Introduction to Social Research PDF

PART I The Nuts and Bolts of Research Design  CHAPTER 1 Introduction to Social Research Different Ways of Knowing An event happens that everyone is talking about. Let’s take the deeply igniting mur- der of George Floyd by police officer Derek Chauvin. People h...

PART I The Nuts and Bolts of Research Design  CHAPTER 1 Introduction to Social Research Different Ways of Knowing An event happens that everyone is talking about. Let’s take the deeply igniting mur- der of George Floyd by police officer Derek Chauvin. People have strong feelings about whether racism was at play, the way law enforcement officials handled the incident, and the widespread protests that occurred in the wake of the tragedy. With respect to the protests, some people felt this was a necessary response to systemic police brutality against Black people, while others felt it was unnecessarily danger- ous and would fuel violence and other crime.1 People’s ideas are formed by what authorities in the media and criminal justice system report, cultural understandings of race and racism, and individuals’ own personal experiences. People may come to very different conclusions about the state of race in the United States and how justice is dispensed based on their personal experiences, the media channels they choose to consume, and their overarching understanding of how race impacts our lives. For example, consider the news we elect to consume. Here are three headlines from different news sources about the Floyd protests, one published on May 31, 2020, and two published on June 1, 2020. “A Weekend of Protest and Mourning: George Floyd’s Death Spurs Demon- strations in Texas Cities” (The Texas Tribune) “Boston Protests Against George Floyd Killing Begin Peacefully, End in Vio- lence, Arrests” (The Boston Globe) “Rioting, Looting Link to George Floyd Protests Leaves Trail of Destruction Across America” (Fox News) Look at the first words used to describe these events: 3 4 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN “Protest and mourning” “Protests” “Rioting, looting” This language has very different connotations and shapes how we come to understand these events. The news source you happen to choose may have a signifi- cant impact on your understanding of this issue. It’s no surprise that after the killing of George Floyd and through the trial in which Derek Chauvin was found guilty, some people assuredly stated that this was an act of racism illustrating the need for Black Lives Matter (BLM), while others claimed it was an isolated incident and BLM is harmful, and yet others asserted Chauvin was a scapegoat and championed Blue Lives Matter. In all instances, people were likely to state their perspective—their knowledge—as not only valid but correct. This process is a product of the ways in which we develop a commonsense understanding of the world in daily life. There are many different ways that we gain knowledge in everyday life. Author- ities or experts are one source of knowledge. For example, we develop ideas about the world through individuals we know personally, such as our parents or guard- ians, friends, and teachers. We also develop ideas about the world through experts we may or may not know personally, including leaders in major societal institu- tions, such as the news media, religious authorities, the Census Bureau, politicians, health care experts, and others. It is important to bear in mind that each of these authorities has his/her/their own perspectives and biases. Factors such as religion, political leanings, education, and status characteristics, including race, class, gen- der, and sexuality, may influence authorities’ ideas, as well as our own. Cultural beliefs are another common source of knowledge. For example, our ideas about race and racism have changed over time as our culture has changed. In order to understand how biased our cultural understandings can be, consider norms regarding race before the civil rights movement. At that time, strongly held ideas about race, which most people would find racist today, were taken for granted. We also develop knowledge from our personal and sensory experiences. We > - aerial learn about our world based on what we see, hear, smell, taste, and touch. Some- times these different ways of knowing coalesce to convince us of something. For example, authority figures, such as parents, may tell us as children not to touch the stove because it is hot and we will burn ourselves. Then, if we do accidentally touch the stove and it hurts, our personal sensory experience confirms for us what we were told. In a more complex example, if we personally experience or witness racial profiling or stereotyping, we may be more apt to believe that others experi- ence the same. Although we do learn through daily life experiences, as already noted, there are considerable limitations with these sources of “knowledge.” When using personal experiences, people have a tendency to overgeneralize, make inaccurate observa- tions, perceive things selectively, and close off inquiry as soon as they have devel- oped an idea. In some cases, authorities, cultural beliefs, and personal experiences can confirm one another in ways that are misleading, serving to reinforce misinfor- mation and bias. For example, if you’re in the dominant racial group, it’s likely you  Introduction to Social Research 5 haven’t personally experienced racism. If your naïveté regarding race is reinforced by your family, friends, and the news you watch, you may come to the conclusion that racism is no longer an issue. Although your sources of daily knowledge confirm this perspective, such confirmation does not make it so. Beliefs and knowledge are not the same. We may develop personal beliefs that racism is no longer an issue— however, knowledge based on research disconfirms that belief. Research is needed in order to challenge and overcome the biases and limitations inherent in “learning” from experts, culture, and personal experiences. Social research, the focus of this book, also produces knowledge and helps us come to understand the social world and our place in it. Social research has devel- oped as a way of building knowledge that promotes agreed-upon practices within the research community that help us avoid the limitations and pitfalls of other ways of knowing. The personal beliefs we have developed from other sources (experts, culture, personal experience) may be the impetus for our interest in a topic for a research project. However, the knowledge produced in this rigorous social scientific manner may support or refute those personal beliefs. Purposes of Social Research There are many purposes for conducting social research. Although projects fre- quently fall into one of the following categories, in some projects there may be more than one of these purposes. Here are the primary purposes for which social research is conducted. Exploration When we have a new or relatively underresearched topic, exploratory research is a way of learning about that topic. Exploratory research can help us fill a gap in our knowledge about a new or underresearched topic, or approach the topic from a different perspective to generate new and emerging insights. When you conduct a literature review and come up short, this absence of adequate research is often an indicator that exploratory research is needed. Such research may prompt further investigation, including the development of an appropriate methodological plan. Accordingly, this initial research may point you or other researchers toward certain research questions, methods for data collection, participants, and/or audiences. Description When we want to describe individuals, groups, activities, events, or situations, descriptive research is appropriate. Descriptive research aims to generate what Clif- ford Geertz (1973) referred to as “thick descriptions” of social life (those that pro- vide details, meanings, and context), typically from the perspective of the people living it. Researchers may turn to rigorous observation or related methods of inter- view in order to document how things are experienced, with respect to the phenom- enon under investigation. 6 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN Explanation When we want to explain causes and effects, correlations, or why things are the way they are, explanatory research is appropriate. For example, if we want to know the particular factors that shape people’s attitudes about a controversial issue, such as fracking, stem cell research, or immigration policies, we may conduct explanatory research. This type of research can also provide evidence for causal relationships, suggesting that A causes B, or that A causes B only under certain circumstances. Or, we may want to study correlations between A and B, showing, for example, that A is positively associated with B. Explanatory research is useful when we want to explain why things are the way they are, with respect to the phenomenon under investigation. (The different kinds of explanation you might seek are described in Chapter 5 on quantitative research.) Community Change or Action When relevant stakeholders have identified the need for community change or action, we may conduct research with the aim of prompting such community change, social action, or community intervention. For instance, if a community is undergoing rapid development and some stakeholders in the community are being excluded from the development process, we may develop a research project with the aim of intervening in that process. Political or social justice concerns underscore this kind of research. In some cases, the goal may be to impact public policy. In order to conduct research with the aim of community change or action, we may also end up conducting descriptive, explanatory, or evaluative research. Evaluation When we want to assess the effectiveness or impact of a program or policy, evalu- ation research provides a means of doing so (Patton, 2015; Scriven, 1998). Evalu- ation can be considered a type of explanation (Adler & Clark, 2015). Evaluation research is useful in numerous kinds of research projects, from evaluating particu- lar outreach programs and educational programs to public policies, campaigns of various sorts, and so forth. For instance, evaluation research can help us determine how changes in a policy have impacted successes or failures in a particular program or the effectiveness of a particular awareness campaign. Evoke, Provoke, or Unsettle When we want to jar specified audiences (groups of people) into thinking about or seeing something differently, promote new learning, or create an awareness cam- paign, we may conduct research with the aim of evoking, provoking, or unsettling. This kind of research may aim to disrupt or unsettle stereotypes or “commonsense” ideologies, serve as an intervention, stimulate self-reflection, or generate social awareness. Research conducted with this purpose may follow a generative model whereby the inquiry itself is the research act (elaborated in Chapter 8, on arts-based  Introduction to Social Research 7 research [ABR]). In order to conduct research with the aim of evoking meanings, we may also end up conducting exploratory or descriptive research. Earlier we saw how we might develop ideas about the killing of George Floyd based on personal experiences, authorities, and cultural beliefs. Let’s return to that example to see how we might explore issues related to this tragic event using social research with the aforementioned purposes. (There are countless