RESEARCH DESIGN PDF

RESEARCH DESIGN Also Available Handbook of Emergent Methods Edited by Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber and Patricia Leavy Method Meets Art, Second Edition: Arts-Based Research Practice Patricia Leavy Forthcoming Handbook of Arts-Based Research Edited by Patricia Leavy Research Design Quantitative, Qualitative, Mixed Methods, Arts-Based, and Community-Based Participatory Research Approaches PATRICIA LEAVY THE GUILFORD PRESS New York London Copyright © 2017 The Guilford Press A Division of Guilford Publications, Inc. 370 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1200, New York, NY 10001 www.guilford.com All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America This book is printed on acid-free paper. Last digit is print number: 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available from the publisher. ISBN 978-1-4625-1438-0 (paper) – ISBN 978-1-4625-2999-5 (hard) To Mark Robins, the best spouse and friend anyone could have Thank you for your unfailing support, wisdom, and encouragement during the long process of writing this book. PREFACE I think of research design as building a structure or plan for your research. Just as architects work with many different general types of structure—single-family homes, multifamily homes, nonresidential buildings, and so forth—social research- ers have five primary structures with which they work: quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based, and community-based participatory. We call these approaches to research design, and the one we select for a given research project depends on considerations including our topic and purpose. The selected approach provides only the general purpose and structure for the research project, just as an architect with an assignment to design a single-family home still has many choices with respect to the style, layout, and size of the building. Within each of the five major design approaches, there are innumerable pos- sibilities for how research might proceed. We have to consider two questions: What do we want to achieve? and How do we execute that goal? This is the process of building a methodology, which is a plan for how the research will be carried out. There are many tools at our disposal—methods, theories, and so forth—that we use to build a research plan. The philosophical point of view, professional experience, ethical standpoint, and practical skill set we, as individual researchers, bring to the table also influence how we design a project. We put our own stamp on our research projects the same way an architect might through unique stylistic features. In addition to reviewing these five approaches to design, this book is unique because of its attention to ethical practice, emphasis on writing a research proposal (and how this proposal differs across approaches to design), modeling of the use of appropriate language for each of the five designs, and the extensive pedagogi- cal features employed to make this text user-friendly for students, professors, and researchers. Special Features of This Book A Focus on Ethics Often research design texts present a chapter on ethics in research or, in some cases, just a section of a chapter. However, ethics are intertwined with all phases vii viii Preface of the research design process. Therefore, in addition to including a robust chapter devoted to ethics, the five chapters that address methods each feature “Ethics in Practice” flags, highlighting some moments in the research process in which ethics have a bearing on decision making. Writing a Proposal Most students of research methods and novice researchers alike need assistance in learning how to write a solid research proposal. Therefore, at the beginning of each of the design approach chapters (Chapters 4–8), I present a template for a research proposal. The remainder of the chapter elaborates on the elements in the template. So, instead of arbitrarily learning the dos and don’ts of each approach to design, as you learn the nuts and bolts of each approach, you are simultaneously learning how to put it all together in a research proposal. As a pedagogical feature, a summary of the proposal template is presented at the end of each chapter as well. It’s impor- tant to note that the format for writing research proposals bears close similarities to the organization of journal articles. In other words, writing a proposal mirrors the process of a final write-up intended for publication. So for those readers not planning to write a formal research proposal, the structure of the chapters may help you reflect on how to structure your research write-up, in addition to provid- ing the content you need for your work. Finally, because quantitative research and (often) mixed methods research follow “deductive” research models, whereas quali- tative arts- and community-based participatory research approaches generally fol- low “inductive” designs, I have followed those models in the structuring of the five chapters on methods. In the quantitative and mixed methods chapters, the methods instruction occurs prior to the use of published research examples. In the quali- tative arts- and community-based participatory chapters, the methods instruction occurs after published research examples are presented. In these subtle ways, each methods chapter models the tenets of that approach to design. A Note about Language The issue of language in how we write research