Unit 5 Summary.docx

Unit 5 Summary The speaker is discussing the importance of research methods in sociology, emphasizing their value in assessing the legitimacy of various studies. They highlight the need to consider factors such as objectivity, funding sources, and sample size when evaluating research. The speaker then introduces the scientific approach, describing it as a methodology for collecting knowledge. This process, applicable across various disciplines, produces content and contributes to our understanding of the world. The concept of epistemology, or the study of knowledge, is introduced. The speaker uses the example of our understanding of the Earth’s shape to illustrate how our knowledge is often based on trusted authorities rather than personal experience. They also discuss the idea that kindness makes a person more likable, suggesting that this knowledge comes from personal experience and teachings from significant figures in our lives. Overall, the speaker is exploring how we acquire and validate knowledge, both through scientific research and our lived experiences. Ways of Knowing The speaker discusses various ways of acquiring knowledge: Intuition: This is an immediate understanding based on feelings and unknown inner sources. An example given is sensing something is wrong with a person you know well, based on their behavior or appearance. Common Sense: These are opinions that seem obviously correct and are widely held. However, the speaker notes that common sense can sometimes be contradictory or not as straightforward as it seems. Tradition: Knowledge that is passed down from one generation to the next. The speaker discusses how traditional beliefs, such as the idea that women are more natural parents than men, can be challenged by societal changes and new observations. Authority: Knowledge that comes from those who are defined as qualified to produce it. The speaker notes that we often trust information from authorities, such as teachers or doctors, even if we don’t have personal experience or observation to back it up. Revelation (Mystical): This refers to knowledge gained through supernatural or spiritual insights, often from religious texts or spiritual leaders. It’s a way of knowing that relies on faith and spiritual authority. Rationality: This is knowledge derived from basic logic and reasoning. However, the speaker notes that rationality alone can sometimes lead to inaccurate conclusions, as our personal experiences and observations may not always align with the broader truth. Science: This approach combines logic with empirical observation. Scientific knowledge must be logically valid and empirically verified. The speaker emphasizes the importance of the scientific process being public and self-correcting, with peers reviewing and challenging each other’s work. This communal aspect of science helps to ensure objectivity and accuracy. The speaker concludes by revisiting the concept of inter-subjectivity, acknowledging that while we are all subjective beings, the scientific approach helps us strive for objectivity. They also remind us that personal observations are not always accurate, highlighting the importance of honesty in scientific work. Strengths and Limitations of the Scientific Method The speaker emphasizes that among the various ways of knowing, only science is routinely and systematically tested, which has led to its significant influence in our culture. Despite its rigorous and intentional process, science is not infallible, as it is conducted by humans who can make mistakes. Moreover, science has its limitations. It cannot address metaphysical questions like life after death, as these cannot be empirically observed or tested. Therefore, such questions fall outside the scope of scientific inquiry. The speaker also hints at the existence of common errors in personal human inquiry, suggesting the need for critical thinking and careful examination in our pursuit of knowledge. The speaker outlines common errors in personal human inquiry: Inaccurate Observation: People may remember the same event differently. Over time, our memories can shift and distort, leading to inaccurate recollections. Overgeneralization: The speaker used the example of observing 40 pregnant women and generalizing those observations to all pregnant women. This is an error because the sample size is too small to represent the millions of pregnant women in different cultures. Selective Observation: We tend to accept facts that support our beliefs and ignore those that challenge them. For instance, we might avoid reading or hearing about things that contradict our existing views. Fabricated Information: Sometimes, people make up information. Illogical Reasoning: The speaker used the example of a poker player who has lost several rounds and decides to play one more round, believing they are bound to win. This is illogical reasoning because past losses do not increase the chances of winning in the future. Ego Involvement: Our ego can skew our understanding and make us resistant to changing our views. For instance, if we’ve publicly committed to a position, we might be reluctant to change it even when presented with new information. Premature Closure of Inquiry: We may stop seeking new information too soon, leading to incomplete understanding. For example, we might decide we’ve read enough about a topic and don’t want any more new information. Mystification: Using mystical or spiritual experiences as justification for our beliefs can lead to errors. For instance, someone might justify a decision by saying something deep inside moved them to make that choice, or that the decision came to them in a dream. These justifications can’t be challenged by others, which can lead to errors. These errors highlight the importance of critical thinking and open-mindedness in our pursuit of knowledge. Assumptions about Science The speaker outlines the following assumptions of science as an