ways one can develop knowledge about these issues via social research, so these examples are meant for illustrative purposes only.) Exploration. If we want to explore how young people of different racial backgrounds have used social media to learn about or share their ideas about this event, and their motivations for doing so, we might turn to focus group interviews to explore their attitudes (where several participants are interviewed in a group setting). Description. If we want to describe community response to this event, we might conduct field research in Minneapolis, Minnesota (involving observations, participation in local meetings/protests, and informal interviews). Explanation. If we want to determine the factors that shape people’s atti- tudes about BLM, we might conduct survey research, via a questionnaire, to see the extent to which race, gender, age, socioeconomic background, political affilia- tion, media consumption, and experience with the criminal justice system impact people’s viewpoints. Community change or action. If we want to assist a community to create change in how its “community watch” programs are created and maintained in order to eliminate racial profiling, we might conduct community-based research by involving local stakeholders—residents, community watch members, law enforce- ment officials—to develop a project with community goals and norms at the center, ultimately to prompt positive community change. Evaluation. If we want to evaluate the effectiveness of a community watch program and how it operates with respect to race (i.e., if it is being enacted fairly), we might conduct research analyzing documents such as incident reports. Evoke, provoke, or unsettle. If we want to evoke people’s perceptions of race and racism, unsettle stereotypes, and provoke new understandings, we may have racially diverse high school students create visual art responding to the George Floyd killing and aftermath, and then textually or verbally describe their art. The art could later be displayed in school settings, community centers, and/or online. As you can see, these examples illustrate some ways social research can help us to systematically learn about a range of issues. Furthermore, conducting social research around these issues can result in many different kinds of projects with different goals and action plans for how to achieve those goals. Topic selection, coupled with the research purpose, leads us to specific design strategies and meth- odological choices. This is ultimately the aim of this book: to show you the five 8 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN major approaches of designing a research project based on your topic, interests, and abilities, and how those approaches lead you to a range of methodological choices. t Visit the companion website for a two-part worksheet about the purposes of research. REVIEW STOP 1 1. What are the three primary ways people develop beliefs and knowledge in daily life? 2. Social research is a way of building knowledge that uses agreed-upon practices within the research community to help avoid some of the limita- tions of other ways of knowing. What are the six primary purposes of social research? 3. A researcher is interested in the correlation between gender and attitudes about handgun legislation. He/she/they conduct research with what pri- mary purpose? ( Go to the end of the chapter to check your answers. Now that you have a sense of what distinguishes social research from other ways of knowing, and of some of the major purposes research can serve, let’s turn to the specifics regarding available approaches to social research and building a project. The Five Approaches to Research Architects design plans to build physical structures. When an architect designs a house or a building, his/her/their ultimate goal will dictate decision making. For example, there are many differences between building a house and building a cathe- dral. Furthermore, building different kinds of homes, located in different geographic areas and serving different purposes, also requires different building strategies. For instance, consider building a beach house on the Maine coast, a colonial-style home in Vermont, a Mediterranean-style home in Florida, and a hillside home in South- ern California. Stylistically these homes require different features in terms of both exterior and interior designs. Although there are some issues that are always at play, such as those related to laying a foundation and creating safe load-bearing walls, due to location and potential weather issues alone, there will be many differences: the need for storm windows or not, whether or not the home has a basement, and so forth. In these examples, we are talking about private single-family homes. Now consider multifamily homes, apartment buildings, and nonresidential buildings,  Introduction to Social Research 9 including those that serve the public in some capacity. Next consider differences in nonresidential buildings based on their purposes—for example, medical facilities, schools, houses of worship, retail spaces, and so forth. The type of structure will dictate many of the choices an architect makes. I think of research design as the process of building a structure, or plan, for your research project. Whereas architects have many general structures with which they work—single-family homes, multifamily homes, nonresidential buildings, and the like—social researchers have five primary structures with which they work. In social research, we call these approaches to research design. There are five major approaches to research reviewed in this text: quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods research, arts-based research, and community-based participatory research (CBPR). In actuality, there may be overlaps between these approaches. For example, there are some methods (e.g., narrative inquiry) that are used by qualitative and arts-based researchers. 2 For another example, CBPR may rely on quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, or arts-based methods. The differ- ences between these approaches will become clearer throughout this book, show- ing that despite overlap, projects can be categorized. It’s important to note that no approach is implicitly better than the others. Rather, they are simply appropriate and useful for different projects. Quantitative research is characterized by deductive approaches to the research process aimed at proving, disproving, or lending credence to existing theories. This type of research involves measuring variables and testing relationships between variables in order to reveal patterns, correlations, or causal relationships. Research- ers may employ linear methods of data collection and analysis that result in statisti- cal data. The values underlying quantitative research include neutrality, objectivity, and the acquisition of a sizeable scope of knowledge (e.g., a statistical overview from a large sample). This approach is generally appropriate when your primary purpose is to explain or evaluate. Qualitative research is generally characterized by inductive approaches to knowledge building aimed at generating meaning (Leavy, 2014, 2020a). Research- ers use this approach to explore; to robustly investigate and learn about social phe- nomenon; to unpack the meanings people ascribe to activities, situations, events, or artifacts; or to build a depth of understanding about some dimension of social life (Leavy, 2014, 2020a). The values underlying qualitative research include the importance of people’s subjective experiences and meaning-making processes and acquiring a depth of understanding (i.e., detailed information from a small sam- ple). Qualitative research is generally appropriate when your primary purpose is to explore, describe, or explain. Mixed methods research (MMR) involves collecting, analyzing, and in some way integrating both quantitative and qualitative data in a single project. The phases of a research project are integrated or synergistic, with the quantitative phase influ- encing the qualitative phase, or vice versa (Hesse-Biber, 2010, 2016; Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2011). MMR may result in a comprehensive understanding of the phenom- enon under investigation because of the integration of quantitative and qualitative data. MMR is generally appropriate when your purpose is to describe, explain, or 10 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN evaluate, and is also routinely used in applied social and behavioral science research, including that which seeks to prompt community change or social action. Arts-based research (ABR) involves adapting the tenets of the creative arts in a social research project. Researchers aim to address social research questions in holistic and engaged ways in which theory and practice are intertwined. Arts-based practices draw on literary writing, music, dance, performance, visual art, film, and other artistic mediums. ABR is a generative approach whereby researchers place the inquiry process at the center and value aesthetic understanding, evocation, and provocation. ABR is generally appropriate when your purpose is to explore, describe, or evoke, provoke, or unsettle. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) involves collaborative part- nerships between researchers and nonacademic stakeholders (e.g., community members). Researchers may partner with established community-based organiza- tions—however, this is not always the case. CBPR is an attempt by researchers to actively involve the communities they aim to serve in every aspect of the research process, from the identification of a problem to the distribution of research find- ings. This is a highly collaborative and problem-centered approach to research that requires the sharing of power. CBPR is generally appropriate when your purpose is to promote community change or action. Each general approach— quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based, community-based participatory—is an umbrella term comprising numerous strate- gies for conducting research. These approaches are all characterized by different philosophical belief systems and rely on different methodological practices. These beliefs and practices are the elements of research. REVIEW STOP 2 1. Deductive approaches to the research process characterize which of the five approaches to research? a. These are appropriate when your primary purpose is to. 2. Inductive approaches to the research process characterize which of the five approaches to research? a. These are appropriate when your primary purpose is to. 3. A researcher is interested in challenging people’s stereotypes about gen- der and profession. He/she/they use an installation of visual images of women in traditionally male jobs, such as construction worker, electrician, and pilot, to provoke viewers into questioning their assumptions. What approach to research is the researcher using? ( Go to the end of the chapter to check your answers.  