proposals and ultimately repre- sent our research is important and often overlooked in the literature. Researchers using the five different approaches reviewed in this book tend to use different words to describe the components of their work. These words are meaningful and carry implications about what we, as researchers, can know and how we develop that knowledge. Here are some examples of words that may be employed as a result of the approach with which you are working (this is by no means exhaustive): respondent, subject, participant, co-creator, collaborator: the people on whom our research is focused. discover, generate, unearth, collect: how knowledge is acquired. method, practice: the tools used to gather/generate data. Preface ix findings, results, renderings, outcomes: the final product of research. data, content: raw information. research study, inquiry: our process. Just taking the first example of the words used to describe the people on whom our research is focused, different approaches lead us to weight words differently. In quantitative research, we often see the word subject or respondent (although some quantitative researchers have shifted to the word participant); in qualitative research, we may see participant; in mixed methods research, we may see respon- dent, subject, or participant; in arts-based research, we typically see participant, co-creator, or collaborator; and in community-based participatory research we generally see co-creator or collaborator. These differences in language are not ran- dom but rather speak to deeper issues about the philosophical beliefs and research practices guiding inquiry. In order to highlight the importance of language and model how you might write a research proposal with these five approaches in Chap- ters 4–8, I employ the terms commonly used in that type of research. Extensive Pedagogical Features This text is meant to be very user-friendly. As such, numerous pedagogical fea- tures are employed. Key terms and concepts appear in bold type, and there are easy-to-read tables and figures throughout the book. Every chapter includes mul- tiple “Review Stops” so that readers can review the information in the preceding sections. Readers are then directed to “Go” to the end of the chapter to check their answers. The “Review Stops” are an opportunity to pause, recap, and make sure the information has been processed before continuing. The end of every chap- ter also includes a “Further Engagement” section, which provides more advanced writing and research activities designed to put the chapter content into practice. Resources (books, chapters, websites) and suggested journals are also provided for each chapter, as appropriate. At the end of each methods chapter, there is a summarized version of the research proposal template. I also interviewed leading researchers across the disci- plines known for their work with the five approaches reviewed in this text. Some of their top tips appear in “Expert Tip” boxes in Chapters 4–8. The book also includes a glossary of key terms that follows Chapter 8. Lastly, PowerPoints are available for instructors who adopt the book for class use. Instructors can email Guilford at [email protected] (with subject line “PowerPoints for Research Design”) to request the files. Instructors should provide the following information in their email: Department University Name of course and level x Preface Expected enrollment Author/title of previous book used, if applicable Audience for the Book This book is appropriate for undergraduate and graduate research methods courses across the social and behavioral sciences. The format of Chapters 4–8, each of which models a research proposal and shows readers how to fill in that proposal, makes the book useful for individual graduate students writing their master’s or dissertation research proposals, as well as researchers at any level looking for assis- tance with this process. Organization of the Book Part I provides a detailed discussion of research design in general: what it is, why we do it, what the five approaches are well s uited for, ethical practice, and the nuts and bolts of starting to design a project. Part II presents a chapter on each of the five approaches to research design. These chapters can be read independently and out of order (although it’s advisable to read the quantitative and qualitative chapters prior to reading the mixed methods chapter). Chapters that aren’t of interest can also be skipped. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS B ooks are never the result of one person’s work, but rather represent the work and generosity of many. First and foremost, I am profoundly grateful to my publisher and editor extraor- dinaire, C. Deborah Laughton. There is no one else like you in this business. When I dreamed of being an author as a kid, you were my fantasy editor. Who knew you were real? This is a much better book because of your careful reading of numerous drafts, vast knowledge of the field, advice and suggestions, and, above all, your belief in the value of this project. You’re simply the best. Not only are you an exem- plary publisher, but you’re a wonderful person and cherished friend. I extend a spirited thank you to the entire team at The Guilford Press, a class act. I’m truly honored to work with you. In particular, thank you to Seymour Wein- garten, Bob Matloff, Katherine Sommer, Anna Brackett, Judith Grauman, Kath- erine Lieber, Marian