URBS_260___Final_Exam_Review.docx.pdf
Transcript
URBS 260: Final Exam Review SRM - CHAPTER 1 (General Research Orientations) Theory It is an explanation of observed regularities or patterns. Purpose: To assess the adequacy of a particular urban social theory To gather information to create urban social theory To understand pressing ur...
URBS 260: Final Exam Review SRM - CHAPTER 1 (General Research Orientations) Theory It is an explanation of observed regularities or patterns. Purpose: To assess the adequacy of a particular urban social theory To gather information to create urban social theory To understand pressing urban social problems To explore personal experiences Theory and Research FORMATION OF THEORY: Predetermined theory that brings one to look at social interaction through a particular framework. Observation of social interaction without a specific theoretical base. Components of a Theory Definitions Descriptions of the phenomena of interest Relational Statements These can be deterministic or probabilistic Types of Theories THEORIES OF THE MIDDLE RANGE Limited in scope and can be tested directly E.g., Durkheim’s theory of suicide GRAND THEORIES General and abstract, cannot be tested directly E.g., structural functionalism, symbolic interactionism E.g., Smith’s Standpoint Theory The Relationship Between Theory and Research One way to conduct social scientific inquiry is through deduction. Using DEDUCTION, one begins with a theory or explanation for something, then goes out into the world and tests it. Another way to conduct inquiry is by using INDUCTION. Here one begins by gathering or examining data, and then tries to derive a theory or explanation from the data. Sometimes INDUCTIVE research is ITERATIVE: 1 The researcher goes back and forth from the data to the theory or explanation. Problem: It sometimes leads only to empirical generalization. Deriving theories or explanations from QUALITATIVE data is sometimes called GROUNDED THEORY. It is grounded because: The data has primacy over theory because the theme emerges from looking at the data after it has been collected. It asks, ‘How does this social space work?’ Or ‘What controls the formulation of our neighborhoods?’ Analyzing the data, you collect to help you formulate a theory. Examples of Urban Inductive Theory’s “What attracts people most, it would appear, is other people.” “If there’s a lesson in streetwatching it is that people do like basics – and as environments go, a street that is open to the sky and filled with people and life is a splendid place to be.” “The human backside is a dimension architects seem to have forgotten.” Epistemology Vs Ontology EPISTEMOLOGY: Concerned with what constitutes as knowledge and how knowledge may be acquired. Positivism Realism Interpretivism ONTOLOGY: What is knowing. Objectivism – reality is a set of truths that is unaffected by those studying it. Constructionism – or is it designed and thus built by those actors. 2 Epistemological Positions: POSITIVISM Empiricism: Knowledge must be based on the information gathered through the senses. A deductive approach can be used to acquire knowledge. In some instances, induction may provide knowledge or generalizations or laws from the gathering of facts. Social scientists should use the same methods of inquiry that are used in the natural sciences such that they are “Value-Free.” Relies of scientific statements, not normative statements. The former has no judgement attached. Thus, intersubjectivity (objectivity) should be possible. Epistemological Positions: INTERPRETIVISM This natural observation approach is very limited in its ability to produce social knowledge. Researchers should use inductive methods to try to grasp the subjective meanings of people’s actions. Actions should be viewed from the point of view of the social actors, i.e., the people studied. Researchers should develop an empathetic understanding of the people studied, sometimes referred to as Verstehen (Weber). Ontological Positions OBJECTIVIST: Social phenomena have a reality independent of our perceptions. Assumption/bias in research toward formal properties of social groups or interactions. Social reality is fixed; we have little or no control over it. CONSTRUCTIONIST (‘Hard’): What passes for reality is merely a set of mental constructions. Assumption/bias in research toward the changing nature of social organization. CONSTRUCTIONIST (‘Soft’): There is an objective social reality. However, many of our ideas and perceptions are false because they have been constructed to justify some form of domination rather than the objective social reality. We create our social worlds through our actions, in particular through negotiation. Orientations: Quantitative and Qualitative Research 3 QUANTITATIVE: Uses numbers and statistics in the collection and analysis of data. QUALITATIVE: Uses mainly words and other non-numeric symbols in the collection and analysis of data. Values They contribute to bias in research Choice of topic Formulation of the research questions Choice of method Formulation of research design and data collection methods Actual data collection Analysis of data Conclusions Three different positions on values in social research: 1. Research should be value-free. 2. Research cannot be value-free, but researchers should be open and explicit about their values. 3. Researchers should use their values to direct and interpret their investigations: value commitment is a good thing for researchers to have. Politics Researchers sometimes ‘take sides.’ Funding: Who gets it? Are stings attached? Research subjects/participants: Who gets access? Are strings attached? Research findings: What sorts of findings are ‘acceptable’ to those who fund or publish research? Practical Considerations The choice of research method should match the research question. 4 A research question states the purpose of the study in the form of a question. E.g., ‘Why is the consumption of alcohol legal, whereas marijuana use is illegal?’ Research questions should: Be clear Be researchable Relate to established theory and research Be linked or closely related to each other Allow the researcher to make a contribution to existing knowledge Be neither too broad nor too narrow SRM - CHAPTER 2 (Research Designs) What is a Research Design? It is a framework for the collection and analysis of data to answer research questions. It is a direction, although sometimes vague. Choice of Design The type of design chosen depends on the kind of explanation sought. For NOMOTHETIC explanations: It involves attribution of cause and effect. It is expressed in terms of general laws and principles. The three rules of CAUSATION: 1. Correlation: variable changing together in the same direction. 2. Time Order: The causing factor must increase before the dependent factor, else the interpretation is wrong. 