Introduction to Social Research 11 The Elements of Research The elements of research can be thought of as the building blocks for any research project. These are integral components of any social research project. Together, our decisions regarding these various elements determine which of the five approaches to research to use. The main elements of research can be organized into three general categories: (1) philosophical, (2) praxis, (3) and ethics (Leavy, 2014, 2020b). The philosophi- cal substructure of research consists of three elements: paradigm, ontology, and epistemology. At the level of praxis there are four key elements of research: genre/ design, methodology, methods/practices, and theory. The ethical component (which combines philosophical and praxis elements) includes values, ethics, and reflexivity (see Table 1.1). Chapter 2 is devoted to the topic of ethics because of its centrality to all social research practice. The remainder of this chapter reviews the philosophical and praxis elements of research and their relationship to the five major research approaches. Although all of these terms may seem confusing at first, they are really addressing two simple questions: 1. The philosophical elements of research answer the question “What do we believe?” 2. The praxis elements of research answer the question “What do we do?” Philosophical Elements: What Do We Believe? What we take for granted is important because it impacts how we think, see, and act. There is a range of beliefs that guide research practice: beliefs about the nature of the social world, what can be known about social life, how research should pro- ceed, who can be a knower, what kind of knowledge is valued, and how we come to know. Together, these beliefs form the philosophical substructure of research, TABLE 1.1. The Elements of Research Philosophical Paradigm Ontology Epistemology Praxis Genre/design Methodology Methods/practices Theory Ethics (philosophical and praxis) Values Ethics Reflexivity Note. From Leavy (2014, p. 2). Copyright © 2014 Oxford university Press. Adapted by permission. 12 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN informing decisions from topic selection all the way to the final representation and dissemination of the research findings. A paradigm is a worldview or framework through which knowledge is filtered (Kuhn, 1962; Lincoln, Lynham, & Guba, 2011); it is a foundational perspective carrying a set of assumptions that guides the research process. Paradigms are often difficult to see because they are taken for granted (Babbie, 2021). Consider the old saying “We don’t know who discovered water, but we know it wasn’t the fish.” Par- adigms become the lenses through which research is conceived and executed, and thus they are often difficult to see. I think of paradigms as sunglasses, with differ- ently shaped frames and differently colored lenses. When you put on a pair, it influ- ences everything you see. Thus, paradigms are important to acknowledge because the beliefs that compose them guide our thinking and actions (Guba, 1990). Onto- logical and epistemological belief systems are joined in paradigms. An ontology is a philosophical belief system about the nature of the social world (e.g., whether it is patterned and predictable or constantly re- created by humans). Our ontological belief system informs both our sense of the social world and, cor- respondingly, what we can learn about it and how we can do so. Egon Guba and Yvonna Lincoln (1998) explained the ontological question as “What is the form and nature of reality and, therefore, what is there that can be known about it?” (p. 201). An epistemology is a philosophical belief system about how research pro- ceeds and what counts as knowledge. Our epistemological position informs how we enact the role of researcher and how we understand the relationship between the researcher and research participants (Guba & Lincoln, 1998; Harding, 1987; Hesse-Biber, 2016; Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2004, 2011). Figure 1.1 visually depicts the components of a paradigm. There are multiple paradigms or worldviews that guide social research. Differ- ent researchers utilize different ways of grouping and naming paradigms, so note that there is some measure of inconsistency in the literature and you may come across other terms when you conduct a literature review. I suggest the six follow- ing terms as a way of categorizing a multiplicity of paradigms: (1) postpositivism, (2) interpretive/constructivist, (3) critical, (4) transformative, (5) pragmatic, and (6) arts-based/aesthetic intersubjective. Ontology Epistemology Paradigm FIGURE 1.1. The components of a paradigm.  Introduction to Social Research 13 Postpositivism This philosophical belief system originally developed in the natural sciences and espouses an objective, patterned, and knowable reality. Research involves making and testing claims, including identifying and testing causal relationships, such as A causes B or A causes B under certain conditions (Creswell & Creswell, 2017; Phil- lips & Burbules, 2000). Researchers aim to support or disprove assertions (Babbie, 2021). To do so, the scientific method is employed. Therefore, this worldview val- ues scientific objectivity, researcher neutrality, and replication (Bhattacharya, 2017; Hesse-Biber, 2016; Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2011). Interpretive or Constructivist This philosophical belief system developed in disciplinary contexts in the social sciences and emphasizes people’s subjective experiences, which are grounded in social–historical contexts (Bhattacharya, 2017; Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2011). This worldview suggests that we are actively engaged in constructing and reconstructing meanings through our daily interactions—often referred to as the social construc- tion of reality. Thus, we make and remake the social world through our patterns of interaction and interpretive processes, by which we assign meaning to activities, situations, events, gestures, and so forth. Researchers therefore value people’s sub- jective interpretation and understanding of their experiences and circumstances. Interpretive or constructivist worldviews are overarching categories that include a broad range of perspectives (reviewed in the discussion of theory), including sym- bolic interactionism, dramaturgy, phenomenology, and ethnomethodology. Critical This philosophical belief system developed in interdisciplinary contexts, includ- ing area studies and other fields forged in critique (e.g., women’s studies, African American studies), emphasizes power-rich contexts, dominant discourses, and social justice issues (Bhattacharya, 2017; Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2011; Klein, 2000; Leavy, 2011a). Research is understood as a political enterprise with the ability to empower and emancipate. Researchers aim to prioritize the experiences and per- spectives of those forced to the peripheries of a hierarchical social order, and they reject grand theories that disavow or erase differences. Collaborative and participa- tory approaches (i.e., those in which participants are actively involved in develop- ing the project) are often privileged. Critical worldviews are overarching categories that include a broad range of perspectives (reviewed in the discussion of theory), including feminist, critical race, queer, indigenous, decolonizing, postmodernist, and poststructuralist theories. Transformative This philosophical belief system, developed in transdisciplinary contexts, draws on critical theory; critical pedagogy; and feminist, critical race, and indigenous 14 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN theories; and promotes human rights, social justice, and social-action-oriented per- spectives (Mertens, 2009). Research should be inclusive, participatory, and demo- cratic, involving nonacademic stakeholders during all parts of the process. Research is understood as an engaged, politically and socially responsible enterprise with the power to transform and emancipate. Pragmatic This philosophical belief system developed at the start of the 20th century out of the work of Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, John Dewey, and George Herbert Mead (Hesse-Biber, 2015; Patton, 2015), and holds no allegiance to a particular set of rules or theories but rather suggests that different tools may be useful in dif- ferent research contexts. Researchers value utility and what works in the context of a particular research question. Pragmatists “focus on the outcomes of action” (Morgan, 2013, p. 28), suggesting that whichever theories are useful in a particular context are thereby valid. Any of the methods and theories reviewed in this text may become a part of a pragmatic design. Arts-Based or Aesthetic Intersubjective3 This philosophical belief system, which developed at the intersection of the arts and sciences, suggests that the arts are able to access that which is otherwise out of reach. Researchers value preverbal ways of knowing, including sensory, emotional, perceptual, kinesthetic, and imaginal knowledge (Chilton, Gerber, & Scotti, 2015; Conrad & Beck, 2015; Cooper, Lamarque, & Sartwell, 1997; Dewey, 1934; Gerber & Myers- Coffman, 2018; Harris-Williams, 2010; Langer, 1953; Whitfield, 2005). Research is understood as a relational, meaning-making activity. The arts-based or aesthetic intersubjective paradigm draws on theories of embodiment and phenom- enology, and may include a range of additional perspectives, such as interpretive/ constructivist theories and critical theories. Praxis: What Do We Do? How can we conduct research? What tools are available with which to build a proj- ect? Praxis refers to the doing of research—the practice of research. There are vari- ous tools that we use to conduct research, including methods and theories. When we combine those tools, we develop a methodology—that is, a plan for how we will execute our research. The specific methods or tools we use to collect or generate data can be grouped into larger genres or designs. These are overarching categories for different ways of approaching research (Saldaña, 2011b). A research method is a tool for data collec- tion or generation. It is important to note that sometimes the term research practice is used instead of research method, particularly in the case of ABR. Research meth- ods are selected because they are the best tools to produce the data sought for a par- ticular project. So, for example, the interview format is a general genre or design.  