Robinson, Margaret Ryan, Paul Gordon, Carly DaSilva, and Andrea Sargent. Thank you to the formerly anonymous reviewers: Barbara B. Levin, Depart- ment of Teacher Education and Higher Education, University of North Carolina at Greensboro; Amanda Byron, Conflict Resolution Program, Portland State Univer- sity; Mary P. Martinasek, Public Health Program, University of Tampa; and Larry Maucieri, Division of Psychology and Counseling, Governors State University. You provided thoughtful and detailed suggestions that have greatly strengthened this book. Your advice was invaluable and deeply appreciated. I couldn’t do any of this work without my long-time assistant and dear friend, Shalen Lowell. Your assistance with the literature review, creating tables, helping with permissions and rights to republish, keeping me laughing through the long writing process (no small task), and so much more was absolutely instrumental. Furthermore, had you not kept so many other balls in the air, I would not have been able to give this book the attention it demanded. Thank you! Many generous colleagues have also contributed to this book. Thank you, Gioia Chilton, for your assistance in interviewing the researchers whose “Expert Tips” appear in boxes throughout this book. Thank you kindly to those experts willing to share their insider advice for the betterment of the field. Your wisdom xi xii Acknowledgments and generosity are deeply appreciated. Marianne Fallon, you’re an exemplary col- league. Thank you for sharing your unpublished manuscript with me and offering advice when I needed it. I’m also appreciative of my friends and colleagues for lending their support during the process. Special thanks to Melissa Anyiwo, Celine Boyle, Pam DeSantis, Sandra Faulkner, Ally Field, Anne Harris, Jessica Smartt Gullion, Monique Rob- itaille, and Adrienne Trier-Bieniek. Finally, I’m grateful to my family. Daisy Doodle, my little best friend, I’m so blessed to have all of the daily cuddles, which are a constant source of joy and peacefulness in my life. Madeline, you are my heart. Mark, you are the best spouse anyone could have. Thank you for lending invaluable support and encouragement along the way, as you have with all of my work, for your true partnership, and for picking up take-out and staying in on weekends, when the book needed me. CONTENTS PART I The Nuts and Bolts of Research Design CHAPTER 1 Introduction to Social Research 3 Different Ways of Knowing 3 Purposes of Social Research 5 REVIEW STOP 1 8 The Five Approaches to Research 8 REVIEW STOP 2 10 The Elements of Research 10 Philosophical Elements: What Do We Believe? 11 Praxis: What Do We Do? 14 REVIEW STOP 3 17 Putting It All Together 17 Quantitative 19 Qualitative 19 Mixed Methods Research 19 Arts-Based Research 20 Community-Based Participatory Research 20 Conclusion 21 REVIEW STOP ANSWER KEY 21 FURTHER ENGAGEMENT 21 RESOURCES 22 CHAPTER 2 Ethics in Social Research 23 Values System 25 Historical Abuses 25 The Social Justice Movements 27 REVIEW STOP 1 30 Ethical Praxis 31 Research Design/Setup 31 REVIEW STOP 2 37 xiii xiv Contents Data Collection/Generation/Content Creation 38 REVIEW STOP 3 42 Representation and Dissemination 42 Reflexivity 47 Power 48 Voice 49 Putting Reflexivity into Practice across the Five Approaches 49 REVIEW STOP 4 50 Conclusion 50 REVIEW STOP ANSWER KEY 51 FURTHER ENGAGEMENT 52 RESOURCES 52 CHAPTER 3 Getting Started Designing a Project 54 Selecting a Topic 54 Literature Reviews 56 REVIEW STOP 1 62 Research Purpose Statements, Hypotheses, and Research Questions 62 Research Purpose Statements 62 Measurement and Variables 67 REVIEW STOP 2 69 Hypotheses 69 Research Questions 71 Putting It Together 73 REVIEW STOP 3 75 Sampling 75 Probability Sampling 78 Purposeful Sampling 79 REVIEW STOP 4 81 Conclusion 81 REVIEW STOP ANSWER KEY 81 FURTHER ENGAGEMENT 83 RESOURCES 83 PART II Five Approaches to Research Design CHAPTER 4 Quantitative Research Design 87 Structure of a Research Proposal 87 Basic Introductory Information 88 Title 88 Abstract 88 Keywords 89 Contents xv The Topic 89 The Topic under Investigation 89 Significance, Value, or Worth 91 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 91 Theoretical Perspective 91 Research Purpose Statement 92 Research Questions or Hypotheses 92 Literature Review 93 REVIEW STOP 1 93 The Research Plan 93 Design and Methods of Data Collection 93 REVIEW STOP 2 96 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 99 REVIEW STOP 3 100 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 108 REVIEW STOP 4 108 Population, Sampling, and Subjects 109 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 111 Data Analysis and Assessment 111 REVIEW STOP 5 112 Interpretation and Representation 116 Pilot Tests (If Applicable) 116 Ethics Statement 116 REVIEW STOP 6 117 References 117 Appendices 117 Conclusion 118 REVIEW STOP ANSWER KEY 120 FURTHER ENGAGEMENT 121 RESOURCES 122 CHAPTER 5 Qualitative Research Design 124 Structure of a Research Proposal 124 Basic Introductory Information 126 Title 126 Abstract 126 Keywords 126 The Topic 127 The Topic under Investigation 127 Significance, Value, or Worth 127 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 127 Literature Review 128 Research Purpose Statement 128 Research Questions 128 The Research Plan 128 Philosophical Statement 128 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 132 REVIEW STOP 1 133 xvi Contents Genre/Design and Methods of Data Collection 133 