approach to gathering knowledge: Orderliness of Nature: Science assumes that nature follows an orderly pattern. For example, an apple will always fall downwards due to gravity. Knowability of Nature: Science operates on the belief that we can study, understand, and gain knowledge about nature. Superiority of Knowledge: Science assumes that knowledge is always superior to ignorance. However, the speaker notes that this assumption can be challenged, citing the regret expressed by Oppenheimer, the developer of the atomic bomb. Natural Causes: Science assumes that natural phenomena have natural causes. This assumption limits science to studying the physical world and excludes metaphysical concepts like the afterlife. Nothing is Self-Evident: Science operates on the principle that nothing is self-evident. Even if something seems logical or common sense, it still needs to be empirically tested. Empirical Knowledge: Science assumes that knowledge is derived from the acquisition of experience. This involves setting up studies and measuring things to gain knowledge. These assumptions guide the scientific approach to understanding the world around us. What Are the Aims of Social Science? The speaker outlines a process of inquiry, starting with an exploration of a question or observation. For instance, they start with the observation that men seem to be more competitive than women. To get a good description of this observation, they suggest using surveys, focus groups, and individual interviews. The data gathered reveals that both men and women are competitive, but in different areas. Men are more competitive in sports, while women are more competitive about appearance. However, these trends are changing, with women becoming more competitive in traditionally male-dominated areas, and men becoming more competitive in areas related to appearance. The speaker then interprets these observations, theorizing that the capitalist market, having exhausted the pressures it can put on women to change their appearance, has now turned its attention to men. Based on this interpretation, the speaker predicts that men will start to feel the need to surgically alter their bodies, just as women have been pressured to do. Through this process, the speaker concludes that the initial statement - that men are more competitive than women - is more nuanced and complex than it appears. This process of questioning, gathering data, interpreting observations, and making predictions leads to a greater understanding of the human experience. The Nature of Causation The speaker is discussing the nature of causation in the context of research methods. They explain that while natural sciences are deterministic (meaning the same conditions will always produce the same results), this is not the case when studying humans. Human behavior can change and adapt, leading to different results even under the same conditions. Therefore, sociology is described as a probabilistic science. It aims to isolate the most important factors that can provide a partial, but hopefully significant, explanation of a social phenomenon or the behavior of a large group of people. This approach acknowledges the complexity and variability of human behavior, making it a more realistic method for studying humans compared to deterministic sciences. Types of Causes The speaker discusses different types of causes or factors: Contributing Factors: These are elements that can influence an outcome but are not essential for it to occur. In the context of weight gain, examples include lack of exercise, poor diet, binge eating, genetics, and certain diseases. Necessary Factors: These are elements that must be present for an outcome to occur. In the case of weight gain, consuming food (or calories) is a necessary factor. Sufficient Factors: These are elements that, if present, guarantee the outcome. The speaker notes that in the context of weight gain, there is no sufficient factor because people’s responses to calorie intake vary. In social sciences, it’s rare to find a sufficient cause for a social phenomenon. Instead, multiple contributing factors often collectively influence the outcome. Criteria for Causality The speaker discusses the criteria for establishing causation: Correct Time Sequence: The cause must occur before the effect. For example, fires occur before fire trucks arrive, not the other way around. Presence of Correlation: There must be a relationship between the two variables. When one variable changes, the other does too. Absence of a Third Variable: The correlation between the two variables should not be explainable by a third variable. For instance, the correlation between ice cream sales and drownings can be explained by a third variable, temperature, making ice cream sales a spurious or false variable. The speaker uses these criteria to analyze the statement “overcrowding causes delinquency,” concluding that poverty, a third variable, is the actual cause of both overcrowding and delinquency. Thus, overcrowding is identified as a spurious variable in this context. The speaker emphasizes the complexity of research studies and the importance of identifying spurious variables. Recognizing a spurious variable can lead to a more accurate understanding of the phenomenon being studied. The speaker also highlights the value of peer review in research, as peers can help identify spurious variables and assess the meaningfulness of the variables used in a study. This collaborative process can enhance the understanding of causality in a social phenomenon. The Principles of Science The text discusses the principles of science in the context of research methods, focusing on the concept of variables. Variables are characteristics of objects, people, or groups that can be measured. Examples given include studying habits of first-year university students and patterns among smokers. Variables are categorized into two types: Dependent Variable: This is the