Introduction to Social Research 15 There are numerous specific interview methods that include, but are not limited to, structured interviews, semistructured interviews, in-depth interviews, focus group interviews, and oral history interviews. Each research method is best suited for par- ticular kinds of research questions. As reviewed in later chapters, the selection of research methods should be made in conjunction with the research question(s) and hypothesis or research purpose, as well as more pragmatic issues, such as access to participants or other data sources, time constraints, and researcher skills. Methods for data collection/generation also lead to particular methods or strategies for analysis, interpretation, and representation (i.e., what form or shape the research outcome will take). Specific methods for data collection/generation, analysis, interpretation, and representation are discussed in detail in Chapters 5–9, as appropriate to each of the five approaches reviewed in this book. For now, Table 1.2 lists research genres/designs and their corresponding research methods for data collection/generation. (This is not an exhaustive list.) A theory is an account of social reality that is grounded in data but extends beyond those data (Adler & Clark, 2015). There are two levels of theory: (1) small- scale theories that researchers suggest based on their data (theory with a small t), and (2) large-scale theories that are widely legitimated based on prior research and that may be used to predict new data or frame new studies (Theory with a big T). For example, beginning with the former, based on your research, you may develop TABLE 1.2. Genres/Designs and Research Methods/Practices Genre/design Research methods/practices Experiments Randomized, quasi, single subject Survey research Questionnaires (administered in numerous ways) Interview Structured, semistructured, in depth, oral history, biographical minimalist, focus group Field research Participant observation, nonparticipant observation, digital ethnography, visual ethnography unobtrusive methods Content analysis, document analysis, visual analysis, audio analysis, audiovisual analysis, historical– comparative Case study Single case, multicase Self-data Autoethnography, duoethnography Mixed methods Sequential, convergent, nested Literary practices Fiction-based research/social fiction, narrative inquiry, experimental writing, poetic inquiry Performative practices Drama, play building, ethnodrama, ethnotheatre, film, video, music, dance and movement Visual arts practices Collage, painting, drawing, photography, photovoice, comics, cartoons, sculpture Community based Participatory action research, social action research 16 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN a theory about how children’s media consumption impacts their self- esteem. The theory will be directly based on the data you collected for your study— however, it makes assertions beyond those data (perhaps generalizing to a larger population of children). Theories with a big T have already been rigorously tested and applied. These theories and theoretical perspectives are available for use in your study. There are numerous theoretical perspectives that may guide the research process, which you may discover during the literature review process (discussed in Chapter 3). Whereas paradigms are overarching worldviews, theories specify paradigms (Bab- bie, 2021). Guiding paradigms can be difficult to discern, but specific theories— tested, applied, or generated during research praxis—are more detailed statements grounded in the project’s guiding paradigm. For now, Table 1.3 presents the six major paradigms with their correspond- ing theoretical schools of thought/major theories, each of which contains numer- ous specific disciplinary and interdisciplinary theories. (This is not an exhaustive list.) Specific disciplinary and interdisciplinary theories are found during literature reviews and are not detailed here. In research practice, methods and theory combine to create a methodology, which is a plan for how research will proceed—how you will combine the different elements of research into a plan that details how the specific research project will be carried out (see Figure 1.2). The methodology is what the researcher actually does once he/she/they have combined the different elements of research. In addition to one’s philosophical beliefs and the selection of appropriate methods and theories, TABLE 1.3. Paradigms and Theoretical Schools of Thought (Big-T Theories) Paradigm Theoretical schools of thought Postpositivism Empiricism Interpretive/constructivist Symbolic interactionism Ethnomethodology Dramaturgy Phenomenology Critical Postmodernism Poststructuralism Indigenous/decolonizing Critical race Queer Feminism Transformative Critical theory Critical pedagogy Indigenous/decolonizing Critical race Feminism Pragmatic N/A (any) Arts-based/aesthetic intersubjective Embodiment Phenomenology  Introduction to Social Research 17 Methods Theory Methodology FIGURE 1.2. The components of a methodology. ethics also influence how a study is designed and executed. (Ethics are discussed in depth in the next chapter.) Although two studies may use the same research method—for instance, a focus group interview—the researchers’ methodologies may be completely different. In other words, how they proceed with the research, based not only on their data collection tool but also on how they conceive of the use of that tool, thus structures the study and determines their methodology. For example, the level of moderation and/or control a researcher exhibits during focus group interviews can vary greatly. So how much the researcher talks, interjects, asks specific participants for responses, and so on changes the nature of the focus group. Specific methodologies lead to variations in methods. REVIEW STOP 3 1. The philosophical elements of research answer the question ? 2. A researcher is interested in how students in one high school create and maintain their social hierarchy through their daily patterns of interaction— for example, how they reinforce, demonstrate, and/or challenge notions of popularity in their school and social cliques. The researcher would adopt which paradigm to guide their study? 3. A is a plan for how research will actually pro- ceed. It combines and theory. ( Go to the end of the chapter to check your answers. Putting It All Together Table 1.4 puts some of the pieces together, illustrating the elements of research available for each of the five approaches to design. Note that there are always excep- tions, but these represent the most commonly used combinations.  TABLE 1.4. The Five Design Approaches with Their Elements Approach Paradigm Theoretical schools Genres Methods Quantitative Postpositivist Empiricism Experiments Randomized, quasi, single subject Survey research Questionnaires Qualitative Postpositivist Empiricism Interview Structured, semistructured, in depth, oral history, Interpretive/ Symbolic interactionism biographical minimalist, focus group constructivist Ethnomethodology Critical Dramaturgy Field research Participant observation, nonparticipant observation, digital Phenomenology ethnography, visual ethnography Postmodernism Poststructuralism unobtrusive methods Content analysis, document analysis, visual analysis, audio Indigenous analysis, audiovisual analysis, historical– comparative Critical race Queer Feminist 18 Mixed methods Pragmatic N/A (any) Mixed methods Sequential, convergent, nested (integrated uses of any quantitative and qualitative method) Arts-based Arts-based/ Embodiment Literary practices Fiction-based research/social fiction, narrative inquiry, aesthetic Phenomenology experimental writing, poetic inquiry intersubjective Performative practices Drama, play building, ethnodrama, ethnotheatre, film, video, music, dance and movement Visual arts practices Collage, painting, drawing, photography, comics, cartoons, sculpture Community- Transformative Critical theory Community based Participatory action research, social action research (use based Critical pedagogy of any methods: qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods, participatory Feminist and/or arts-based practices therewithin) Critical race Indigenous  Introduction to Social Research 19 Considering the five approaches abstractly takes us only so far. In order to get a better sense of each approach, let’s take one research topic and look at how we might design a project within each of the five approaches. Bear in mind that in each case, I offer only one of innumerable possibilities for how we might design each study. They are examples. Here is our research topic: students’ experiences with drinking on college campuses. For the sake of simplicity, let’s assume that each study occurs on your own college campus or on one in your community. Quantitative Working from a postpositivist paradigm, design a survey research project with a questionnaire as the data collection method. The questionnaire could be admin- istered online so that students, who are guaranteed anonymity, feel comfortable responding to questions on sensitive subject matter, including underage drinking. Predetermined questions with a limited range of possible answers, such as those ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree, would ask students to self-report on their attitudes and behaviors in relation to drinking on their campus, including their own participation, peer rates of drinking, accessibility of alcohol, behaviors associated with drinking, other relevant aspects of peer culture, and their attitudes about their school’s policies regarding drinking on campus. The major advantage of this approach is that you could collect a wide range of data from a large number of students, which would allow you to make determinations about the prevalence of drinking on campus and about associated issues. In other words, the study would result in statistics about each of the major dimensions of drinking on campus about which you ask the respondents. Qualitative Working from an interpretive paradigm, design an interview study using focus groups as your data collection method. You could hold four focus group sessions, each comprising six students, in a private room adjacent to a student center or other student-friendly part of campus. In a group setting, students may feel more comfortable talking about drinking on their campus, and one student’s sharing may prompt others to agree or disagree, and so on. An open-ended focus group would allow the students to talk about the issues they think are important, using their own language and describing their experiences in detail, with stories and examples. With a low level of moderation, you could guide the discussion, asking some key questions, but allowing students the freedom to talk at their discretion. The major advantage of this approach is that you could collect rich data with descriptions and examples, and the participants’ language and concerns would be at the forefront. Mixed Methods Research Working from the pragmatic paradigm, design a sequential mixed methods study. Use a questionnaire as your first data collection method in order to learn about 20 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN the prevalence of drinking on campus, the factors most often at play when drink- ing occurs, and the like. Then, after analyzing the data statistically, hold focus groups to ask a smaller sample of students to talk at greater depth about some of the findings, explaining their personal experiences and describing the circum- stances of drinking on their campus. By using the questionnaire first, you will learn broadly what students report is happening on their campus. You can then design focus groups specifically to pick up on the major data points to emerge from the survey research, in an effort to unpack the meanings behind the statistics. The focus groups will help you to describe and explain the issues, in language chosen by the participants, at a greater depth so that you understand not only the rates of certain behaviors but the experience, motivation, and context. Whereas the survey research might point to, for instance, the failure of a certain on- campus policy, the interviews might help explain why the policy has failed. By using the two methods in an integrated way, you can learn comprehensively about the prevalence, context, and individual experience of drinking on campus. Arts-Based Research Working from a critical paradigm, design a participatory visual arts study using collage as your data generation method. A group of student participants could be presented with materials commonly used in collage making (magazines, newspa- pers, colorful selection of paper, drawing tools, pens, scissors, glue, tape, etc.) and asked to create a collage or drawing that represents their perception of the drinking culture on their campus and how it makes them feel. Students also could be asked to provide a textual description of their collage. Both the visual art and their textual descriptions could be analyzed. This approach has the potential to bring forth data that would not emerge with written or verbal communication alone. For example, there may be an emphasis on a certain kind of image that points to something unanticipated. The major advantages of this approach are that the participatory nature of the design, with students creating the data, may serve as an empowering experience for them, affording them the opportunity to express themselves without preconceived notions of what is expected or wanted, and insights that would other- wise be unavailable may emerge. (The art could potentially be displayed in selected locations on campus as well.) Community-Based Participatory Research Working from a transformative paradigm, design a CBPR study. First, assemble relevant stakeholders, including students in different class years, resident advisors, campus police, health services staff, administrators, and faculty. Together, develop a project to assess and improve the policies and procedures for dealing with drink- ing on campus, in ways that identify and meet student needs (e.g., being able to call campus police or health services, without fear, if a student is in trouble) and meet institutional needs (e.g., keeping students safe and not endorsing unlawful behavior). Together, determine the research purpose, questions, and methodology.  