynn, & H. H. Janse van Vuuren (eds.), Online readings in research methods. Psychological Society of South Africa: Johannesburg. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ BNPFS. Sarantakos, S. 2005. Social research. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. 20  Learning unit 2 | RSC2601 Theory and Conceptualisation in Social Science Research TABLE OF CONTENTS LEARNING UNIT 2: THEORY AND CONCEPTUALISATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH. 2 1. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................2 2. LEARNING OUTCOMES...........................................................................................................2 3. DEFINING KEY CONCEPTS.....................................................................................................2 4. WHAT IS THEORY?..................................................................................................................3 4.1 Theory as a conceptual framework.....................................................................................5 4.2 Scope and level of abstraction of theory..............................................................................7 4.3 Reconsidering the relationship between theory and research.............................................8 4.4 Concluding remarks on theory and research.......................................................................9 5. THE CONCEPTUAL GROUNDING OF RESEARCH..............................................................10 6. CONDUCTING A LITERATURE REVIEW...............................................................................11 7. FORMULATING A RESEARCH QUESTION...........................................................................13 8. FORMULATING A HYPOTHESIS...........................................................................................15 9. OPERATIONALISING CONCEPTS.........................................................................................18 10. CONCLUSIONS......................................................................................................................20 1  Learning unit 2 | RSC2601 Theory and Conceptualisation in Social Science Research LEARNING UNIT 2: THEORY AND CONCEPTUALISATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH Tshepo B Maake 1. INTRODUCTION This learning unit aims to describe the relationship between theory and research. The learning unit defines and describes theory with reference to its purpose, the forms of explanations it provides, its scope and the domains of social reality it deals with. Additionally, attention is given to conceptualisation with a specific focus on identifying a suitable research topic and problem and formulating a hypothesis. 2. LEARNING OUTCOMES After the completion of this learning unit/lesson, you should be able to: Define a theory in research. Explain the purpose of theory in social science research. Describe how theories develop. Select a research topic. Identify a research problem. Explain the key conceptual stages in social science research. Explain how hypotheses are used in social science research. 3. DEFINING KEY CONCEPTS Theory: Du-Plooy Cilliers et al. (2015) define a theory as a logical description of a set of interrelated constructs, concepts, propositions and definitions that present relationships of specific processes or phenomena in a certain discipline. Social research: Babbie (2021) defines social research as a vehicle for exploring social issues, to explain and provide reasons for phenomena in terms of causal relationships. Social research is also conducted to describe the state of social affairs. Conceptualisation: Conceptualisation is a mental process in which vague and imprecise notions or concepts are made more specific and precise. In other words, it is a process whereby we specify what we mean when we use certain concepts in research (Babbie, 2021; Creswell, 2014). 2  Learning unit 2 | RSC2601 Theory and Conceptualisation in Social Science Research Activity 1 Define the concepts below in your own words: Theory Social research Conceptualisation 4. WHAT IS THEORY? The word “theory” is often used in everyday conversation. Someone may say that they have a theory on why something occurred. For example, one may argue that poverty in South Africa causes crime. Used in this way, the theory implies a possible explanation. After hearing the theory, someone else may argue that it is only a theory. Here, theory is equated to speculation. The person may argue that evidence or “facts” are needed to support the assertion. We can probably list several other ways in which the notion theory is used in everyday conversation. These competing and contradictory notions of theory suggest that the word is being used carelessly. Social scientists have, despite their differences, a more systematic and precise definition of what they mean when they use the word “theory”. Theory, based on reasoning, provides an interpretation of the facts collected. It tells us why and how particular phenomena occur. Babbie (2021:43) defines a theory as “a systematic explanation for the observations that relate to a particular aspect of life: juvenile delinquency, for example, or perhaps social stratification or political revolution”. Furthermore, Babbie (2021) teaches us that theories comprise sets of statements that are interrelated to provide a reasonable explanation for some aspect of social life. In other words, theory helps us understand causal relationships between related phenomena and enables a focused and deeper understanding of complex phenomena (Du-Plooy Cilliers, Davis & Bezuidenhout, 2015). For example, Erwin Goffman’s (1963) stigma theory posits that people are stigmatised because they possess attributes that are different from members in a particular space. Goffman (1963) refers to these attributes as stigma, because they are discrediting to the individual possessing them. Gay people, for instance, are stigmatised because their sexual identities do not conform to the gender-normative expectations of society. As such, society’s perceptions of their sexual identities