REVIEW STOP 2 138 REVIEW STOP 3 143 REVIEW STOP 4 148 Sampling, Participants, and Setting 148 Data Analysis and Interpretation Strategies 150 REVIEW STOP 5 154 Evaluation 154 Representation 156 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 157 Ethics Statement 157 REVIEW STOP 6 158 References 158 Appendices 158 Conclusion 159 REVIEW STOP ANSWER KEY 160 FURTHER ENGAGEMENT 162 RESOURCES 162 CHAPTER 6 Mixed Methods Research Design 164 Structure of a Research Proposal 164 Basic Introductory Information 165 Title 165 Abstract 165 Keywords 165 The Topic 165 The Topic under Investigation 165 Research Purpose Statement 166 Research Questions and Hypotheses (as Applicable) 166 Philosophical Statement and Theoretical Perspective 168 Literature Review 169 REVIEW STOP 1 170 The Research Plan 170 Design and Methods of Data Collection 170 REVIEW STOP 2 172 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 178 REVIEW STOP 3 179 Sampling and Participants 179 Data Analysis and Interpretation Strategies 181 Representation 183 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 183 Ethics Statement 184 REVIEW STOP 4 184 References 184 Appendices 185 Conclusion 185 REVIEW STOP ANSWER KEY 187 FURTHER ENGAGEMENT 188 RESOURCES 189 Contents xvii CHAPTER 7 Arts-Based Research Design 191 Structure of a Research Proposal 191 Basic Introductory Information 192 Title 192 Abstract 192 Keywords 192 The Topic 193 The Topic under Investigation or the Theme 193 Research Purpose or Goal Statement 194 Research Questions (Optional) 194 REVIEW STOP 1 194 The Research Plan 194 Philosophical Statement 194 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 195 Participants and/or Content 197 REVIEW STOP 2 198 Genres and Practices 198 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 202 REVIEW STOP 3 203 REVIEW STOP 4 207 REVIEW STOP 5 211 Representation and Audience 212 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 214 Evaluation Criteria 214 Ethics Statement 216 REVIEW STOP 6 218 References 218 Appendices 218 Conclusion 219 REVIEW STOP ANSWER KEY 221 FURTHER ENGAGEMENT 222 RESOURCES 223 CHAPTER 8 Community-Based Participatory Research Design 224 Structure of a Research Proposal 225 Basic Introductory Information 225 Title 225 Abstract 225 Keywords 226 The Topic 226 The Problem or Issue 226 Literature Review 229 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 230 REVIEW STOP 1 231 Research Purpose Statement 231 Research Questions 231 xviii Contents The Research Plan 232 Philosophical Statement 232 Setting(s) and Participants 235 REVIEW STOP 2 236 Design and Methods 236 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 243 REVIEW STOP 3 243 Data Analysis and Interpretation 243 Representation and Dissemination 244 ETHICS IN PRACTICE 247 Ethics Statement 248 REVIEW STOP 4 249 References 249 Appendices 249 Conclusion 250 REVIEW STOP ANSWER KEY 252 FURTHER ENGAGEMENT 253 RESOURCES 253 Glossary 255 References 273 Author Index 287 Subject Index 291 About the Author 301 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 polarizing verdict in the case against George Zimmerman in the killing of Trayvon Martin. People have strong beliefs about whether racism was at play, the way law enforce- ment officials handled the tragedy, and “stand your ground”1 laws. 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 experi- ences. 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 two snippets from different news sources after the Trayvon Martin killing, with diametrically opposed takes on “stand your ground” laws: These laws allow people who face serious bodily harm or death to defend them- selves without first having to retreat as far as possible.—Chicago Tribune (Lott, 2013) If you are using the stand your ground law, it actually encourages that person not only to shoot, but to shoot to kill... because if you eliminate the only potential other witness, you’re much more likely to be able to prevail in a stand your ground hearing.—MSNBC, quoting criminal defense attorney Ken Padowitz (Whitaker, 2013) The news source you happen to choose may have a significant impact on your understanding of this issue. It’s no surprise that after the killing and acquittal, some people assuredly stated this was a hate crime based on race and, moreover, had the race of the defendant and victim been reversed, the outcome in the criminal justice system would have been different. Others argued that we live in a postracial society 3 4 THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN and that legitimate fears for safety were at play. Yet others argued those so-called fears were the result of systemic racism that serves to reinforce stereotypes. In all of the 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 own perspectives and biases. Factors such as religion, politi- cal leanings, education, and status characteristics, including race, class, gender, 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 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, as children, authority figures such as parents may tell us 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 experience 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 each other 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 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 Introduction to Social Research 5 us come to understand the social world and our place in it. Social research has developed 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 the 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. 