Summary THEORY AND METHODS AQA A2 NOTES (5 TOPICS INCLUDED)
49 keer bekeken 1 aankoop
Vak
Theory and Methods
Instelling
AQA
This theory and methods document for AQA Sociology A Level includes:
- Topic 1: Quantitative Research Methods
- Topic 2: Qualitative Research Methods
- Topic 3: Sociology and Science
- Topic 4: Objectivity and Values in Sociology
- Topic 5: Functionalism
A level theory and methods
A sociologists’ choice of research method is influenced by practical, ethical and
theoretical issues
- Practical issues: time and money, requirements of funding bodies,
research opportunity, personal skills/characteristics of researcher, subject
matter of study
- Ethical issues: informed consent, protection from harm, confidentiality and
privacy, vulnerable groups, covert methods
- Theoretical issues: reliability, validity, representativeness
The theoretical issues that affect a sociologist’s choice of research method also
include their methodological perspective
Interpretivists: prefer qualitative (written) data which tells us about the
feelings/thoughts/emotions of the individual eg in unstructured interviews,
participant observations and the analysis of personal documents
Positivists: prefer quantitative (numerical) data, seek to discover patterns of
behaviour and see sociology as a science eg closed-ended questions, laboratory
experiments, official statistics
Positivism and quantitative methods
- Prefer scientific research methods as they are objective
- Society has trends/patterns that we can observe and measure using
research methods
- Cause and effect relationships – explain the patterns
There are three main types of experimental method that sociologists use:
- Laboratory experiment
- Field experiments
- Comparative method (thought experiment)
The laboratory experiment is used in natural sciences and is a method that
scientists use to gather data, test theories, and discover laws of cause and effect
Laboratory experiments (Milgrim, Harvey and Slatin, Mason, Charkin et al)
- These are conducted in highly controlled, artificial environments and
participants are aware that they are being studied
- The experimenter can control different variables within this artificial
setting in order to discover what effect they have; they may test
hypotheses (predictions) about the cause of a phenomenon with the aim
of developing a causal law
- In a laboratory experiment, there is an independent variable and a
dependent variable
- The independent variable is the variable that has been changed
(manipulated) by the experimenter
- The dependent variable is the variable that is being measured by the
experimenter
- The aim is to establish a cause and effect relationship between the
independent variable and the dependent variable
,In an experiment the researcher first selects a set of subjects (participants);
these must be identical in all relevant aspects. They are then divided at random
into two groups and treated differently
1. Experimental group: receive the independent variable that has been
manipulated
2. Control group: do not receive the independent variable that has been
manipulated
After the experiment has been conducted, we would compare the results of the
experimental group with the control group to see if there is a difference. If there
is, we may be able to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between what we
manipulated and what we measured. This will allow sociologists to predict
accurately what will happen in the future under the same conditions
Laboratory experiments however are rarely used in sociology due to a number of
practical, ethical and theoretical reasons
Practical problems
Open systems: lab experiments are only suitable for studying closed systems
where the researcher can control/measure the relevant variables and make
precise predictions ie in chemistry. However, society is an open system,
countless factors are at work – impossible to control/identify all variables
Individuals are complex: therefore, it is not possible to match the members of
the control/experimental groups exactly – no two humans are alike
Studying the past: cannot be used to study an event in the past as we cannot
control all the variables from the past. Cannot keep people in lab conditions for
too long
Small samples: only study small samples – hard to investigate large scale social
phenomenon
Expectancy effect: a form of experimenter bias – refers to the fact that what a
researcher expects to happen in the experiment can affect its actual outcome
The Hawthorne Effect:
A lab experiment is conducted in an artificial and unfamiliar setting. Therefore,
any behaviour that subjects show may also be artificial (not true to real life) –
decreases validity. They know that they are being studied, so could act
differently – subject reactivity. This ruins the experiment as their behaviour
changes due to being studied, not the independent variable or dependent
variable
Ethical issues
There are ethical (moral) objections to conducting experiments on humans,
especially under certain circumstances.