variable that the researcher wants to explain. For example, the habits of first-year university students or lung cancer rates. Independent Variable: This is the variable that causes change in the dependent variable. For example, study methods (memorizing, reading over, using cue cards, etc.) or smoking status (smoker vs. non-smoker). The independent variables cause changes in the dependent variable, influencing the results of the research. For instance, being a smoker or a non-smoker can change the rates and onset age of lung cancer. These variables can also be compared based on demographics like age, gender, socioeconomic status, and ethnicity. Further, the speaker discusses several key aspects of conducting research: Control Group: In a study comparing smokers and non-smokers, the control group would exclude individuals with a family history of cancer and those exposed to secondhand smoke. This is to ensure that the study focuses solely on the effects of smoking versus non-smoking on lung cancer rates. This is because we are comparing the nonsmokers to the smokers. Hypothesis: The speaker hypothesizes that people who smoke have higher rates of lung cancer and that the more a person smokes, the greater their rate of lung cancer will be. The hypothesis guides the design and execution of the study. Measurement: The results of a study heavily rely on the quality of measurement. Two important aspects are validity and accuracy. Validity: This refers to the extent to which a study or research instrument is measuring what it’s supposed to measure. For instance, when studying religiosity, it’s important to ensure that the measures used (such as frequency of attending religious services or practicing religious rituals at home) accurately reflect the concept of religiosity. Reliability: This refers to the extent to which a study or research instrument yields consistent results. If a study produces certain results, but other studies on the same topic produce different results, the original study may not be reliable. The speaker uses the analogy of hitting a bull’s eye to illustrate these concepts. A study that consistently hits the same spot (even if it’s not the bull’s eye) is reliable but not valid. The results may have been carefully collected but methodology itself is flawed. A study that hits all over the target is neither reliable nor valid. A study that consistently hits the bull’s eye is both reliable and valid. Both validity and reliability are crucial for ensuring the accuracy and usefulness of social scientific research. The speaker discusses the importance of sampling in research. Sampling involves selecting a small number of cases from a larger group to make inferences about the entire group. The key is to ensure that the sample is representative of the whole group. For instance, if you want to understand the opinion of all Canadians on a particular issue, you need to select a sample that accurately represents all Canadians. Sampling at a local library, a specific city corner, or a medical clinic may not provide a representative sample as it might exclude certain demographics. Nonprobability sampling is a method where there’s no way of specifying the probability of the unit being selected. It’s often used for convenience and cost-effectiveness, as it doesn’t require accessing an entire population list. Examples include standing outside a library or using quarter samples, snowball samples, or purposeful sampling. However, the results from nonprobability sampling can only be generalized to a certain extent, and this depends on the study and the sampling design. On the other hand, probability sampling involves taking a random sample from the entire population, which allows for broader generalization of the results. This requires access to all possible units. Techniques include using a computer program to draw a random sample or using a table of random numbers. The text uses the example of wanting to survey University of Manitoba students. Simply asking students in one’s own classes or those in the library wouldn’t be representative of the entire student body. Instead, the author suggests obtaining a list of all students and sending a survey to every fifth student. This method is entirely randomized, eliminating conscious or unconscious bias, and allows the results to be generalized to all University of Manitoba students. Probability sampling is necessary for representation and helps estimate the accuracy and representativeness of the sample. It also avoids conscious or unconscious bias from the researcher. Types of probability sampling include simple random sampling, systematic sampling, stratified random sampling, and cluster random sampling. In both cases, transparency about the sampling method used is crucial, and researchers must always consider who they can generalize their results to and how broadly they can do so. Data Collection The text discusses experimental methods as a way of data collection, using the example of studying the effects of media violence on children. In an experimental method, the independent variable is manipulated, which is different from surveys or field research. The classic experimental design involves both an experimental group and a control group. In this case, children of both genders are divided into these two groups. A pretest is conducted on both groups, involving interviews with the child, their teacher, and their parents to assess the child’s initial aggression level. After the pretest, the children in the experimental group watch a violent video, while the control group does not. Following this, a post-test is conducted where the children play a game of floor hockey, and their aggression levels are observed and measured. The pretest and post-test aggression levels are then compared for both groups. The aim is to see if watching a violent video affects the aggression levels of the children in the experimental group. The importance of the