3. Non-Spuriousness: There must not be a third factor which explains the relationship. Such explanations may be developed through particular research subjects and extrapolated to a larger population outside the study. E.g., ‘The prevalence of suicide in a particular social group is a function of the level of integration individuals typically have in the group.’ However, IDEOGRAPHIC explanations involve a rich description of a person or group. 5 An IDEOGRAPHIC explanation is not meant to apply to all persons or groups. The explanation applies to only those that were part of the study. E.g., ‘Jade became addicted to crack because she never got over her parents’ divorce, she felt she was never really accepted by her friends, and had a classmate who offered her crack,’ alongside the other details of how Jade interpreted her life. E.g., Teenage homeless often avoid shelters to keep their privacy. Criteria for Evaluating Social Research CAUSALITY in social research is directly related to variables. VARIABLES are characteristics or attributes of data that vary or change. Three criteria for measurement of variables: 1. RELIABILITY: The results remain the same each time a particular measurement technique is used on the same subject (assuming that what is being measured has not changed). The results aren’t influenced by the research, the location, the timing, etc. 2. REPLICABILITY: The results remain the same when others repeat all or part of a study. The procedures used to conduct the research are sound. 3. VALIDITY: There is integrity to the conclusions. The three measures of validity are: 1. Measurement Validity 2. Internal Validity 3. External Validity Measures of Validity 1. Measurement Validity (or construct validity): It involves the question, ‘Are you measuring what you want to measure?’ E.g., is the number of murders recorded in annual police statistics a valid indicator of murder rate? 2. Internal Validity: Concerned with the issue of whether causation has been established by a particular study. E.g., did the study establish that personal income level in Canada really is influenced by one’s level of education? Could income be influenced by something else? Two key terms used when discussing causation: Independent Variable 1. The proposed cause (e.g., ‘level of education’) 6 2. Must occur first (time order) Dependent Variable 1. The proposed effect (e.g., ‘level of income’) 2. Must occur second (time order – as a result of the specified independent variable that occurred/existed before it) 3. External Validity: Involves two primary concerns: 1. Are the findings applicable to situations outside the research environment? Naturalistic studies tend to satisfy this criterion. Ex: studies of the real-world environment, little is changed that could affect the real or natural setting. 2. Can the findings be generalized beyond the people or cases studied? Studies using representative samples tend to satisfy this criterion. Trustworthiness (Criterion for Qualitative Work) Trustworthiness includes: Credibility (Internal Validity) Believable and trustworthy Transferability (External Validity) Are the findings generalizable to other populations, settings or situations? Dependability (Reliability) Could the results be replicated in another study? Does temporal, environmental, contextual shifts matter? Confirmability (Replicability) Does the data support the findings? Does the review of data by others support the findings? SRM – CHAPTER 2B (Research Designs) Research Design Elements: Experiments True Experiments are common in psychology and organizational studies but rare in fields like sociology or political science. 1. Many variables of interest are not subject to experimental function. 2. Ethical concerns preclude performing experiments. 3. Many phenomena of interest have long-term, complex causes that cannot be simulated in experiments. 4. Even where applicable, experimental models do not get at the perceptions and feelings of research subjects. Two kinds of Experiments: 1. FIELD EXPERIMENTS are conducted in real-life surroundings. 7 2. LABORATORY EXPERIMENTS take place in artificial environments. Controls research environment. Easier to randomly assign research subjects. Therefore, enhanced internal validity. Easier to replicate. Key Concepts relevant to experiments: Experimental or Treatment group: receives a treatment or manipulation of some kind. Control Group: does not get the treatment or manipulation. Random Assignment: participants are placed in the experimental or control group using a random method. Pre-Test: measurement of the deepest variable before the experimental manipulation. Post-Test: measurement of the dependent variable after the experimental manipulation. Classic Experimental Design Independent and dependent variables are identified. The dependent variable is observed or measured (pre-test) in each of the control and treatment groups and recorded as T1 (time 1). The treatment group receives the treatment/manipulation while the control group is left alone. The dependent variable is observed or measured (post-test) in each of the control and treatment groups and recoded as occurring at T2 (time 2). Any changes in each group are noted. Ideally change will only occur in the treatment group. True experimental evidence would eliminate all other possible (rival) explanations for the change in the dependent variable in the treatment group. Most social experience involves complex issues thus, it is hoped that the control group and random distribution of subjects will increase internal validity. Research Design Elements: Threats to Internal Validity History: some event occurring after the treatment was given may have influenced the dependent variable. Testing: the pre-test may have influenced the dependent variable. 8 Instrumentation: changes in the way a test is administered may account for pretest and post-test differences. Mortality: participants leave the experiment before it is over. Maturation: participants change over time, e.g., get older, develop mentally and emotionally, etc. Selection: post-test differences between the control and experimental groups may have been caused by pre-existing differences. Research Design Elements: Threats to External Validity Interaction of selection and treatment: the findings may not be generalizable to a wide variety of people who were not in the experiment. Interaction of setting and treatment: the findings may not apply to settings and environments that differ from those of the experiment. Interaction of history and treatment: the findings may not apply to other time periods, either in the past or in the future. Interaction effect of pretesting: the findings may not apply to people who were not pretested, and few people in society are pre-tested. Reactive effects of experimental arrangements: the findings may be invalid because they were caused by subjects behaving atypically due to the fact that they were in an experimental situation. Research Design Elements: Quasi-Experiments They differ from true experiments in that internal validity is harder to establish. E.g., Natural experiments, in which naturally occurring phenomena or changes introduced by people who are not researchers result in experiment-like conditions. This occurred in the 1930s and 1940s in the prairie provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan, two provinces that were similar in many ways. Two different social movements, Social Credit and the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) came to power in Alberta and Saskatchewan respectively. Researchers could compare the effects the different movements had on their respective provinces. A drawback that researchers of the two movements had to face involved the idea that the two provinces may have been different in important ways the two movements came to power. It may have been those differences, rather than rule by two different movements, that produced the differences between the two provinces that developed later. This issue presents a threat to internal validity. 