Sociological Research Method

Sociological Research Method

Human behaviour in groups has remained the central them in Sociological Research. However, it is highly complex and difficult subject to deal Human Behaviour changes too much from one period to next to permit scientific, exact prediction.

Human behaviour is too elusive, subjective and complex to yield to rigid categorization and artificial instruments of science

Human behaviour can be studied only by other human observers , and these always distort fundamentally the facts being observed, so that there can be no objective procedure for achieving the truth

Human beings are the subject of such predictions and have the ability deliberately to upset any prediction we make

Sociologists are engaged constantly in predicting social behaviour. Indeed if sociologists could not do so, the society could not exist at all. Sociologists abstract various factors from the behaviour of other people, and thus find their behaviour understandable.

All sciences simplify their subject matter and sociologists are also struggling in the same direction— simplifying the understanding of behaviour in groups by reducing variability and complexity

Techniques and Method

Technique is skill or tools which help a researcher to collect and process the data for analysis and explanation (gathering and ordering of data).

Method is application of fundamentals of science to the field of Sociology Science is popularly defined as an accumulation of systemic knowledge. It is also explained merely as mode of analysis that permits the scientists to state propositions in the form of IFS,THEN-,

Theory and Fact

Popular opinion generally conceives of these as direct opposition. Theory is confused with speculation, and thus a theory remains speculation until it is proved. When this proof is made, theory becomes fact.

In this popular misconception science is thought to be concerned with facts alone. Theory (speculation) is supposed to be the realm of philosophers. But in scientific research it becomes clear that theory and Facts are not diametrically opposed, but intertwined; that theory is not speculation; and that scientists are very much concerned with both theory and fact

Fact is regarded as an empirically verifiable observation. Fact could have never produced modern science if they have been gathered at random. Without some system, some ordering principles, in short, without theory, science could yield any predictions. Without prediction there could be no control over the material world.

It can be said the fact of science are the product of observations that are not random but meaningful—theoretically relevant. Thus, we can’t think of theory and fact as being opposed. The development of science can be considered as a constant interplay between theory and fact

Theory as a tool of science is important for various reasons:

1.It defines the major orientation of a science, by defining a kinds of data which are to be abstracted.

2. It offers a conceptual scheme by which the relevant phenomena are systematized, classified and interrelated

3. It summarizes facts into empirical generalization, and system of generalization

4. It predicts facts

5. It points to gaps in our knowledge

A major function of the theoretical system is that it narrows the range of facts to be studied. Any phemenon or object may be studied in many different ways. Theory and facts are, then in constant interaction. Development in one may lead to development in other

CONCEPT

Concepts are logical construct created from the sense impressions, percept, or even complex experiences. A concept is like a fact, is an abstraction, not a phenomenon. It takes its meaning from the thought framework within which it is placed. It symbolise the empirical relationships and phenomena which are stated by the facts. But it should be communicable in very special sense

Hypothesis

It is a proposition which can be put to a test to determine its validity. It may be proved to be correct or incorrect. Formulation of deduction can be called Hypothesis when verified become part of theoretical construction.

Hypothesis should be conceptually clear. It should have empirical referents( no moral judgment). It must be specific.

STAGES OF RESEARCH

Formulation of Research Topic Literature Review Consulting Researcher/ Professionals

Theoretical and Conceptual clarification Identification of Data sources Identify Techniques of Data collection

Data Collection (Both Primary and Secondary) Data Processing and data analysis by using statistical tools Reporting

SURVEY: How to Begin

A survey usually originates when an individual or institution is confronted with an information need and the existing data are insufficient. At this point, it is important to consider if the required information can even be collected by a survey.

If a survey is decided upon, the first step is to lay out the objectives of the investigation. The objectives of a survey should be as specific, clear-cut, and unambiguous as possible. Tradeoffs typically exist and sometimes this only becomes apparent as the planning process proceeds.

How to Plan a Survey Questionnaire?

First, the mode of data collection must be decided upon (e.g., mail, telephone, or in person). Once this has been determined a questionnaire can then be developed and pretested. Planning the questionnaire is one of the most critical stages in the survey development process.

Questionnaire construction has elements that often appear to be just plain common sense, but, when they are implemented, may involve some subtlety. It is common sense to require that the concepts be clearly defined and questions unambiguously phrased; otherwise, the resulting data are apt to be seriously misleading. .

Sampling--The quality of the sampling frame—whether it is up-to-date and complete — is probably the dominant feature for ensuring adequate coverage of the desired population to be surveyed. Some types of samples are straightforward , requiring little in the way of experience or training; others are highly complex and may require many stages of selection.