Introduction to Social Research 21 The major advantage of this approach is that all relevant stakeholders are equally valued and can collectively identify core issues, problems, and solutions. The preceding examples are merely illustrative of the many kinds of studies that can be developed with the different approaches to research and their corre- sponding methodological tools. Because each approach carries its own set of advan- tages, research design decisions should be made to best serve your objectives for the particular project. I hope the working example of students’ experiences with drinking on college campuses illustrates how all the approaches to research are use- ful, but differently so. Conclusion Regardless of the topic under investigation or the approach selected, above all else, research is a human endeavor. Ethics underscores every aspect of social research: the philosophical and praxis levels, what we believe, and what we do. As reviewed in the next chapter, there is a historical legacy of egregious exploitation and abuse of human research subjects, which has informed contemporary ethical standards. As Maya Angelou has widely said, “Do the best you can until you know better. Then when you know better, do better.” This is very much the case in the sphere of research ethics.  REVIEW STOP ANSWER KEY Review Stop 1 1. Authorities/experts, cultural beliefs, personal experiences 2. Exploration, description, explanation, community change or action, evalu- ation, evoke/provoke/unsettle 3. Explanation Review Stop 2 1. Quantitative a. Explain or evaluate 2. Qualitative a. Explore, describe, or explain 3. ABR Review Stop 3 1. What do we believe? 2. Interpretive/constructivist 3. Methodology; methods 22 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN Further Engagement 1. Pick a topic you’re interested in studying and write down everything you think you know about it, based on your own life experiences and perceptions (e.g., exposure to the news, what you’ve learned in school, family and peer opinions, per- sonal experiences; one page maximum). Then get one article from a peer-reviewed journal in your discipline that presents a study on some aspect of your topic. Read the article and write a short response (one paragraph). What new information have you learned? What, if anything, in the article surprised you? Did the article give you any new language or new ways to understand the topic? 2. Pick a current or controversial event. Select two newspaper articles writ- ten on the topic from different newspapers in different geographic regions. Write a short compare-and- contrast response (one page maximum). How do the two arti- cles represent the same set of facts or circumstances? What kinds of language do the two articles use to set their tone? Could readers develop a different perspective based on which news source they read? 3. A team of researchers is interested in how prisoners experience their time being incarcerated. The primary research purpose is to describe prison life from the perspective of prisoners. The researchers conduct a qualitative study on prisoners’ experience of incarceration in a minimum security facility using focus groups. They hold four focus groups with six prisoners in each session and ask questions about daily routines, the dynamics of fear and power, relationships that form in prison, their perception of the guards, and other aspects of daily life. Now imagine that the research team changes its primary purpose. Instead of seeking to describe prison- ers’ experiences, they aim to identify problems in the prison experience in order to facilitate change within prisons. Now the researchers want to collectively create a project investigating prisoners’ experiences of incarceration in order to lobby policy officials for improved conditions and outcomes for prisoners, also accounting for the demands placed on prison guards and how their roles might be improved. The researchers’ reimagined purpose leads them to design a CBPR project. How might their CBPR project proceed? What are the first steps? Resources Lemert, C. (2021). Social theory: The multicultural, global, and classic readings (7th ed.). New York: Routledge. Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation. New York: Guilford Press. Trier-Bieniek, A. (2019). Feminist theory and pop culture (2nd ed.). Leiden, The Nether- lands: Brill/Sense.  Introduction to Social Research 23 Notes 1. Some people were particularly concerned that protests would spread COVID-19, which fueled some criticism of these protests. 2. Some researchers consider ABR a genre of qualitative research, creating even more over- lap in the literature. 3. Gioia Chilton, Nancy Gerber, and Victoria Scotti (2015) coined the term aesthetic inter- subjective paradigm.  CHAPTER 2 Ethics in Social Research I n 1971, the Stanford Prison Experiment occurred. Philip Zimbardo, a Stanford University psychology professor, led a team of researchers in a study about the psychology of imprisonment (Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo, 1973). They created a simulation of a prison in the basement of a Stanford building, including prison cells, solitary confinement quarters, and other common features of a prison. Twenty-four male students, from primarily middle-class backgrounds and deemed stable, were recruited for what was supposed to be a 2-week experiment. Half were assigned the role of prison guard and half the role of prisoner. Zimbardo assumed the role of superintendent, and a research assistant was assigned the role of warden. Guards and prisoners were given clothing to match their roles, as well as props to simulate prison life. Guards worked in shifts, and prisoners were left in their cells 24 hours a day. The guards were instructed not to physically harm prisoners but to give them a negative, disempowering experience (e.g., by calling them by numbers, not names; denying them privacy; giving them a sense of having no control or power). Researchers watched the action unfold from video monitors. The participants internalized their roles and acted upon them far beyond what the researchers had predicted. By the second day, mayhem began to ensue. The prisoners began to resist their conditions, and the guards decided to up the ante by psychologically controlling them. The guards employed various measures of psy- chological abuse and torture, demeaning and degrading the prisoners. Some prison- ers had their mattresses taken away and were forced to sleep on the floor, and some had their clothing taken away to cause humiliation. The treatment of the prisoners continued to worsen. Two prisoners left the experiment. On the sixth day, to the dismay of many of the guards, Zimbardo stopped the experiment. He later noted that more than 50 people observed the experiment, and only one raised ethical concerns. Imagine if you were a participant in this experiment. If you were assigned the 24  Ethics in Social Research 25 role of prisoner, how might you feel, knowing that the researchers had put you in a situation in which you were mistreated? What might be some of the consequences of being dehumanized in these ways, such as being stripped naked to maintain your submission? Would you be able to comfortably return to school with the others from the study? If you were in the role of a guard, how might you feel outside of the constructed experimental environment, knowing that you had participated in these behaviors? Might you feel guilty or ashamed? What if something violent or hateful was stirred up in you? How might that kind of experience impact you or others in your life? Parts of the experiment were filmed and are publicly available. How might it make you feel if others witnessed you being psychologically abused or causing such abuse? Now imagine that you were a researcher. What would you do if you were in this situation? Once you observed psychological abuse, would you allow the study to continue? How would you protect the welfare of all the research participants? What if the information you were learning was really interesting? Would you be enticed to let the experiment continue? How would you know whether you were doing the right thing? The Stanford Prison Experiment is one of the most infamous experiments in modern U.S. history, likely made more shocking because it occurred at a prestigious university. It has even been the subject of stories and films, including a 2015 movie. In the research community, the experiment is most frequently cited in discussions about ethics in social research. The word ethics comes from the Greek word ethos, which means character. Ethics involve morality, integrity, fairness, and truthfulness. Morality is about knowing what is right and wrong, and integrity is about acting on that knowl- edge. Ethics are central to social research. Because we are human beings engaged in understanding other human beings—social realities—ethics are of the utmost importance so that our research is not harmful. There is an ethical substructure that impacts every aspect of the research pro- cess (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2011; Leavy, 2011a, 2020a; Traianou, 2020). Right from the beginning, as we select a topic to study, ethical considerations come into play. Topic selection is informed by our values, our understanding of which prob- lems are in need of research, and the potential impact of the research. Every aspect of dealing with the “who” of our study—the people involved—is an ethical deci- sion. For example, everything from how we decide which group of people to study or build projects with, how we identify potential participants for our study, the manner in which we interact with the people involved in the study, and our research relationships, to how we disseminate our research findings to interested parties and therefore who gets to “know” and benefit from the research, are all examples of research components that require ethical considerations in decision making and practice. These are just the tip of the iceberg. In short, embedded within every aspect of the research endeavor are ethical considerations. The ethical substructure of research contains dimensions on three levels: philo- sophical, praxis, and reflexivity. 