9 Research Design Elements: Cross-Sectional Design Cross-Sectional Design involves taking observations at one point in time (no before and after comparisons). They do not include a manipulation of the independent variable (no ‘treatment’ is given). Examples: questionnaires, structured interviews, structured observation. Two or more variables are measured in order to detect patterns of association. There are issues with internal validity, in particular with establishing the direction of causation E.g., a researcher may find a positive association between self-esteem and income. But does self-esteem influence the level of income, or is it the other way around? Is there reciprocal causation: self-esteem influences income and income influences self-esteem? There can also be problems with external validity. For cross-sectional studies to have external validity, it helps if some random method is used to select participants for the study. If random methods are not used, the findings may not hold for people who were not studied. One strength of the design is that is can examine the effect of variables that cannot be manipulated in experiments. These include things like age, gender, ethnicity, culture, social class, etc. Research Design Elements: Longitudinal Design Cases are examined at a particular time (TI, and again at a later time or times (T2, T3, etc.) These designs provide information about the time-order of changes in certain variables. This helps establish the direction of causation. For example, if an increase in income is observed at T1, and an increase in life satisfaction occurs at T2, that is evidence that the increase in life satisfaction was preceded by the increase in incomes, rather than the other way around. There are two basic types: 1. Panel Study: the same people, households, organizations, etc. are studied at different times. 2. Cohort Study: people sharing the same experience are studied at different times, but different people may be studied at each time. The drawbacks include: 1. Attrition over time 10 2. It may be difficult to determine when subsequent waves of the study should be conducted. 3. Panel Conditioning: people’s attitudes and behaviors may change as a result of participating in a panel. Research Design Elements: Case Studies A basic case study involves an in-depth study of a single case. A single case can be a person, family, organization, event, etc. Can involve qualitative and/or quantitative research methods. Sometimes questions arise regarding the external validity of case studies. Specifically, the findings for a particular case may not be applicable to other cases. E.g., a study of student activism at York university may not be applicable to students at other universities. However, achieving external validity is not the main reason for doing a case study. Case studies have other strengths, in particular they provide in-depth descriptions of the characteristics of a particular case that cannot be achieved using other methods. Types of Case: Critical: illustrates the conditions under which a certain hypothesis holds or does not hold. E.g., studying a person for whom certain counselling techniques are successful. Extreme (or unique): illustrates unusual cases, which help in understanding the more common ones. E.g., studying the life of a person who has been married seven times helps researchers understand more common marriage patterns. Revelatory: examines a case or context never before studied. E.g., the study of a particular historical figure may be enhanced when documents are ‘de-classified’ or enter the public domain, such as the diaries of former Prime Minister McKenzie-King. SRM – CHAPTER 3 (Research Ethics) Research Ethics Boards (REBs) All Canadian research involving humans requires REB approval. Must be obtained before people are approached to be participants. There is an appeal process. REBs are internal to the affiliated institution. Universities, colleges, government, private companies. 11 Members from different disciplines. Must have an external representative. Conflict of interest rules. Funding relationships, work with the applicant. Ethics Approval in Quantitative versus Qualitative Research Quantitative Is easier Stated hypothesis and specific plan for testing Data gathered from one person at a time Qualitative Flexibility for emerging themes means indeterminate methods. May capture data on people that would not want their activities observed. Cautious REB can restrict project, prevent funding, prevent research project. Tri-Council Policy Statement (TCPS2) Provides for variation in research methods. There are three core overlapping principles: 1. Respect for Persons 2. Concern for Welfare 3. Justice Respect for Persons Research subjects are not “objects” or resources to be used for some end. Individuals have basic human rights that include dignified treatment by researchers. The most fundamental of the three principles. Informed consent, which is free and ongoing, is necessary for the researchers and participants to act as collaborators. Participants must be advised of the risks and potential benefits of the research. Potential participants are given an information sheet and/or consent form outlining what the research is about. Information sheet outlines The research project The methods The potential risks and potential benefits of participating The names of those in charge The affiliated institution and contact information Assurances of confidentiality 12 How the data will be stored How the findings will be published A consent form is important because it mentions the ability of the participant to leave the study at any time. Prospective participant must have the ability to understand. Prospective participant must have the ability to actually consent. A person with limited ability (e.g., child, medically limited) must have an agent or guardian provide the consent. Informed consent is impractical in ethnography (participant observation) Prevents contamination of subjects Unforeseen changes in project due to emerging theme Unknown people may enter the research setting Participants with knowledge of the research Not all participants will get the