Whether simple or complex, the goal of a properly designed sample is that all of the units in the population have a known, positive chance of being selected. The sample plan also must be described in sufficient detail to allow a reasonably accurate calculation of sampling errors. These two features make it scientifically valid to draw inferences from the sample results about the entire population that the sample represents

How to Choose a Random Sample Virtually all surveys taken seriously by social scientists and policymakers use some form of random sampling. Methods of random sampling are well grounded in statistical theory and in the theory of probability. Reliable and efficient estimates of needed statistics can be made by surveying a carefully constructed sample of a population. This is provided, of course, that a large proportion of the sample members give the requested information.

The particular type of sample used depends upon the objectives and scope of the survey. Factors include the nature of potentially available frames, the overall survey budget, the method of data collection, the subject matter, and the kind of respondent needed. Deciding on the right respondent in a household sample is a key element in “assuring” quality.

Stages of survey

Data are not inherently quantitative, and can be bits and pieces of almost anything. They do not necessarily have to be expressed in numbers. Data can come in the form of words, images, impressions, gestures, or tones which represent real events or reality as it is seen symbolically or sociologically

Qualitative research uses unreconstructed logic to get at what is really real -- the quality, meaning, context, or image of reality in what people actually do, not what they say they do.

Unreconstructed logic means that there are no step-by-step rules, that researchers ought not to use prefabricated methods or reconstructed rules, terms, and procedures that try to make their research look clean and neat. It is therefore difficult to define qualitative research since it doesn't involve the same terminology as ordinary science. The simplest definition is to say it involves methods of data collection and analysis that are nonquantitative.

PARTICIPANT-OBSERVATION

It is the process of involving yourself in the study of people you're not too different from. It is almost always done covertly, with the researcher never revealing their true purpose or identity. If it's a group you already know a lot about, you need to step back and take the perspective of a "martian", as if you were from a different planet and seeing things in a fresh light.

If it's a group you know nothing about, you need to become a "convert" and really get committed and involved. The more secretive and amorphous the group, the more you need participation. The more localized and turf-conscious the group, the more you need observation

It's customary in the literature to describe four roles: •Complete participation -- the researcher

participates in activities and goes on to actively influence the direction of the group

•Participant as observer -- the researcher participates in activities but does not try to influence the direction of the group

•Observer as participant -- the researcher participates in a one-time activity but then takes a back seat to any further activities •Complete observation -- the researcher is a member of the group but does not participate in any activities

It's difficult to say which of these four roles are the most common, probably the middle two. The key point behind all of them is that the researcher must operate on two levels: becoming an insider while remaining an outsider. They must avoid becoming oversocialized, or "going native", as well as being personally revolted or repulsed by the group conduct. Going native is sometimes described as giving up research and joining the group for life, but in most sociological circles, it means losing your objectivity and glorifying activities. Generally, it takes time to carry out participant-observation, several weeks or months to 2-4 years. In criminology, Gangs, hate groups, prostitutes, and drug dealers have all been studied by this method

The following are some standard rules for taking field notes (adapted from Neuman & Wiegand 2000): •Take notes as soon as possible, and do not talk to anyone before note taking •Count the number of times key words or phrases are used by members of the folk group •Carefully record the order or sequence of events, and how long each sequence lasts •Do not worry that anything is too insignificant; record even the smallest things •Draw maps or diagrams of the location, including your movements and any reaction by others •

Write quickly and don't worry about spelling; devise your own system of punctuation •Avoid evaluative judgments or summarizing; don't call something "dirty" for example, describe it •Include your own thoughts and feelings in a separate section; your later thoughts in another section •Always make backup copies of your notes and keep them in a separate location

CASE STUDYAS METHOD Occurs when all you have is information about one unique example, and you want to generalize about all cases of that type. Almost all case studies involve unstructured interview and ethnographic methodology (meaning the subject was allowed to express themselves in their own words). It's difficult to describe the variety of techniques used to arrive at useful generalizations in a case study. The idea is to find a subject so average, so typical, so much like everyone else, that he/she seems to reflect the whole universe of other subjects around him/her.

CONTENT ANALYSIS It is a technique for gathering and analyzing the content of text. The content can be words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs, pictures, symbols, or ideas. It can be done quantitatively as well as qualitatively, and computer programs can be used to assist the researcher. The initial step involves sorting the content into themes, which depends on the content. If you were studying white collar crime, for example, you might have themes like planning, action, and cover up.

Then, a coding scheme is devised, usually in basic terms like frequency (amount of content), direction (who the content is directed to), intensity (power of content), and space (size of content). The coding system is used to reorganize the themed content in what is called manifest coding. Manifest coding is highly reliable because you can train assistants to do it, ensuring intercoder reliability, and all you're doing is using an objective method to count the number of times a theme occurs in your coding scheme.