control group is emphasized, as it helps ensure that the results are due to the manipulated variable (watching a violent video) and not other factors. If the control group’s aggression levels remain the same but the experimental group’s levels increase, it suggests a cause-and-effect relationship between watching violent videos and increased aggression. However, the text notes that this experiment only measures immediate effects and cannot be generalized to long-term effects. It’s crucial to qualify the results and be transparent about what the experiment measures. The key point is that the experimental method allows for the manipulation of the independent variable (exposure to violent media in this case) and comparison of outcomes between the experimental and control groups. This design helps to establish cause-and-effect relationships. The text discusses various survey methods used in social science research, which include questionnaires, telephone interviews, in-person interviews, and focus groups. Different types of questions are used in these surveys: Fixed, Forced, or Closed Questions: These questions provide specific categories for respondents to choose from. For example, asking “What province do you live in?” only allows responses from people living in Canada. Rating Questions: These questions ask respondents to rate their agreement with a statement. For example, “Adults don’t drive as well as teenagers,” with response options ranging from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree.” Ranking Questions: These questions ask respondents to rank a list of options in order of preference. For example, ranking food types like meats, pastas, bread, and sweets from most to least favorite. Both rating and ranking questions are closed questions, as they limit what a participant can put down. Semantic Differential Questions: These questions ask respondents to rate something on a scale. For example, rating enjoyment of a musical selection on a scale from 0 (neutral) to 2 (dislike). Open Questions: These questions allow respondents to answer freely. For example, “What’s your favorite food?” permits any answer. Each type of question serves a different purpose and can provide unique insights into the research topic. The text emphasizes the importance of avoiding bias in constructing survey questions. It outlines several types of questions that can introduce bias: Negative Questions: These can create confusion due to double negatives. For example, “Canada should not support United Nations peacekeeping missions, do you agree or disagree?” is less clear than “Canada should support United Nations peacekeeping missions, do you agree or disagree?” Leading or Loaded Questions: These questions are phrased in a way that suggests a certain answer is expected, such as “Do you agree that the prime minister of Canada should increase family tax payments so that little children do not go to bed hungry?” Threatening Questions: These questions ask about potentially incriminating behavior and may not elicit honest responses. Examples include “Have you ever told a lie?” or “Have you ever done any shoplifting?” Double-Barreled Questions: These questions contain two different questions in one, making it difficult for respondents to answer if they agree with one part but disagree with another. For example, “Canada should spend less money on welfare programming and more money on education.” Avoiding these types of questions can help ensure that survey results are accurate and representative of respondents’ true opinions and experiences. The text discusses field research, a type of qualitative research that involves observing life in its natural habitat. Unlike quantitative research, which involves systematic questioning and manipulation of variables, field research does not manipulate anything and is not systematic in the same way. In field research, the focus is on generating descriptions and interpretations by observing what’s happening in a natural environment. The term “natural” here does not refer to a forest or nature, but rather to the typical environment of the subject being studied. For example, when studying street gangs, the “natural habitat” would be the environments where these gangs typically operate. The text also emphasizes that qualitative and quantitative research methods are complementary, like yin and yang, each offering unique insights and fitting together to provide a comprehensive understanding of the research topic. Roles of the Observer The text outlines four roles an observer can take in field research: Complete Participant: The observer fully integrates into the group being studied, such as a street gang, and their identity as a researcher is concealed. This role poses challenges in notetaking and raises ethical questions about privacy and deception. Participant as Observer: The observer participates in the group’s activities, but their identity as a researcher is known to the group. This role offers more transparency. Observer Only: The observer does not participate in the group’s activities but observes from the sidelines. The group is aware of the observer’s research role. Undisclosed Observer: The observer watches the group without their knowledge, neither participating in the group’s activities nor revealing their presence or research role. Each role has its own advantages and challenges, and the choice of role can significantly impact the research outcomes. Finally, to conclude: Qualitative and quantitative research: These are two different methods of collecting and analyzing data in the social sciences. Complementary approaches: Both methods can be used together to generate rich and diverse insights from experiments, surveys, and field research. Disciplinary preferences: Anthropology tends to favor qualitative research, while sociology has been incorporating more qualitative research in recent years.

Unit 5 Summary.docx

Related

Transcript

Upgrade to continue