26 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN 1. The philosophical dimension of ethics is based on your values system and addresses the question “What do you believe?” 2. The praxis dimension of ethics addresses the question “What do you do?” 3. Finally, the reflexivity dimension of ethics, which combines the philosophi- cal and praxis, addresses the question “How does power come to bear?” The remainder of the chapter is divided into three sections: values system, ethi- cal praxis, and reflexivity. Note that although many of the issues reviewed in this chapter apply in some way or another to research regardless of approach, there are some issues that are heightened or unique to particular research designs or methods used within those designs. These are noted and expounded on, as appropriate, in Chapters 5–9. Values System As noted, this dimension of ethics addresses the question “What do you believe?” Each of us brings our own moral compass into our research experiences. We each have beliefs, attitudes, and ideas about the world. The values we bring to the research experience shape every decision we make; they shape what we think and therefore how we act. Our beliefs don’t just develop in our own minds—rather, they develop in a social context. Let’s take an example from everyday life. Your religious beliefs, whether regarding a specific religion, a nonreligious form of spirituality, agnosti- cism, or atheism, impact your worldview. These beliefs did not develop in a vacuum but were likely a part of your socialization. For example, if you are religious, you may have learned religious values in your childhood home. Your beliefs impact your behaviors. For example, if you are religious, you may attend religious services, engage in regular prayer or meditation, follow dietary restrictions, and so forth. The values and sense of morality that we bring to the research experience don’t just come from our personal lives. Specific social– historical events have impacted the values system researchers bring to their work. Although numerous historical events have influenced the research community’s understanding of ethics, there are two major events (each a series of events) that are considered landmarks in under- standing how our communal values system has emerged. First, a legacy of historical ethical atrocities in social research, and second, the social justice movements have impacted the values of research fields that include human subjects. Historical Abuses Sadly, there is a long history of biomedical abuses and the exploitation of human research subjects. For example, there were horrid abuses during World War II, including brutal experiments in concentration camps and related war crimes. As a result, the Nuremberg Code (1947) was established, outlining rules for experiments  Ethics in Social Research 27 with human beings, such as voluntary participation. Although not formalized into law, this was the first major effort at getting the medical community to regulate itself. Later, the Declaration of Helsinki (1964) was developed and, together with the Nuremberg Code, they are the basis for federal codes regarding the treatment of human beings in medical research. Biomedical abuses are not particular to times of war, nor are they foreign to those in the United States. The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, which occurred from 1932 to 1972, is perhaps the most infamous case of unethical biomedical research ever conducted in North America. In 1932, the U.S. Public Health Service began working with the Tuskegee Institute. They recruited 600 impoverished African American men in Alabama, 399 who had syphilis prior to enrollment and 201 who did not. What makes this experiment unconscionable is that the men did not know they had syphilis and were not treated for it. They were instead told that they had “bad blood” and were being treated for that. By 1947, penicillin was the legitimized treatment for syphilis, but the researchers still withheld it from the unknowing research subjects. Many of the men in the study died of syphilis and related complications, many infected their wives, and some had children born with congenital syphilis. The experiment was only stopped in 1972 when the truth was leaked to the press. Although only made known publicly in recent years, from 1946 to 1948 the U.S. Public Health Service conducted even more unethical experiments in Guatemala on prisoners and patients in mental health facilities. They purposely infected 696 men and women with syphilis and, in some instances, gonorrhea, and then treated them with antibiotics. Racism and, more specifically, stereotypes about African American men as sexually promiscuous, permeated Tuskegee. The men in the study were not regarded as medical patients, or even as human beings, thus absolving the doctors involved of treating them to the best of their abilities. They were deemed research “subjects,” available for the exploitation of the researchers. Imagine a modern-day version of this. What if prisoners were unknowingly put in an experiment to see whether torture, such as “waterboarding,” caused prisoners to reveal accurate information about their criminal activities? What if Muslim prisoners were targeted for this experiment? Without regulations, what would stop this kind of research? As a result of the Tuskegee undertaking, the research community developed a new set of principles or values regarding the rights of human participants in research studies. Participants began to be viewed as people first, with the right to know the nature of the study they are participating in, including possible risks and benefits, and to voluntarily choose whether to participate. Furthermore, over time a prin- ciple of mutuality, in which the research benefits both the researchers and the par- ticipants (Loftin, Barnett, Bunn, & Sullivan, 2005), has become important to many practitioners (particularly those working with qualitative and community-based participatory research [CBPR] approaches). In this regard, an important question to ask regarding any project is “Whose interests are being served?” These core values were put into ethical praxis with the development of various codes and regulations regarding research. The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment pre- cipitated the Belmont Report (1979), which led to the development of the National 28 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The three primary guiding principles identified in the Belmont Report are (1) respect for person, (2) beneficence, and (3) justice. These principles are enacted via informed consent, analysis of risks and benefits, and the selection of partici- pants. Here is a YouTube link where you can learn more about the Belmont Report: www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7sfIA1dIGQ. The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment also led to federal laws regarding institutional review boards (IRBs) and the pro- tection of human subjects in research. IRBs are discussed in the section on ethical praxis. The Social Justice Movements The social justice movements of the 1960s and 1970s—the civil rights movement, the women’s movement, the gay rights movement, the labor movement—reflected and created major shifts in our cultural values. The justice movements sought equality on the basis of status characteristics, including sex, race, sexual orienta- tion, and economic class, and the eradication of sexism, racism, homophobia, and classism. In various arenas of social life, from education to employment to home life to legal protection in the private and public spheres, inequalities were exposed and change demanded. Although many social injustices persist, the 1960s and 1970s were decades of great change. Increased attention to issues of gender, race, and sexuality and efforts to rectify historical inequities impacted the values guid- ing social research. A common effect from the justice movements was a thorough reexamination of power within the social research enterprise, in order to avoid creating knowledge that continued to collude in the oppression of minority groups. (The issue of power is expanded in the section on reflexivity.) Social Justice and Subjugated Voices The cumulative effects these movements have had on the research community include reconsiderations of why we undertake research, what we believe about who should be included in research, what topics are valuable to study, and the uses to which social research might be put. All researchers are impacted by these ideas, but they shape individual researchers’ values systems differently. Values to emerge from the justice movements include, but are not limited to, inclusivity in the research process; addressing inequalities and injustices; soci- etal improvement (making the world better); and anti-sexist, anti-racist, anti- homophobic, and anti- classist agendas. Social research became an important vehi- cle for identity politics1 and social change, and for influencing public policy. Because historically marginalized groups had been rendered invisible in social research or included in ways that reinforced stereotypes, populations comprising women; Black, indigenous, or people of color (BIPOC); or lesbian/gay/bisexual/ transgender/queer or questioning (LGBTQIA) individuals were sought out for meaningful inclusion. This effort was an attempt to include underrepresented groups in research. Sometimes researchers talk about including subjugated voices  Ethics in Social Research 29 and marginalized perspectives, the perspectives of those typically forced to the peripheries of society. Researchers working from the five approaches may have dif- ferent perspectives and practices with respect to inclusivity. For example, in quantitative research, attempts at inclusivity often center on including persons from marginalized groups in research samples. For instance, whereas prior to the women’s movement, an experiment may have included only male research subjects, an effect of the women’s movement in the research arena has been to design experiments around women as well as men. In qualitative research, increased value may be placed on allowing participants to use their own language to describe their experiences as a way of including differences based on gender and other status characteristics. In mixed methods projects, the approaches to inclusiv- ity fostered in both quantitative and qualitative traditions come to bear. In arts- based research (ABR), there may be an effort to use an art form to include formerly marginalized perspectives in ways that jar people into thinking differently about commonly accepted stereotypes. In CBPR, there may be an effort to develop the project from the outset with people from different groups so that, for example, the perspectives of people across gender, race, class, or sexual orientation, or people who share a stigmatized characteristic such as schizophrenia or HIV-positive sta- tus, help build the project from the ground up. These are just a few examples to show how the changing beliefs that emerged from the previous social justice move- ments have influenced researchers: the beliefs that people/groups with different status characteristics should be included in research. However, researchers adapt differently to those changing beliefs in accord with the principles of the specific research design. Inclusivity can be understood and internalized as a part of our val- ues system in numerous ways. How we think about and put into practice the value of inclusivity invariably affects the selection of participants for our project. Who do we identify as stakeholders (i.e., those groups with a vested interest in the research topic)? Around whose experiences and perspectives do we build the study? Whom do we choose to include? By changing the populations researchers were interested in studying, research topics and purposes changed as well. As a result of the social justice movements, researchers have been able to ask new groups old research questions, and to ask entirely new questions. Let’s take the example of studying parenting. Whereas his- torically, research would have focused exclusively on the nuclear family ideal, as a result of the social justice movements there has been a wealth of new research on parenting that has included single parents, gay and lesbian parents, interracial par- ents, families with stay-at-home dads, and families with two heterosexual working parents. This new body of research has greatly broadened our understanding of parenting in numerous ways. As a result of including previously neglected groups, we have also been able to ask entirely new research questions based on varying perspectives and experiences, including conducting comparative research. So, for example, we may conduct a study comparing parenting and family issues in house- holds with heterosexual or homosexual parents. The findings from this kind of research can potentially be used to combat stereotypes and lobby for related policy changes. 