same information. When participant refuses to sign forms (anonymity concern), researcher may rely on a verbal, ad hoc explanation and consent. REB approval of methodology is still required. Deception is used as a last resort. If used, deception must be used sparingly. Subjects should be debriefed about the deception. If feasible and as soon as possible Concern for Welfare Welfare in this context is concerned with the well-being of person, group, community affected by the research. Avoid harm, embarrassment, inadvertent identification. Privacy Ensure the right to privacy Confidentiality Must be maintained when there is contact between researcher and subject, even if online. Not a concern with publicly available information. In qualitative research, dealing with privacy and confidentiality issues is quite different: Pseudonyms may not be enough In-depth research, analysis, and reporting may provide enough detail that people or locations could be identified Make sure to change any identifiable information about the participant Another issue surrounding privacy and confidentiality in qualitative studies pertains to covert research: Very intrusive 13 No consent Benefits must outweigh any harm to participants Little to no concern over reactivity Permission from the participants to use the data may be sought after-thefact if they are available Researchers must ensure anonymity of the non-consenting participants Secondary participants People who enter into a research setting whose social role is not at the heart of the research (e.g., clients who appear in a study on the working conditions of prostitutes) Historically they have often missed in privacy, confidentiality, and consent concerns. Is it enough that the researcher ensures nothing is disclosed that might expose the secondary participants’ identity? Other issues Researcher may have a duty to report on certain activities observed or disclosed (e.g., child abuse, crime) Privacy and confidentiality rules are often used to set boundaries on what can be disclosed to a researcher and what will result in a report to an outside agency REB review and approval required Justice No person or group should be exploited for research (e.g., prison inmates). No person or group should be systematically excluded from the benefits. Inclusivity Usually present in social science research Normal part of establishing a representative sample group Intersubjectivity But some researchers have dealt with research subjects as “objects of study” rather than as human collaborators. Principle of no harm should be followed Less risk in social research than in medical research but it still exists (e.g., Zimbardo). In practice, potential harm should not outweigh the potential benefits Avoid research that is likely to cause harm or be disturbing. Life should not get worse because of participation in a research project. If potential harm and risks are greater than risks of everyday life, then informed consent is a minimum requirement. Ability to opt-out at anytime. Paid participation 14 May include risks beyond participants normal behaviour. May be viewed as pressure to participate or remain in a study beyond participants usual stopping point. Don’t make the research a payment for higher-than0usual level of risk. SRM – CHAPTER 4 (The Nature of Quantitative Research) Key Terms Concept: ideas or mental representations of things E.g., crime, gender, alienation, love, life, satisfaction, etc. Concepts may be independent or dependent variables. Coding: transforming a measure into numbers E.g., in measuring life satisfaction, respondents who say they are ‘very satisfied’ may be given a code of ‘1’, which is then recorded in a file. Concepts and Measurement Why measure concepts? Measurements allow a delineation of small or fine differences between people or issues we are interested in. Measurement provides a way to identify and gauge those differences with consistency. It allows you to estimate what the relationship is between concepts and the strength of that relationship. What is the correlation? Two types of definitions for a concept: 1. Nominal: describes the concept in words, much like a dictionary definition. E.g., ‘political party identification refers to the party to which people most closely associate themselves.’ 2. Operational: describes how the concept is to be measured. E.g., ‘political party identification may be measured by asking people, “Do you normally think of yourself as a supporter of the Conservatives, Liberals, New Democrats, Greens or Bloc Québécois?”’ Indicators tell us (indicate) that there may be a link and tell us (indicate) how strong that link may be. Usually, on indicator for each concept is adequate. It is advantageous to use more than on indicator of a concept (often done in survey research) because it; 15 Reduces the likelihood of misclassifying some people because the language of a question is misunderstood. Ensures the definition of the underlying concept is understood correctly. Gets access to a wider range of issues related to the concept, allows the researcher to make finer distinctions. Allows factor analysis (the process of sorting out the degree to which a particular concept is being measured and by which indicator). Reliability It refers to the stability of a measure over time, i.e., whether one would get the same result after using a measure at two different times (assuming no change in what is being measured). Stability can be measured using the test-retest method. It is extremely difficult to quantify stability over time because of the number of factors that may come into play over passage of time, including the fact the respondents took a prior or pre-test and that may influence a subsequent test. Internal reliability (or internal consistency): are multiple measures administered in one sitting consistent with each other, e.g., multiple measures of ‘life satisfaction’ on a survey. This can be measured using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient or the split-half method. These calculations are completed using statistical programs. A correlation of .8 or higher on a scale of ‘0-1’ is generally accepted as a minimum of internal reliability, although results with lower figures may still be used by some researchers. Inter-observer consistency: all observers should classify behaviour or attitudes in the same way. E.g., if two observers are recording the amount of aggression children display on a particular playground, their estimates should agree. 3 Kinds of Measurement Validity 1. Face Validity: at first glance, the measure appears to be valid. Ask for the opinion of someone with expertise in the area of study. 2. Concurrent Validity: measure correlates with some criterion thought to be relevant to the concept. A lack of correlation brings some doubt onto the validity (correctness) of the original measure. E.g., if IQ scores correlate as expected with grade in university, concurrent validity is established. 3. Construct Validity: is established if the concepts relate to each other in a way that is consistent with the researcher’s theory. Confirmed when results match what is predicted by given the theory. 16 E.g., if a theory states that a child hyperactively is caused by poor parenting, and the level of hyperactivity increases as parenting gets worse, that suggests that the measures used to gauge ‘parenting’ and ‘hyperactivity’ are valid. Measurement Validity A measure that is not reliable will also not be valid. An inconsistency in the way the data was gathered makes the data more or less unusable. A measure may be invalid but still be reliable. Data gathered for a research project may be invalid because it doesn’t fit with that particular project, but because it was gathered properly, it may be useful to inform a small facet of the research, provide a topic of further research or provide useable data for other similar research. Main Goals of Quantitative Researchers Measurement: data is used to understand or quantify social phenomena, concepts and their interrelations, in general. Establishing Causality: researchers want to know what causes social phenomena, e.g., prejudice, crime, class conflict, etc. Generalization of findings to those not studied. The goal is to come up with law-like findings that apply to large numbers of people. This is of particular concern for researchers using cross-sectional and longitudinal design. (Experimental model research is concerned more with internal validity than external validity). Having a representative sample is essential for generalization. Representative Sample Representative only of the population from which is was taken. E.g., a sample from a town only really applies to that specific town. Probability Sampling The use of a random sample drawn from a given population. Random selection does not guarantee representativeness of a sample group, but it does improve the chances. Replication, or repeating a study using the same methods, provides a check for biases and routine errors. If the findings are not the same as those of the original study, the comparison provides reason to re-evaluate the methods and findings of the original study. 17 If the findings are the same, researcher have grater confidence in the original findings. Criticisms of Quantitative Research People and social institutions are treated as if they are part of ‘the world of nature.’ Critics maintain than humans and their actions are fundamentally different from the non-conscious entities that natural scientists study: subatomic particles, photosynthesis, chemical reactions, etc. Therefore, the methods used to study humans must be fundamentally different from those used to study natural phenomena. However, quantitative researchers counter that humans are a part of nature, and that science can therefore be used to understand the human condition. The measurement process produces an artificial and false sense of precision and accuracy. E.g., problems can arise if people interpret the same survey item differently. Quantitative researcher produces a disjuncture between researcher and everyday life. This is a question of validity. Manipulated independent variables are small facets of life and have short-term effects. Life is a long-terms, ongoing, sometimes shifting, social process. ‘Real life’ may be very different from what is recorded on a survey or what happens in an experiment. An analysis of relationships between variables ignores people’s everyday experiences and how they are defined and interpreted. This incorporates the first and third criticisms above. E.g., if a researcher studies the relationship between single motherhood and poverty using a questionnaire, the actual experiences of single motherhood will not be understood. Explanations for findings may not address the perceptions of the people to whom the findings purportedly pertain. Valid quantitative findings may be achieved, but the conclusions don’t take into account what the people involved actually feel and think. The categories for questionnaires are pre-set to analyze activity and assumptions are made about the related activity. E.g., a high incidence of single-motherhood translate to a loss in popularity of marriage. This interpretation of the data was later proved to be false. Quantitative researchers tend to assume an objectivist ontology. 18 I.e., that a social reality exists that is independent of the observer, and that the social order is fixed. Quantitative researchers counter that there may indeed be a social reality that may or may not be perceived. They also claim that some aspects of society are fixed or hard to change. Quantitative Research: Reality and Practice The ideals of quantitative research and how it is actually conducted may be very different. E.g., less attention may be paid to matters of reliability and validity than what one might think. However, some of that comes about through practical limitations of time, cost, and feasibility. SRM – CHAPTER 9 (The Nature of Qualitative Research) Nature of Qualitative Research Qualitative research is concerned primarily with words and images rather than numbers. It is usually inductive The process starts with field research, then concepts and theories are developed. It tends to be interpretivist Concerned with finding out what an action or event means to the people involved. Often constructionist Social life is not seen as fixed, but as an outcome of interactions and negotiations. Takes a naturalist perspective When doing research, the social world should be left as undisturbed as possible. Kinds of Qualitative Research Ethnography/participant observation Immersed in the social setting Qualitative interviewing In-depth, semi-structured or unstructured Focus groups Interview several people together Discourse and conversation analysis 19 Analyse the language Qualitative analysis of texts and documents Participatory action research Engage participants to produce social change Steps in Qualitative Research Establish a general research question What interesting social issue are you studying? For example, do high crime communities have low social control? Select a relevant site and subjects Where is the research being conducted and who are the research subjects? For example, residents in a high crime neighborhood. Collect the data Determine which methods to use. As suggested earlier, it may be more appropriate to use more than one method. For example, ethnographic observations and interviews. Interpret the data Determine the meanings that the research subject put to activities that occur in the social environment. For example, residents don’t perceive crime as a problem because there is a low incidence of violent crime, in spite of the high crime rate. Conceptual and theoretical work Evaluate the data related to your research question. For example, crime may not be as damaging to a community as outsiders might think if there are cushioning factors. Although crime is recognized as common, networks of localized support reduced the potential or at least fear of actual violence. How does available data answer this question? a) Tighter specification of the research question b) Collection of further data Here the interpreting and theorizing process is intermixed data collection. This is an iterative process. Data may confirm or contradict the interpretation which may lead again to more data collection. For example, more interviews with research subjects, perhaps some new or some revisited. Writing up and findings/conclusions The researcher must demonstrate the credibility of the research and why the research matters. 