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. 6 THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN 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 4 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, 2011). Evaluation research is useful in numerous kinds of research projects, from evaluating particu- lar outreach programs, educational programs, to public policies, campaigns of vari- ous 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 7, on arts-based research). 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 Trayvon Mar- tin 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 Introduction to Social Research 7 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 set- ting). Description. If we want to describe community response to this event, we might conduct field research in Sanford, Florida (involving observations, participa- tion in local meetings/protests, and informal interviews). Explanation. If we want to determine the factors that shape people’s atti- tudes about “stand your ground” policies we might conduct survey research, via a questionnaire, to see the extent to which race, gender, age, socioeconomic back- ground, political affiliation, 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 Tray- von Martin 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. Further, 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 methodological choices. This is ultimately the aim of this book: to show you the five 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. 8 THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN 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 conducts research with what primary 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 ultimate goal will dictate decision-making. For example, there are many differences between building a house versus a cathedral. Further, 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 Southern California. Stylistically these homes will 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 loadbearing 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, includ- ing those that will 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 alone 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 Introduction to Social Research 9 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. In actuality, there may be overlaps between these approaches. For example, there are some methods (e.g., narrative inquiry) that are used by quali- tative and arts-based researchers. 2 For another example, community-based partici- patory research may rely on quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, or arts-based methods. The differences between these approaches will become clearer throughout this book showing that despite overlap, projects can be categorized. 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). Researchers use this approach to explore; to robustly investigate and learn about social phenom- enon; 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). 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 sample). 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 influencing the qualitative phase, or vice versa (Hesse-Biber, 2010; 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 evaluate. MMR 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 whose researchers place the inquiry process at the center and value aesthetic understanding, evocation, 10 THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN 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 mem- bers). Researchers may partner with established community-based organizations (CBOs); 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 . 2. Inductive approaches to the research process characterize which of the five approaches to research? a. These are appropriate when your primary purpose is . 3. A researcher is interested in challenging people’s stereotypes about gender and profession. He/she uses 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. 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. Introduction to Social Research 11 The main elements of research can be organized into three general categories: (1) philosophical, (2) praxis, (3) and ethics (Leavy, 2014). The philosophical sub- structure of research consists of three elements: paradigm, ontology, and epistemol- ogy. At the level of praxis there are four key elements of research: genre/design, methods/practices, theory, and methodology. The ethical component (which com- bines 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, 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, 2013). Consider the old 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. Adapted from Leavy (2014, p. 2). Copyright © 2014 Oxford Univer- sity Press. Adapted by permission. 12 THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN saying “I don’t know who discovered water, but I doubt it was the fish.” Paradigms 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 differently shaped frames and differently colored lenses. When you put on a pair, it influences every- thing you see. Thus, paradigms are important to acknowledge because the beliefs that compose them guide our thinking and actions (Guba, 1990). Ontological 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 explained the ontological question as “What is the form and nature of reality and, therefore, what is there that can be known about it?” (1998, p. 201). An epistemology is a philosophical belief system about how research proceeds 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 & 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. 