1. Informed consent: getting the subjects’ agreement to take part once they
know the true aim of the study, what risks/effects there may be, and how
the findings will be used. However, sometimes it may be necessary to
, deceive the subjects (withhold the true aim) as this could impact on the
data collected if they behaved differently
2. Harm to subjects: researchers have a duty of care to their participants.
Some argue that minor/temporary harm may be ethically justified if results
have significant benefits from society. Research should also seek to do
good, if a medical experiment benefits the experimental group eg drug
treatment, then ethically the study should be stopped to make the sake
treatment available to the control group eg no drug/placebo. Can also be
done in sociological experiments where two groups of pupils are taught
using different methods, if one is more successful, it should be offered to
both groups
Theoretical issues
Reliability – once an experiment has been conducted, other sociologists can
replicate it – repeat in exactly the same way. Lab experiments are highly reliable
as they produce the same result consistently, The original experiment can
specify precisely what steps were followed in original experiment so others can
copy – very detailed, very detached method – the experimenter merely
manipulates the variables and record the data – experimenters subjective
feelings/thoughts have no impact on results – positivists favour ; cause and
effect relationships
Reliability and hypothesis testing
Highly reliable as original experimenter can control the variables/conditions,
specify precise steps that were followed. Produces quantitative data – results of
the re-run experiments can be easily compared, very detached and objective –
merely manipulates variables. Effective way to test hypotheses/predictions as
they can isolate/control any variable that is of interest to the researcher
Representativeness
Danger that findings lack external validity – can’t be confident that research is
true for the wider population. Experiments can only study small samples – risk
representativeness of the whole population so can’t be generalised. High levels
of control the experimenter has – higher levels may lead to unnatural
circumstances – not true of world outside the lab
Internal validity
Lab experiments lack internal validity – findings are not true for the subjects of
the experiment. Artificial environment – Hawthorne effect
Interpretivism and free will
Our actions can only be understood in terms of the choices we freely make
based on the meanings we give to events. Lab experiments are an inappropriate
method for studying humans
Due to the limitations of laboratory experiments, sociologists have developed
two alternative methods. These follow the same logic in seeking to identify
causes, but they aim to overcome the unnaturalness and lack of validity of
laboratory experiments. These methods are field experiments and the
comparative method
, Field experiments (Rosenthal and Jacobson, Brown and Gay, Wood et al)
A field experiment has two features that distinguish it from a laboratory
experiment
- It takes place in the participants natural surroundings rather than in an
artificial, controlled, lab experiment setting
- Participants are unaware that they are in the experiment, so decreased
risk of the hawthorne effect
What is the problem with studying participants without their knowledge?
- Informed consent: not allowing the participants to give consent if they
want to take part
- Confidentiality: some participants may not want the sociologist to know
about them/may not want to give them their information
- Deception: misleading the participants
- Right to withdraw how do they leave an experiment if they know that they
aren’t in an experiment
The main similarity with a laboratory experiment is that in a field experiment the
researcher still manipulates an independent variable to see the effect on the
dependent variable
Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) – Pygmalion in the classroom
Field experiment – labelling in classroom ‘Oak School’ – pupils did an IQ test-
dependent variable, 20% of pupils are spurters (list given to teachers – fake),
independent variable: manipulated perspective of pupils. 8 months later – 2 nd IQ
test, 20% of spurters – 12 points, 80% not spurters – 8 points. Teachers
prioritised these children – time, attention and effort increased
Other types of field experiments include:
- Actor tests (Brown and Gay 1985) – valid, natural, avoid artificiality – sent
white actor/male actor for interviews to see who would be offered a job –
white actor got the role – can’t control variables
- Correspondence tests eg Wood et al 2010 – sent closely matched job
applications for almost 1000 vacancies
Strengths of field experiments: less risk of hawthorne effect, natural setting so
increased validity
Weaknesses of field experiments raises ethical issues as unaware, less control
due to setting, more extraneous variables, no validity
The comparative method (Durkheim study)
- Thought experiment – based on secondary data from other researchers eg
official statistics/documents
- Doesn’t involve researcher actually experimenting on real people, so
cheaper, quicker and less effort
- Still want to discover a cause-and-effect relationship between independent
and dependent variable
How does it work?
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper scarletelisabeth. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €6,00. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