20 Theory and Concepts Qualitative research often involves “grounded theory” approach: the use of data to develop theories. This may involve an iterative process: going back and forth from data to theory, revising the theory in the process. Qualitative research may involve testing theories This can be done through an iterative process, or occasionally through theory testing in the conventional sense. For example, provide insight into why rime may flourish in an area essentially under the nose of residents. Blumer (1954): definitive versus sensitizing concepts Definitive Concepts: defined with nominal and operational definitions, as in quantitative research. Sensitizing Concepts: provide only a general sense of reference and guidance as to the content of the concept. Begin with a broad definition of a concept and narrow it down through the research process. Reliability and Validity LeCompte and Goetz (1982) Different meanings for key terms External Reliability Degree to which a study can be replicated Difficult to achieve in qualitative research Ethnographer adopts the same social role as previous researcher Internal Reliability Do different observers see the same things? Internal Validity Is there a good match between what is observed and the resulting theoretical ideas? Strength of qualitative methods (ethnography) External Validity Can the findings be generalized across social settings? Difficult to achieve in qualitative research because of small sample sizes Alternative Criteria for Evaluation Trustworthiness Authenticity 21 Trustworthiness Credibility Do the people studied agree with the interpretation of their thoughts and actions offered by the researcher? Conducted through respondent (member) validation. The people studied may become defensive and try to censor the research. The people studied may not give genuine feedback on what the researcher produced but may instead try to please the researcher. The people studied may not have the expertise to provide meaningful comments. Transferability Can the findings be applied to other contexts or people not studied? “Thick” description helps to determine whether transferability is possible. Provides enough information to conduct later comparison to findings from other studies. Dependability Were proper procedures followed? Can the study’s theoretical inferences be justified? “Auditing” is sometimes done wherein peers review the research and procedures to see if the study is dependable. May be time consuming and expensive because of the amount of data gathered in a qualitative research project. Confirmability Was the researcher objective and unbiased? Did the researcher sway the results dramatically? “Auditing” can be used to examine this. Main Goals of Qualitative Research Seeing through the eyes of the studied: Empathy Probing “beneath the surface” of social behaviour Seeing through the eyes of people studied In-depth description and emphasis on context Behaviour that may seem odd or irrational may become more understandable if the context is described. Naturalism is an approach that helps the researcher gain an understanding of the social context. 22 Observing people in their own environment. Emphasis on process Showing how events and patterns unfold over time. A long time spent in the field allows the researcher to understand individual and social change and its context. This can also be done with semi-structured interviewing, unstructured interviewing, and life history approach. Flexibility and limited structure Questions should be quite general (especially early in the research). There is usually little or no theory driving the research. The topics explored in the research may change as the study progresses. Allows the researcher to find new directions of study. Critiques of Qualitative Research Too Subjective It can be too impressionistic and subjective. Bias can result from personal relationships that develop during the research. It may be unclear as to how a particular topic of theme became the focus of the research. Difficult to Replicate: Reactive effect can be expected. Subsequent researchers will bring a different reactive effect to their gender, race, or social position. Problems of Generalization However, generalization may not be the goal of research. In-depth description and understanding of meaning may be what the researcher is aiming for. Lack of Transparency It may be difficult to determine how the research was conducted, why certain people were chosen for in-depth interviews, etc. Unclear how researchers arrived to specific findings. Can be diminished by researchers keeping the detailed record of decisions taken at various stages of research. 23 SRM – CHAPTER 7 (Structured Observation) Structured Observation Eliminates problems found in survey research Misunderstanding the meaning of the terms used in the survey. Problems of memory: what was done, where it was done, etc. Social desirability effect in answering questions. Threatening or embarrassing questions not answered sincerely. Gap between stated and actual behaviour. Explicit rules for observing, categorizing and recording behaviour. Direct observation over inferences from respondent reports. Limited access to some social spaces. Smaller sample sizes. Rules for observation and for recording the data are contained in the observation schedule. The Observation Schedule A clear statement of the research problem. Specifies who is to be observed and which behaviours are to be recorded. Categories for recording behaviour must be mutually exclusive and exhaustive. Pilot studies may help develop the categories. Classification scheme must be clear and easy to use. Minimal interpretation of behaviour. Strategies for Observing Behaviour Recording of Incidents Wait until there is a behaviour of interest (e.g., observe bar behaviour, note each time there is opposite sex, stranger-to-stranger interaction). Time Period Processes are observed and recorded at a designated period of time (e.g., everyday at lunchtime for two weeks). Time Sampling Observe the interactions that take place at designated intervals of time (e.g., every 15 minutes for three hours). 24 Reliability Compared to survey research, structured observation offers: More reliable information about events; Greater precision regarding the duration and frequency of events; Greater accuracy in time-ordering events; More accurate reconstruction of large-scale social episodes. Inter-observer consistency is a concern. Intra-observer consistency is also an issue. Training is usually implemented to counter these issues. Validity Measurement validity can be an issue. Does the structured observation measure what it is supposed to measure? The structured observation must be administered properly. The researcher should try to determine whether there are any reactive effects. People often behave differently because they know they are being observed. Some research suggest this lessens as the researcher spends more time with the participants. Validity – Reactive Effects Guinea pig or ‘Hawthorne’ effect Participants intentionally adjust their behaviour to conform to what they believe is the purpose of the study. Role Selection Participants adopt an expertise role when asked questions or shift to a more passive role than usual. Researcher presence as a change agent The physical environment is changed when a new person enters. It will impact the social environment somewhat as well. Trying to be helpful to the researcher Joining the experiment whole heartedly. Sometimes asking for approval afterwards. This matters only if it impacts the actual phenomenon being studied. Varied reaction according to who the researcher is Expectations of the research subject may be communicated unconsciously. Double-blind experiments serve to reduce this. Neither the person administering the instrument of the participant knows the details of the important issues. 25 Field Experiments The researcher engages in social interaction in its natural environment and watches to see what happens. The participants are not aware that they are being studied. In the extreme, researchers have adopted a social role and used deception to gain entry into social spaces that would not otherwise be allowed. Limited opportunity for recording data. At best a limited coding system can be implemented. Criticisms An observation schedule may be used that is inappropriate for a particular setting. Unstructured observation done in advance of structured observation can help to eliminate this. The intentions and meanings of the acts observed may be missed. The effect of context on the behaviour may not get sufficient attention. Structured observation produces many small bits of data, which may be difficult to piece together. Other Types of Observation Research Participant Qualitative method. Immersion in a particular social setting for an extended period of time. To determine meanings that people give to their environment and their behaviour. Non-Participant or “Unobtrusive” Observer does not take part in the activities of the observed group. Observed group may or may not know that it is being observed. Process may be structure or unstructured. Unstructured Observation No rules for observing or recording the observations. Observer attempts to gather as much detail as possible, make thorough notes and develop a narrative account of the behaviour at a later time. Most participant observation is unstructured. 26 SRM – CHAPTER 10 (Ethnography and Participant Observation) Definitions The terms ‘ethnography’ and ‘participant observation’ are essentially synonymous, although we will consider ‘ethnography’ to be the more inclusive term. ‘Participant Observation’ will refer to the observational component of this sort of work. With both, the researcher is immersed in a particular social setting for a long period of time, sometimes even years. Behaviour is observed in an unstructured way, and often in-depth, unstructured discussions and interviews are held with the people studied. The Four Types of Ethnography OVERT: the people being studied know they are being observed by a researcher. COVERT: the people being studied do not know they are being observed by a researcher. OPEN or public settings: e.g., public parks, downtown sidewalks, etc. In an OPEN setting, it may be difficult to make observations and talk to people. CLOSED: i.e., private or restricted settings: meetings of private clubs, social movement organizational centres, etc. Access to Closed Settings There are many different ways to gain access: Use friends, contacts, and colleagues. Get someone in the organization to vouch for you: a ‘sponsor.’ Even if acquired, you may need the approval of ‘gatekeepers.’ Offer something in return, e.g., a copy of the finished product. Provide a clear explanation of your aims and methods. Be willing to negotiate the terms of access. Be open about how much time research participants would have to spend. Access to Open Settings Similar process to access closed settings: May need to get ‘sponsors’ and ‘gatekeepers’ on side. ‘Hanging around’ may help. 27 Ongoing Access Ongoing access can be problematic: People get suspicious of the researcher’s motives. Group members fear that what they say or do will get back to bosses or colleagues. People being studied may decide to sabotage the research. To maintain access: Play up your credentials; Do not give people a reason to dislike you; Play a role and construct a ‘front’; Have a plan for allaying people’s suspicions; Be prepared for tests of competence and credibility; Be adaptable to changing circumstances in the research setting. Key Informants These are informants who are particularly knowledgeable and cooperative. Drawbacks to using them: Researcher may ignore other group members. Key informant’s view may not be representative of the group as a whole. Roles for Ethnographers Complete Participation: Covert operations. The researcher adopts a secret role in the group. Method gets the closest to participants and their activities, but there is a risk of over-identification or developing a strong dislike of the participants. Either may skew the data. Participant-as-observer: Researcher adopts a role in the group. Participants are aware who the researcher really is. Risk of reactivity. Observer-as-participant: Researcher observes and interviews from the edge of the group. Risk of reactivity. Risks of incorrect interpretation of activity. Complete Observer: Researcher does not engage the participants at all No risk of reactivity. 28 Researcher has limited information for understanding the actions of the participants. Field Notes Write down your observations as soon as possible. At the end of the day at the latest. Using a tape recorder is often advantageous but involves a lot of transcription. Photography and video recording may be an option in some settings. Types of Field Notes Mental Notes Remember and write later. Jotted Notes (scratch or rough notes) Brief notes made at time to jog memory when writing detailed noted later. Full Field Notes Detailed notes of what was seen, heard and reflection on situations. Include comments on possible reactivity. Analytic Memos Link observations to concepts. Theories that may apply. Notes on data, not data notes. Must be kept separate to avoid influencing the data notes. Visual Ethnography Visual materials may be: Used as memory aids, like field notes; Data sources in their own right; Prompts for discussion. Difficulties with using visual materials stem from interpretation. Context of when, where, how, and by whom the visual material was taken. Different meaning may be ascribed to the visual material by the researcher and by different participants. Potential for researcher to influence the perception of the subject. REALIST approach: the material depicted treated as ‘factual’, objective reality. REFLEXIVE approach: consideration of how the researcher influenced what the materials reveal. The reflexive approach recognizes that the visuals may be ‘collaborative’ and may be subject to multiple interpretations by different people. 29 Ending the Research The end may be determined by practical or personal factors. It may result from saturation of categories. New data does not result in new concepts or categories, or in an elaboration of existing concepts or categories. Feminist Ethnography Study of the lives and activities of women as a marginalized subgroup in society. Gives public voice to a marginalized group. Criticism: Researcher can decide to leave the social at any time while research subjects cannot. Mirrors the processes that have subjugated and marginalized women throughout history. SRM – CHAPTER 5 (Survey Research: Structured Interviewing) Structured Interviews It is an interview that follows an Interview Schedule, which includes: A formal list of questions that the interviewer must follow in detail. The questions must be asked in the order given. Structured interviews are used because they produce standardization in the asking of questions and the recording of answers. Variation Variation should be attributable to the characteristic being measured, not the interview process. This is a ‘true’ or ‘real’ variation. Variation related to the interviewer or the interviewing process is variability due to error. Errors are unwanted. They skew the data and thereby the findings. Variation Sources Intra-interviewer variability: an interviewer is not consistent in asking questions or recording answers (with the same respondent or a different one). Inter-interviewer variability: lack of consistency in asking questions or recording answers between different interviewers. Why Structured Interviews? Reduces the chance of variation due to error on the part of the interviewer/interview process. 30 Enhances the accuracy and ease of data processing, because of the use of ‘closed’ or ‘fixed choice’ questions. The interviewees ultimately put themselves into categories when they select answers. Interviewer Effects The characteristics of the interview may influence the responses given. Sex, social class, and race of interviewer are key reactive issues. Interview Types and Context One Interviewer Design Even with focus groups where there are several interviewees. This may be due to cost. Reduces inter-interviewer variability. Avoids distraction. Reduces misunderstanding. In Person Face-to-face interviewing is the preferred method in academic research. Data gathered through face-to-face interviews is argues to be a superior quality to that of telephone interviews. Telephone Interviews Strengths Cheaper and quicker to administer, especially where the respondents are geographically spread out. Easier to supervise to reduce interviewer errors up front. Reduced issue with confidentiality, that exists with taped interviews. Reduced bias arising from ‘interviewer effect.’ Weaknesses May exclude people without telephones. Hard to sustain for long periods of time. Personal interviews tend to be more effective with sensitive issues. Less peripheral information available to work with to assess for understanding and other social conditions. Difficult to be sure targeted respondent is the person actually answering the questionnaire. No visual aids can be used to assist the interview. Computer-Assisted Interviewing Programs are often used in conducting interviews, both in person and over the phone. 31 The program relies on answers to ‘filter out’ further questions that are unnecessary. Filter question example: A series of questions pertain to car ownership. A filter question could be, ‘Do you own a car?’ If the answer is ‘no’, the software can automatically skip all further questions on car ownership. Online Personal Interview Advantages Quality of face-to-face interviewing with efficiency and economy of the internet. Opportunity for more considered, fuller responses. Ease of contact for follow-up. No need to transcribe. Disadvantages Fairly high dropout rate (may be overcome by developing mutual trust). Key Features: Methodological issues Trust developed through Soliciting agreement before sending questions. Self-disclosure by researcher. Disclose details of research project. Questions sent in bulk May lead to answering most interesting. Questions-followed-by-reply process More reliable but more time consuming. Conducting Interviews: Basic Points Schedule – Interviewers should be familiar with the interview schedule. Introduction – Respondents should be provided with a credible rationale for the research. Rapport – Interviewers should try to develop rapport with interviewees but maintain a cautious balance. ‘Too friendly’ may cause the interview to get side-tracked, go on too long, or bring an interviewee to tailor their responses toward ‘pleasing’ the interviewer. Introductory Statement Who you are The sponsoring organization Funding sources 32 Topic of the research How the respondent has been selected Confidentiality purposes Participation is voluntary Respondents have the opportunity to ask questions about the research Asking Questions The question should be asked exactly as stated. Similarly, the answers should be recorded as exactly as possible. Questions should be asked in the order they are given on the interview schedule. Probes Sometimes probes are used if the respondents need help with their answers. If used, probes should follow a standardized format. Often repeating the question or answer choices will suffice. Show Cards Sometimes show cards are used to provide detailed information, e.g., income categories the respondent can choose from. Show cards are appropriate if: There is a long list of possible answers; The question is of a personal nature; The same set of answer categories applies to several questions. Prompting Interviewer suggests a specific answer for the interviewee. Should only be a last resort when a respondent absolutely cannot come up with a reply. Leaving the interview The interviewer must remain professional and have a set response to rebuff respondents that wish to engage the interviewer after the interview. Training Good interviewing is a skill set to be developed. It usually requires considerable training and supervision to become good at it. Questionnaires Questionnaires are essentially structured interviews without an interviewer. They involve filling out a form which is then returned to the researcher, often by mail. Because the respondent has to read the questionnaire without the aid of an interviewer, it has to be very clear and easy to follow. Compared to interviews, questionnaires tend to: 33 Have