30 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN Our values concerning inclusivity also come to bear during the process of data collection or generation. Language is a central issue. From the outset, we need to think about how we employ language both in written and verbal communication. With respect to the written word as we develop our topic, create the instrumentation for the project (such as a questionnaire or interview guide), and choose how to repre- sent our research to audiences, our use of language must be considered. Likewise, we need to carefully consider the language we use in our interactions with the research participants so that we don’t offend anyone. It is important to use politically and culturally sensitive terminology with respect to status characteristics. Think about how often an actor, actress, or politician makes a public apology because he/she/they used an outdated or otherwise offensive racial term, for instance. It is important to be culturally competent and employ cultural sensitivity in all dealings with research participants and collaborators (Leavy, 2011a; Loftin et al., 2005) and in the docu- mentation of the process and findings. This means that when you are conducting research on or with individuals with whom you share social or cultural differences, such as race, ethnicity, religion, social class, or education, it is important to be mind- ful of these differences, including different cultural understandings or experiences and commonly used expressions and other ways of communicating. It is vital to use nonoffensive and mutually understandable language. Some strategies for discover- ing what language is appropriate with your participants include: Conducting literature reviews Conducting pilot studies Initially immersing yourself in the setting/field Creating and consulting with community advisory boards As a result of the historical atrocities reviewed earlier, as well as the values that emerged from the social justice movements, some researchers achieve cultural sen- sitivity by engaging their research participants as full collaborators in the process, which is commonplace in CBPR (reviewed in Chapter 9). Full collaboration means that participants help design all aspects of the research project, beginning with identifying a worthwhile topic. As noted earlier, due to the social justice movements, social research became an important vehicle for identity politics and social change, and for influencing public policy. Therefore, our values system impacts how we think about issues related to the audience for our research. The audience for our research may include a range of stakeholders. You can see social justice values reflected in the following questions: Whom do we include in our research? How do we identify relevant stake- holders? What do we choose to study? How do we come up with topics, write purpose statements and hypotheses, and frame research questions?  Ethics in Social Research 31 What measures have we taken to ensure that our language is appropriate and respectful and reflects sensitivity to cultural differences? How do we write up or otherwise represent our research? How will we think about issues such as authorship and ownership of the research findings/output? How will we identify relevant audiences? How do we take status character- istics into account as we identify relevant audiences? How will we distribute our findings to relevant audiences? Will we contribute to public scholarship, and if so, how? Do we intend to apply our research to a particular group or setting in pursuit of social change? Will we attempt to impact public policy, and if so, how? What is our political or social agenda? Bear in mind that the preceding questions may not be paramount in every project, but they serve as examples of the different ways in which the values that emerged from the social justice movements have infiltrated the research process. The research community has composed the moral principles that should under- score all research in response to the jarring historical atrocities reviewed earlier, as well as the cumulative and continued progress made by the social justice move- ments. Our community responded to these events by continually reevaluating our values and ethical standards. This constant renegotiation of the important role of values in our work has moved research practice forward. Ultimately, our values impact our goals and what we do, including the treatment of those who participate in research, the kinds of people and topics we choose to include, and the uses to which we put our research. REVIEW STOP 1 1. The ethical substructure impacts every aspect of the research process and consists of three dimensions: , , and. 2. How was the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment unethical? a. Tuskegee spurred new codes and regulations about the protection of human research participants, including the 1979. 3. The language that researchers use should be sensitive and culturally competent. What are the four strategies for discovering what language is appropriate with your participants? ( Go to the end of the chapter to check your answers. 32 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN Ethical Praxis This dimension of ethics addresses the question “What do you do?” What we actu- ally do in terms of designing and executing our research agendas is greatly influ- enced by our beliefs. Carolyn Ellis (2007) notes there are three subcategories of ethics at the praxis stage: procedural ethics, situational ethics, and relational ethics. There is a historical context for guidelines and regulations (discussed earlier), but as you will see in this section, regulations take us only so far, and we must also rely on our own moral compasses. This section is divided into the issues that arise during three phases of research: research design (setup), data collection or content genera- tion, and representation and dissemination. Research Design/Setup This phase involves preparing and designing your project. There are two main ethi- cal issues applicable to this part of research design. First, ethical considerations emerge during the development of your research topic. Second, you need to consider the protection of the research participants and seek necessary approvals before you can begin working with human subjects. Ethical Considerations as You Develop Your Topic There are many considerations that go into the selection of a research topic, as reviewed in the next chapter—your moral compass comes into play as you select and develop a topic. Ethically, you must first ask yourself, “What is the potential value or significance of research on the proposed topic?” The value or significance of a research topic is determined by who will benefit from new knowledge on the topic, whether the research will address an identified social need, and its potential to promote new learning or social change. Second, you must ensure there are no potential conflicts of interest. For instance, if your research is funded, make sure that your funder’s agenda does not compete with your own. There should be no pressure or monetary gain for deriving certain outcomes or research findings. You can reflect on these questions as you develop your topic: Who will benefit from research on this topic? Will research on this topic promote new learning, social justice, or social change? Is there a moral basis for conducting research on this topic (e.g., are you correcting a historical bias by focusing on a minority group or seeking to destigmatize a disenfranchised group)? Are you aware of any conflicts of interest? As you continue to develop your topic, you will also identify potential popula- tions of interest (those people or groups you are interested in, from whom you will  Ethics in Social Research 33 seek participants for the study). During this time additional ethical questions come to bear: Does your research involve underrepresented persons or groups? Will the research participants benefit from their participation in the project? Will the distribution of burdens and benefits to the participants be fair (Adams, Holman Jones, & Ellis, 2015)? There are also ethical considerations as you compile a literature review to learn more about your topic and shape the direction for your research. These are dis- cussed in Chapter 3. The Protection of Research Participants First, do no harm is the primary principle governing the protection of research participants. Adapted from the biomedical community, this principle states that no harm should come to research participants. This protection is extended to the set- tings in which research occurs (in cases when you are conducting research in real- world environments, such as the participants’ community). Once you have selected a research topic, you will need to develop a research proposal that includes your intentions regarding the protection of your research participants (research proposals are discussed in depth in Chapters 5–9). Every discipline has a professional association with an established code of ethics that outlines discipline-specific ethical considerations (see the select list provided in the “Resources” section at the end of this chapter). As you develop your research pro- posal, or plan for how the research will proceed, you can consult the code of ethics in your discipline (Creswell, 2014). You will then need to seek appropriate approv- als from your IRB. IRBs are established in universities to ensure that ethical standards are applied. Although there are variations at different kinds of institutions, IRBs have a mini- mum of five members and must include at least one scientist and one nonscientist. In addition to being diverse in terms of disciplinary backgrounds, IRBs should be diverse in terms of gender and race, although this is not always the case. The com- position of an IRB can have serious consequences for how proposals are understood and evaluated. Prior to contacting potential research participants or beginning any data collection, you must seek permission from your IRB. IRBs are primarily in place to ensure the protection