inform the stigma and discrimination that they may encounter in particular spaces. In terms of a causal relationship, negative perceptions of gay identities lead to discrimination and homophobia. We, therefore, define theory as a conceptual framework that provides an explanation of certain occurrences or phenomena. But, what do we mean by a conceptual framework? Theories consist of logically interconnected propositions. Propositions are generalised abstractions about social reality; they are statements about the state of the world, supported by evidence (facts). Provided that these propositions are logically organised 3  Learning unit 2 | RSC2601 Theory and Conceptualisation in Social Science Research into a coherent whole, these interconnected propositions can provide an explanation. Theory prevents fragmentation of knowledge by ordering and, at least, identifying a clearly defined relationship between phenomena (Babbie 2021; Du Plooy-Cilliers et al. 2015). We can make this more transparent by providing you with an example. One of the most well-known theories in psychology is the frustration-aggression hypothesis, first formulated by John Dollard and his colleagues, in 1939. It provides an explanation of aggressive behaviour with reference to the experience of having one’s goals frustrated. The theory consists of the following propositions: a. People are motivated by goals. b. Reaching those goals provides a pleasurable release of energy. c. Being frustrated in reaching those goals leads to the build-up of energy. d. Aggressive behaviour leads to a release of the pent-up energy. e. Frustration, therefore, leads to the occurrence of aggression as a way of releasing pent-up energy. As you can see by reading these propositions, we have organised them into a logical sequence, so that one proposition leads to another. Connected together, these propositions can explain aggressive behaviour, which turns it into a theory of aggressive behaviour. Theory provides our inquiry with a focus, by suggesting what evidence we need. Since this evidence is specified, the theory provides a sifting mechanism, making the evidence generated by research more manageable and thus keeping us from drowning under too much information. Theory also potentially yields new insight, by organising evidence in a new and different way. Sets of interrelated propositions can be logically rearranged; we can even make connections between phenomena that were previously not connected and thought to be independent of each other. It is precisely when theory gives new explanations, supported by evidence that we learn from it and uncover new dimensions of and patterns in social reality. W O’Brien, cited in Gilbert (1993:1), aptly summarises the role of theory in research: The role of theory is precisely to make things that were hidden visible, to define some patterns and give some meaning to the sorts of observations that social researchers continually make when investigating society. Seeing the world in different ways is the essential and fundamental role of social research, and the ability to see these differences and to make sense of the different points of view that a researcher can take is the basic contribution that theory makes to the research process. In effect, theory provides research with “scaffolding” by organising and generating new ideas. 4  Learning unit 2 | RSC2601 Theory and Conceptualisation in Social Science Research A theory provides an explanation for our questions: theory asks “why” and “how”. We have argued that theories enable us to make sense of the information we collect in research. Theories also generate particular lines of enquiry. There is, for instance, a debate about whether we should conceptualise unemployment within South Africa as class-based, race- based or a combination of both. Such a debate highlights one of the most important contributions of theory: it can provide us with a deeper understanding of what is at stake in political and social conflicts that have a real existence. 4.1 Theory as a conceptual framework Learning concepts and theory is similar to learning a language. Using this analogy, theory is the language through which social scientists speak to each other. Just as languages are constituted by their vocabulary (words), theories are constituted through concepts and, just as there are many languages in the world, so there are many theories in social sciences. Concepts are the basic components of every theory. Concepts vary in terms of their complexity. Consider “poverty” and “alienation”. We all have some sense of what poverty is. However, the meaning of the concept “alienation” will be less clear to us and, even when the meaning of concepts appears quite obvious, researchers often need to clarify it. Crow, in Allen and Thomas (1992), indicates that poverty can be defined as a situation where people’s existence is threatened. Chronic hunger is one dimension of poverty. However, poverty can also be defined as a situation where the means at the disposal of people are below the prevailing social standards in society. The first definition refers to absolute poverty, and the second one to relative poverty. It is important to remember that a concept is an abstract idea and not the phenomenon itself. As a result, there is a potential margin of error in our characterisation and observation of the phenomena we study. Terminology that is developed in social sciences is often also used in everyday conversation. Du Plooy-Cilliers et al. (2015) indicate that certain concepts that were used in previous research become popular cultural terms, which may be used in everyday language. As an example, the term “ego” originates from Sigmund Freud’s theory of the human psyche, but it has become popular and is often used in everyday interactions. As such, people take a range of concepts from various theories and use these concepts, often incorrectly, in their daily conversations. The way the term “ego” is used in everyday conversations is often far removed from the original definition of the concept used by Freud. This can lead to confusion about the meaning of such