HISTORIOGRAPHY is the method of doing historical research or gathering and analyzing historical evidence. There are four types of historical evidence: primary sources, secondary sources, running records, and recollections. Historians rely mostly on primary sources which are also called archival data because they are kept in museums, archives, libraries, or private collections. Emphasis is given to the written word on paper, although modern historiography can involve any medium.

Secondary sources are the work of other historians writing history. Running records are documentaries maintained by private or nonprofit organizations. Recollections are autobiographies, memoirs, or oral histories. Archival research, which is the most common, involves long hours of sifting through dusty old papers, yet inspection of untouched documents can yield surprising new facts, connections, or ideas.

FOCUS GROUPS According to the late political consultant Lee Atwater, the conversations in focus groups “give you a sense of what makes people tick and a sense of what is going on with people’s minds and lives that you simply can’t get with survey data.” Focus groups are not polls but in-depth, qualitative interviews with a small number of carefully selected people brought together to discuss a host of topics.

Unlike the one-way flow of information in a one-on-one interview, focus groups generate data through the give and take of group discussion. Listening as people share and compare their different points of view provides a wealth of information—not just about what they think, but why they think the way they do. Focus groups are an increasingly popular way to learn about opinions and attitudes.

The composition of a focus group is usually based on the homogeneity or similarity of the group members. Bringing people with common interests or experiences together makes it easier for them to carry on a productive discussion. Often a research project will use different groups to get differing views. For example, an organization is planning a major restructuring . It would be desirable to have three separate focus groups—union members, nonunion employees, and managers. Each of these groups would represent a potentially different interest

The composition of a focus group is usually based on the homogeneity or similarity of the group members. Demographic characteristics are another way to determine focus group composition. One caution—remember that with a focus group, it is not possible to compare the results from different groups in a strict quantitative sense, because they lack representativeness

Generally, focus groups are conducted by trained “moderators,” who are skilled in maintaining good group dynamics. Depending on the purpose of the focus group, the moderator may also be an expert in a given topic area. The moderator’s basic job is to keep the group “focused.” He or she has the goal of helping the group generate a lively and productive discussion of the topic at hand.

It is imperative that a moderator understand the underlying objectives of the study. Much of the data quality in focus groups depends on how effectively the moderator asks the questions and how well this person keeps the discussion targeted on the research objectives. Making this work requires the ability to tailor one’s moderating style to different types of groups. Questions should be open-ended so that t here are many possible replies. Short – answer questions, such as those that can be answered “ Yes” or “No” should be avoided. It is also important to avoid leading questions that suggest the moderator’s opinion or the answer that he or she hopes to receive.

Size The ideal size for a focus group is generally between six and twelve people. This size group encourages participants to contribute their ideas. Too-small groups are easily dominated by one or two members, or they may fall flat if too few people have anything to contribute. (Another problem is that the session may lapse into serial interviewing and lack energy. ) Too large a group lacks cohesion and may break up into side conversations, or people may become frustrated if they have to wait their turn to respond or to get involved.

At the focus group itself, the moderator begins with an introduction that should include the following: Explaining the purposes of the focus group n laying down some basic ground rules to encourage everyone to participate in the discussion Reassuring the participants about the voluntary and confidential nature of their Participation introducing the moderator and any co moderators and explaining how and why these group members were invited to participate

Advantages of Focus Groups Among the advantages of focus groups are the following: A wide range of information can be gathered in a relatively short time span. The moderator can explore related but unanticipated topics as they arise in the discussion . Focus groups do not require complex sampling techniques.

Disadvantages of Focus Groups There is also a set of accompanying disadvantages : The sample is neither randomly selected nor representative of a target population, so the results cannot be generalized or treated statistically. The quality of the data is influenced by the skills and motivation of the moderator. Focus groups lend themselves to a different kind of analysis than would be carried out with survey results. In surveys, The emphasis is on counting and measuring versus coding/classifying/ sorting in a focus group.

pretesting The systematic checking or pretesting of a questionnaire is central to planning a good survey. Much of the accuracy and interpretability of the survey re s u l t s hinge on this pretesting step—which should never be omitted. Pretesting is critical for identifying questionnaire problems. These can occur for both respondents and interviewers regarding question content, “skip patterns,” or formatting. Problems with question content include confusion with the overall meaning of the question, as well as misinterpretation of individual terms or concepts. Problems with how to skip or navigate from question to question may result in missing data and frustration for both interviewers and respondents. Questionnaire formatting concerns are particularly relevant to selfadminister questionnaire.

Types of Pretesting

Pretesting techniques are divided into two major categories—pre - field and field. Pre - field techniques are generally used during the preliminary stages of questionnaire development. They include respondent focus groups and cognitive laboratory interviews .