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, 2014; Phillips & Bur- bules, 2000). Researchers aim to support or disprove assertions (Babbie, 2013). To do so, the scientific method is employed. Therefore, this worldview values scientific objectivity, researcher neutrality, and replication (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2011). Ontology Epistemology Paradigm FIGURE 1.1. The components of a paradigm. Introduction to Social Research 13 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 (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 construction of reality. Thus, we make and remake the social world through our patterns of interaction and inter- pretive processes, by which we assign meaning to activities, situations, events, ges- tures, and so forth. Researchers therefore value people’s subjective interpretation and understanding of their experiences and circumstances. Interpretive or construc- tivist worldviews are overarching categories that include a broad range of perspec- tives (reviewed in the discussion of theory), including symbolic interactionism, dra- maturgy, phenomenology, and ethnomethodology. Critical This philosophical belief system developed in interdisciplinary contexts, includ- ing areas studies and other fields forged in critique (e.g., women’s studies, Afri- can American studies), and emphasizes power-rich contexts, dominant discourses, and social justice issues (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 perspectives of those forced to the peripheries of a hierarchical social order, and they reject grand theo- ries that disavow or erase differences. Collaborative and participatory approaches (i.e., those in which participants are actively involved in developing the project) are often privileged. Critical worldviews are overarching categories that include a broad range of perspectives (reviewed in the discussion of theory), including femi- nist, critical race, queer, indigenous, postmodernist, and poststructuralist theories. Transformative This philosophical belief system, developed in transdisciplinary contexts, draws on critical theory, critical pedagogy, feminist, critical race, and indigenous theo- ries and promotes human rights, social justice, and social-action-oriented perspec- tives (Mertens, 2009). Research should be inclusive, participatory, and democratic, 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 Hebert Mead (Hesse-Biber, 2015; Patton, 2015), holds no allegiance to a particular 14 THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN 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, emo- tional, perceptual, kinesthetic, and imaginal knowledge (Chilton, Gerber, & Scotti, 2015; Conrad & Beck, 2015; Cooper, Lamarque, & Sartwell, 1997; Dewey, 1934; Langer, 1953; Harris-Williams, 2010; Whitfield, 2005). Research is understood as a relational, meaning-making activity. The arts-based or aesthetic intersubjective paradigm draws on theories of embodiment and phenomenology 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. 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, Introduction to Social Research 15 analysis, interpretation, and representation are discussed in detail in Chapters 4–8, as appropriate to each of the five approaches reviewed in this text. 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 that data (Adler & Clark, 2011). 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 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 popular of chil- dren). 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 (Babbie, 2013). Guiding paradigms can be difficult to discern, but specific theories—tested, applied, 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, 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 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 (Figure 1.2). The methodology is what the researcher actually does once he/she has combined the different elements of research. In addition to one’s philosophical beliefs and the selection of appropriate methods and theories, 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 com- pletely 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 inter- views can vary greatly. So, how much the researcher talks, interjects, asks specific 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 Critical race Queer Feminism Transformative Critical theory Critical pedagogy Indigenous 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. participants for responses, and so on, changes the nature of the focus group. Spe- cific 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. Considering the five approaches abstractly only takes us 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. Please bear in mind that in each case, I am offering only one of innumerable possibilities for how we might design each study. They are examples. Here is our research topic: students’ experi- ences with drinking on college campuses. For the sake of simplicity, let’s assume that each study will occur on your own college campus or one in your community. 