of human subjects. They dictate procedural ethics (Ellis, 2007). Your proposal to the IRB will include information such as the pur- pose of the study, the benefits of doing this research, the intended outcomes of the study, the population you are interested in, the proposed sampling strategy (how you will select participants), the possible risks to participants (which may include any possible physical, psychological, or emotional harm), benefits to participants, and your plan to garner informed consent. Consult your university’s website for 34 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN their particular requirements— typically there is a sample proposal you can use as a template or that you can download. Once you have received IRB approval, you need to obtain informed consent from the research participants. At this early stage, there may be two phases of obtaining informed consent. First, you may provide your potential participants with an invitation letter or a recruitment letter. Although you don’t want to inundate people at first contact, the letter should outline the basics of the study. After first identifying yourself as the researcher, providing your qualifications, and describing your interest in the topic (if there is more than one researcher, each one should be identified), describe the following (Leavy, 2011b, p. 35): The purpose of the study Why or how the person has been selected as a potential participant What the person’s participation would entail, including the time commit- ment Information about how and when follow-up to this letter will occur Contact information for the principle investigator or whomever they should contact if they have questions or concerns Here is a sample invitation/recruitment letter2: Dear Jane Smith, My name is Patricia Leavy, and I am a sociology professor at Stonehill College, where I have taught for 7 years. I am writing to you because I am conducting an oral history interview study about the experience of divorce for stay-at-home mothers. Through my recruitment process, your name was mentioned as some- one who might be interested in participating. Should you choose to participate, your participation is completely volun- tary and you are free to change your mind and stop your participation at any time. Your identity will be kept strictly confidential. It is my hope to publish this study as an academic journal article; however, I will not use your name or any other identifying information. Your participation would mean that I would set up two or three interview sessions with you, lasting 60–90 minutes each. I would work around your schedule. The interviews could be held in my office, your home, or another quiet location of your choosing. I will provide light refreshments and reimburse you for any travel expenses. I am very interested in the issues women face regarding marriage, parent- ing, and work. I think you have valuable knowledge to share that could benefit others. It is my hope that the interview experience would be personally reward- ing for you, as well. I can be reached at (phone) or (e-mail) to answer any questions you may  Ethics in Social Research 35 have. I will follow up in 1–2 weeks with a phone call to see if you’re interested in learning more (unless, of course, I hear from you first). Thank you. Sincerely, Patricia Leavy, PhD Second, you will need to obtain written informed consent from the partici- pants. Check your academic institution’s website for their guidelines and the sam- ples they may provide. There are also many discipline-specific examples available online. Generally, your written informed consent request should include the follow- ing (Leavy, 2011b, pp. 36–37): Title of the research project Identification of the principal investigator (and any other researchers) with contact information Basic information, including the purpose of the project and the research methods/procedures The intended outcomes of the project (including plans for publication) Details about what the individual’s participation will entail, including the time commitment Possible risks of participation Possible benefits of participation The voluntary nature of participation, including the right to withdraw at any time The right of all participants to ask questions The steps that will be taken to ensure confidentiality and privacy Compensation for participation (even if there is none, this should be stated) Contact information for the principle investigator or whomever they should contact if they have questions or concerns A space should be provided for the principal investigator’s and participant’s signatures with dates Here is a sample informed consent letter3: Informed Consent Title: Oral History Project on Divorce for Stay-at-Home Mothers Principal Investigator and Contact Information: Dr. Patricia Leavy (contact information) Purpose of the Study: The purpose of this study is to learn about the experience of divorce for stay-at-home mothers from their own perspective. The study 36 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN aims to produce new knowledge about how divorce impacts the identity of stay-at-home mothers, practical matters such as daily routine, financial issues, and any other points of interest to the participants. Intended Outcomes of the Study: The study is intended to contribute to our understanding of the lives of stay-at-home mothers and the impact of divorce on those women. The knowledge gained from the study will contribute to the literature on marriage and family, gender, and identity in the social sciences. The results of the study will be published as an article in a peer-reviewed aca- demic journal, shared in professional conference presentations, and may be published in other forms (such as a book chapter in an edited volume). Procedures and What Participation Entails: This study relies on the method of oral history interview, which is a highly in-depth form of interview in which participants can share their experiences and stories. You will be asked to set up an initial interview expected to last 60–90 minutes. The interview will be arranged around your scheduling needs. You can elect to have the interview conducted in the principal investigator’s office located at (address), in your home, or in another quiet location of your choosing. You may bring a family photo album or any other pictures or objects you wish to share and discuss. During the interview, you will be asked a series of open-ended questions about your marriage, divorce, and your life as a stay-at-home mother before and after your divorce. You will be able to speak for as long as you like, and there aren’t right or wrong responses. The goal is to share your experience. With your permission, the interview session will be audiotaped so that it can later be tran- scribed accurately. You will be provided with light refreshments during your interview. After the initial interview there will be an e-mail follow-up within 2 weeks, and you will be asked to schedule a second interview (same location and procedure as already described). The second interview is an opportunity to elaborate or explain previous comments and answer new questions that have arisen as a result of your first interview. A third interview session may be requested within 2 weeks after your second interview, if clarifications are needed. Confidentiality: Your participation is strictly confidential; your identity will be kept anonymous and you will be assigned a pseudonym (a fictitious name) in any resulting publications or presentations. The audiotapes will be destroyed after they are transcribed and the interview transcripts will bear only your assigned pseudonym. Likewise, any people you mention in your interview will also be assigned pseudonyms. Details that are so specific they might alert read- ers to your identity will not be used. Participant Rights and Compensation: Your participation in this study is strictly voluntary and can be withdrawn at any time without consequence. You also have the right to ask questions at any point during the study. Your time and experiences are greatly valued. Although you will not be compensated for your participation, you will be reimbursed for any travel expenses. Please be  Ethics in Social Research 37 aware that possible risks of your participation include emotional or psychologi- cal distress from talking about your divorce, your children, and your identity. Should you experience any distress, please let the principal investigator know. Please be aware that possible benefits you may experience as a result of your participation include having your voice heard and valued and feeling empow- ered by sharing your experience with the knowledge that it may help others. If you have any questions or concerns about participating in this study, please contact Dr. Patricia Leavy at (e-mail) or (phone). If you agree to participate in the study, please sign and date this form below and return it to (include information). Once I have received your signed informed consent letter, I will e-mail you to set up an interview time. Thank you. Participant signature Date Both the invitation and informed consent letters are generally hand delivered, mailed, or e-mailed. Obtaining written consent is an important measure of protec- tion not only for participants but also for researchers, and in this age of technology, information about the project can also be communicated via video chatting (Zoom, FaceTime, and the like), social media, websites, blogs, and other technologically enabled means. One additional issue emerges for minors. In studies involving participants who are minors and not legally able to give informed consent, but are old enough to understand the basics of the study and what their participation entails, assent is required. Assent means that a minor understands and agrees to participate in a study. Once assent is acquired, informed consent must be given by the minor’s legal guardian. The Messiness of Informed Consent in Practice Although it is important to obtain informed consent, which is a real and valid mea- sure for the protection of research participants, it would be a mistake to gloss over the complexity and messiness of informed consent in practice. This is an area in which procedural ethics bump up against situational and relational ethical issues, which come to bear after you have begun the research process. Situational ethics refers to “ethics in practice” (Ellis, 2007, p. 4). Relational ethics refers to an “ethics of care” (p. 4). This set of ethical issues centers on the interpersonal relationships between the researcher and participants (Ellis, 2007). (Situational and relational ethics are discussed further in the section on data collection and working with the research participants.) The procedural aspect of obtaining informed consent is straightforward. How- ever, once the informed consent has been obtained, there are two additional issues to be aware of: process consent and unanticipated experiences. Informed consent must be obtained prior to beginning research in order to 38 THE NuTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN satisfy your IRB. In addition, in a project for which participation extends over a period of time, it is appropriate to process consent at multiple stages (Adams et al., 2015). This means that you designate times to check in with research participants and review consent issues, including the voluntary nature of the study and their right to withdraw. This effort also provides an opportunity to see how participants are doing, and to learn whethe