concepts. Hence, it is imperative in a research study to describe the exact theoretical meaning of a concept. Social 5  Learning unit 2 | RSC2601 Theory and Conceptualisation in Social Science Research scientists may also borrow terminology used by people in their everyday language. Social scientists deal with phenomena people come across every day. Consequently, social scientists borrow terminology from everyday language (e.g. “group” or “family”). In these cases, social scientists often make the definitions of these words more precise. Concepts give researchers and theorists a shorthand language through which they can communicate with each other. It is, therefore, essential that researchers are clear about the meaning of the concepts used if they are to understand the work of other researchers and theorists. Although social scientists are more systematic, rigorous and cautious in their definition and use of concepts, they are still interested in the way these concepts are used in everyday life. Du Plooy-Cilliers et al. (2015: 42) explain that “by conceptualising the theoretical aspects of a study, we define concepts in terms of their theoretical meaning, to help us organise our thoughts and hence also our studies”. As such, conceptual analysis is absolutely\necessary for any theory. To recap: concepts identify and describe phenomena. Concepts are, therefore, the starting point of theorising. New concepts, introduced by theory, ideally open up new avenues to explore. Intersectionality, a concept that was coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw (1991), despite its critiques, continues to have an enormous impact in the social sciences, particularly when it comes to understanding various forms of discrimination, including gender and sexuality discrimination. The concepts help us understand how multiple forms of discrimination may lead to the oppression of certain people in society. For example, black unemployed women in South Africa may be oppressed based on their intersecting gender, race and class. As such, they do not only encounter a single issue of gender discrimination, but multiple intersecting discriminations, including racial and class discrimination. Thus, intersectionality helps us understand how gender, class and racial identities intersect in ways that perpetuate multiple forms of discrimination. The concept sensitises researchers to another realm of social reality that otherwise would not be explored if the concept was not coined. However, description and identification are not the same as explanation. Concepts are related to each other. Together, these clusters of concepts “build the sentences” of theory. We have pointed out that theorists use reasoning to relate phenomena to each other systematically. In each case, a particular set of concepts is associated with a specific theory. Can you think of any examples in one of the academic disciplines you are studying? For instance, gender theory uses concepts such as gender normativity, heteronormativity, patriarchy, masculinity, femininity, heterosexuality and homosexuality to describe the gender relations between men and women in various contexts of society. In contrast, Marxist theorists use concepts such as class, working class, bourgeoisie, 6  Learning unit 2 | RSC2601 Theory and Conceptualisation in Social Science Research exploitation, production, capitalism, economic surplus and periphery to describe economic inequality in society. At least some of the concepts used and defined are unique to the particular theory. 4.2 Scope and level of abstraction of theory The scope of a theory refers to how much it explains or how many different contexts the theory can explain. For example, the frustration-aggression hypothesis can be applied to a large number of contexts. It can be applied to explain violence in the following instances: On the sports field and among spectators (the members and supporters of the losing team are more likely to be aggressive, because they are frustrated in their aim to win the game) Violence on the playground and among siblings (when children are frustrated in their aim to play with a particular toy, they are more likely to hit out at whoever monopolises that toy) Political violence (poor people are frustrated in their aim of looking after themselves and their families and, therefore, resort to violent political action) Criminal violence (unemployed youth may be frustrated with unemployment and resort to robbery, which is a violent crime as a means to make money) The scope of a theory is linked to the level of abstraction achieved by the concepts in the theory (the building blocks of the theory). The higher the level of abstraction, the more the theory can be generalised and wider its applicability. The opposite of abstract is concrete. The difference between abstract and concrete concepts can be compared to a view of a town from 10 kilometres in the sky and one that is seen up close. Abstract concepts allow us to get the big picture, but do not show much detail, whereas concrete concepts present the close-up view and allow us to focus on specific cases. “Humanity” is an abstract concept, because it refers to all of the people in the world, viewed as a general category; whereas, “Jim the plumber, whom you call to fix your blocked drain” is a concrete concept. The scope of a theory is not limited to the number of contexts explained. The “spread” of phenomena accounted for is also crucial. We pointed out that linking phenomena previously assumed unrelated and independent of each other is one of the contributions of theory. Logical reasoning plays a crucial role in uncovering dimensions of and patterns in social reality that we were previously unaware of. The scope of a theory is reflected in the forms of units or situations that the theory applies to. For instance, Stevens, cited in Sapsford et al. (1998:58), argues that, whereas attribution theory has a restricted range, psychoanalysis and social 7  Learning unit 2 | RSC2601 Theory and Conceptualisation in Social Science Research constructionism “offer principles applicable to human behaviour of almost any kind”. When considering the scope of a theory in terms of generalisability, we can distinguish between empirical generalisation, middle-range theory and theoretical frameworks. Empirical generalisations classify, summarise and organise observations. This type of generalisation is the first step towards abstraction but remains close to the concrete information the researcher has collected. The generalisability of the relationship proposed between phenomena is limited. Middle-range theory begins to organise empirical observations in a way that explains the relationships between them in more general terms. Theoretical perspectives give an overall explanation; this means that a particular study only provides partial evidence to support or question some of that perspective’s propositions (Source: Creswell, 2009; Du Plooy- Cilliers, 2015; Babbie, 2021). Do all researchers strive to obtain abstract and generalisable propositions? No, however, various social scientists argue that there is merit in attempting to provide an overall theoretical perspective, because this allows us to avoid the fragmentation of our understanding into multiple theories that are not related. 4.3 Reconsidering the relationship between theory and research When we discussed theory as a conceptual framework, we referred to the fact that theory provides researchers with scaffolding by specifying key concepts that enable them to reflect on the essential characteristics of the phenomena they study. In fact, it is naive to imagine research without some theoretical orientation. Thus, it is clear that theory plays a pervasive role in research. However, the relationship between the two is reciprocal: empirical studies are based on theory, and theories, in turn, are based on empirical studies. Let us consider this relationship: Deduction: going from the general to the specific; using general principles to suggest specific outcomes. Induction: using several specific observations to formulate general principles Babbie (2021) identifies deduction and induction as the two processes of reasoning that are used to develop theories. Deduction involves the process of testing general ideas (theory). This is done by finding out whether abstract, logical relationships apply to specific, concrete contexts. During the process of deduction, general ideas are linked to empirical evidence. In contrast, induction involves 8  Learning unit 2 | RSC2601 Theory and Conceptualisation in Social Science Research using specific and concrete observations to develop abstract, logical relationships between phenomena. Induction implies the process of building theory. In the case of induction, the researcher develops new concepts and specifies the relationships between them on the basis of the evidence collected. The evidence is generalised during this process. An example of induction is when I conclude that I am not good at ballroom dancing - since I continually step on the toes of my partner, making a fool of myself time after time. In this case, I connect several observations of the same kind of thing (my experiences of ballroom dancing) into a general statement that applies to all cases of the same thing (I am useless at ballroom dancing). Deduction is the opposite of induction. Here we start with a general statement applying to all the cases of the same thing and apply it to a specific case. For example, when I conclude that Venus (specific case) must revolve around the sun, because Venus is a planet, and all planets revolve around the sun (general statement), I am busy with deduction. Social science research goes beyond the role of verifying and testing theory. Depending on the evidence collected, general ideas can be confirmed, refined and even reformulated. New evidence generated by research can also lead to the development of new theories or refinement of older theories. 4.4 Concluding remarks on theory and research Our discussion illustrates some general features of the theory. Let us sum them up. Theory explains actual situations in social reality, not imaginary ones. Theory is a way of systematically thinking about the phenomena we observe or experience. A theory provides an indication of what we can logically expect in particular cases. Theory also provides a framework for interpreting and organising the information we have collected. But, if a theory is to do all this, it needs to be empirically testable. This empirical testability is the crucial feature that distinguishes theory from other forms of explanation. Through research, we should be able to collect evidence that either supports or questions a particular theory. We evaluate theory through evidence and reason. Theory deductively guides research, while the information obtained through research inductively builds theory. As such, theory and research are inseparable and cannot be treated as separate entities. Activity 2 After reading this section answer the following questions. 1. In your own words, explain what a theory is. 2. Using examples, explain why theory is necessary for social science research. 9  Learning unit 2 | RSC2601 Theory and Conceptualisation in Social Science Research 3. Choose a theory in your discipline and identify key concepts for the theory. 4. Using examples, provide a comparison of deduction and induction and explain how they are used in the development of theories. 5. Identify a popular theory in your discipline and explain its scope. 5. THE CONCEPTUAL GROUNDING OF RESEARCH The first step in the research is obviously to decide on a topic to research. Researchers are concerned with discovering new knowledge. Du Plooy-Cilliers et al. (2015) explain that social science research starts with identifying a problem that needs to be solved. We learn from Zain et al. (2010) that research studies are conducted because there is uncertainty about a specific phenomenon that has or has not yet occurred. As such, research is conducted to address this uncertainty. Social scientists are aware of the gaps they have in their knowledge of a particular topic, based on their review of the literature. They read existing research to see what is known and what still needs to be investigated. Also, social scientists are sometimes confronted by contradictory research findings or events that challenge existing explanations; these are both things that obviously require further research. An event that they experience or encounter through the media may spark a researcher’s interest in a certain topic. Choosing a research topic is not a decision that is made in a vacuum. Both the researcher and the context in which research is taking place have an impact on each other. Often, a topic is selected because a researcher is personally interested in finding out more about it (as we have indicated above). Zain et al. (2010) argue that personal values and interests often inform a researcher’s choice of research topic. These personal interests are necessary, since they ensure that the researcher will have the commitment and motivation to complete the project. Even positivist social scientists acknowledge the role of these influences at the initial stage of research. There are two other factors that influence the choice of a research topic: the social and scientific significance of the research topic. The social significance of the research is linked to its practical relevance. Research opportunities often arise out of pressing social issues. In this respect, the research should help to solve a specific problem. If this research is commissioned and funded by an agency or organisation that is dealing with the problem, it is often linked to policy objectives and the resolution of a problem. Can you think of any examples? Research is not only conducted to solve practical problems. Its scientific or academic significance is also important. The long-term contribution that research can make to the development of theories gives research academic significance. Research that is 10  Learning unit 2 | RSC2601 Theory and Conceptualisation in Social Science Research scientifically significant is conducted to create and develop knowledge in a certain field, regardless of its immediate practical usefulness. To summarise, there are three broad factors that influence the choice of a research topic: personal interest; the need to solve a particular problem; and the need to develop theories. The fact that a researcher is interested in a particular topic is seldom sufficient justification for the research. Any research undertaken must have practical relevance (i.e., have social significance) and/ or contribute to developing theories (i.e., have scientific significance). The presence of these three factors (researcher’s interest, social and scientific significance) will ensure that our research has some relevance on a practical and/or a theoretical level and will prevent us from choosing a trivial topic. Activity 3 Consider the research topics suggested by the following questions. Indicate whether the main objective of the proposed topic is problem-based or theory- based. 1. What is the extent of gender-based violence in Johannesburg, South Africa?’ 2. Does giving encouraging feedback improve students’ achievements? 3. Why do people conform to gender norms? 4. Should we treat others the way we would like to be treated? 6. CONDUCTING A LITERATURE REVIEW Identifying a topic or an area of interest is only the beginning. In order to narrow a topic into a researchable question is imperative to examine what previous research has found about the topic. Conducting a literature review is an important part of the research process. In the early stages of the research, the researcher must search for literature that relates to the topic they seek to explore. However, this is not an easy task, because searching for literature requires a skill. As such, it is important that the researcher is familiar with databases where they can access reliable academic sources, such as published journal articles and books. Du Plooy-Cilliers et al. (2015) argue that conducting a proper literature review may take time, because the researcher has to read widely and extensively, to get an in-depth understanding of what has been said about the topic they want to research. However, taking the time to gather information, relevant to the research topic, will provide a platform for the researcher to identify gaps and formulate the research questions and problem statement more clearly. Read the excerpt below from article by Bayane (2021), in Community, Work and Family, entitled “‘Sister-Madam’: Family members navigating hiring of relatives as domestic 11  Learning unit 2 | RSC2601 Theory and Conceptualisation in Social Science Research workers in Nkowankowa, Limpopo”. It is an example of a literature review. This article deals with the experiences of family members, who hire their relatives as domestic workers. The research question that the study sought to answer is: How do black women, hiring relatives as domestic workers, navigate work and family relations in family domestic work in Nkowankowa, Limpopo? ‘Sister-Madam’: family members navigating hiring of relatives as domestic workers in Nkowankowa, Limpopo P Bayane Since the seminal work of Cock (1989), domestic work has gained scholarly attention in South Africa, with most studies helping to give insight into the evolution of the domestic work sector, transitions into a sector dominated by black women, and the challenges experienced (Ally, 2009; Cock, 1989; Fish, 2006; Ginsburg, 2000; Grant, 1997; King, 2007). The domestic work sector in South Africa is traced back to colonialism and remnants of the practices of apartheid, in that it was dominated by non-related black women working as domestic workers. According to Cock (1989), domestic work during the colonial and apartheid era in South Africa, was associated with challenges such as poor working conditions. Cock (1989) further stipulates that various challenges within the domestic work sector were facilitated by the sector not being regulated by the Department of Labour. However, the end of apartheid has resulted in the process of regulating the domestic work sector in South Africa (Ally, 2009). The regulation of the domestic work sector occurred thro