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, narrative inquiry, experimental aesthetic Phenomenology 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 (uses based Critical pedagogy of any methods qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods participatory Feminist and/or arts-based practices there within) Critical race Indigenous Introduction to Social Research 19 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 comprised of 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 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 length 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 20 THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN 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. 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. Introduction to Social Research 21 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 said, “When you know better, you 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 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? 22 THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN 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 identity 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. (2013). Social theory: The multicultural, global, and classic readings (5th ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Mertens, D. M. (2011). Transformative research and evaluation. New York: Guilford Press. Trier-Bieniek, A. (2015). Feminist theory and pop culture. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Notes 1. “Stand your ground” laws permit an individual to defend him/herself against an immi- nent or perceived threat that would result in bodily harm or death. There is no duty to retreat from the situation (as there is in the case of “retreat” laws). 2. Some researchers consider arts-based research a genre of qualitative research, creating even more overlap 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 23 24 THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN 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 of 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 if 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 film. 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). 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 problems 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 decision. For example, 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, 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. Ethics in Social Research 25 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. Please 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 appro- priate, in Chapters 4–8. 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 26 THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN result, the Nuremberg Code (1949) was established, outlining rules for experiments 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 com- plications, 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 Gua- temala 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 it an experiment to see if 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 or not to participate. Further, over time a principle of mutuality, in which the research benefits both the researchers and the participants (Loftin, Barnett, Bunn, & Sullivan, 2005), has become impor- tant to many practitioners (particularly those working with qualitative and 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 vari- ous codes and regulations regarding research. The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment Ethics in Social Research 27 precipitated the Belmont Report (1979), which led to the development of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects. 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 participants. 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 and the protection of human subjects in research. Institutional review boards 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 guiding social research. A common effect from the justice movements was a thorough reex- amination 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 comprised of women, people of color, or lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender (LGBT) 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 and marginalized perspectives, the perspectives of those typically 28 THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF RESEARCH DESIGN forced to the peripheries of society. Researchers working from the five approaches may have different 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 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 inclusivity 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 mar- ginalized perspectives in ways that jar people into thinking differently about com- monly accepted stereotypes. In community-based participatory research (CBPR), there may be an effort to develop the project from the outset with people from dif- ferent 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 status, 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 movements 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 inter- nalized as a part of our values system in numerous ways. How we think about and put into practice the value of inclusivity invariably affects the selection of partici- pants 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. Our values concerning inclusivity also come to bear during the process of data Ethics in Social Research 29 collection or generation. Language is a central issue. From the o

RESEARCH DESIGN PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue