Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Methods in Context, 4 types of observation, two main types of experiments,…
-
-
-
-
experiments are research situations where the researcher has a high degree of control.
variables are identified and some are controlled
by manipulating the variables and observing what happens, the researcher can discover cause and effect relationships.
hypothesis are tested under a controlled and created environment
focusing on independent and dependant variables.
-
strengths
- they can be replicated easily, making it reliable
- can easily identify cause and effect relationships
weakness
- they are conducted in an artificial environment, and its unlikely results can be transformed in the real world
- hawthorne effect, the knowledge that your in an expreiment can chnage someones behaviour
- ethical issues with consent, they usually involve deception, which means obtaining informed consent can be difficult or impossible
strengths
- they are less artificial then lab experiments, they have more ecological validity
- people do not know they are in an experiment, and therefore there is no Hawthorne effect.
weakness
- they have less control over variables
- They have limited application, and have very few situations that can be adapted to become a field experiment
- they do not gain the consent of those involved, as this would chnage behaviour.
- Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiement
- Milgram's authority figure experiment
questionnaires are a set list of questions, asked in the same way every time, they are usually self completed, but can be done over the phone, or face-to-face. They usually consist of mainly closed questions which creates quantitive data.
strengths
- they are relativley cheap compared to interviews
- the a quick to conduct compared to interviews
- they obtain quantitive data
- they can be geographically widespread
weakness
- no way of stopping the reseach if someone is triggered or upset -the obtain quantitative data, meaning they lack detail or the 'why' factor
- responses are not garuenteed and can can be low
- the lower the response rate, the less representative it is, this is often combatted by using an incentive, for example a chance to win a trip abroad. but it can be argued this doesn't actually make it representative, as it will only appeal to people who want to go to the aboard location, it may also cause answers to be untruthful as participants may answer what they think researchers want to hear in order to 'boost' their chances of winning the incentive.
- an interview that follows a list of pre-set questions
- interviewees choose from a limited list of possible answers
- They are usually done face-to-face or over the phone
- usually consist of mainly closed-ended questions which creates quantitive data
- favoured by postitvists
strenghts
- they are reliable because they used a fixed list of questions, so they can be easily repeated by another interviewer
- they are relativley quick to conduct, which menas the interviewer can get a large sample size
- they are the cheapest form of interview
Weakness
- they lack validity because the questions and responses are already predetermined, so may not fit what the interviewee actually thinks
- Employing interviewers incurs a cost
- not useful for many situations
- an interview that asks mainly open-ended questions, there are no fixed set to ask every person
- they produce qualitative meaningful data
- guided by the interviewee as well as the interviewer
- free flowing, so similar to a natural convosation
- a strong relationship is built between the interviewer and interviewee
- favoured by interpretivists
strengths
- because they are informal, participants may be more likely to 'open up'
- because questions aren't fixed, there's less chance of being imposed
- interviewers can ask questions to explore specific answers further
weakness
- not reliable at all
- too much data
- not always relevant
- employing interviewers can be expensive
- can a close relationship and 'conversational' tone make answers less valid
strengths
- groups are observed in a natural and authentic setting, therefore data is more likely to be a true account of the groups behaviour
- data generated is rich in detail and offers insight into social behaviour
Weaknesses
- Being open-ended and subjective research, there is no fixed procedure or standardised system of measurement and cannot be replicated
- most participant observations investigate small-scale groups that are not representative of the wider population
- The Hawthorne effect - due to how the observer is likely affect the group's behaviour, and the researcher is at risk of 'going native', meaning the researcher over-identifies with the group.
Strengths
- there is a limited risk of the researcher 'going native'
Weakness
- Each observation will be subjective, and therefore the results cannot be repeated
- they generally use a small-scale research sample
strengths
- less ethical issues than covert because the participants know they are being researched
- higher level of reliability than covert
- the observer can openly take notes
- allows researcher to use interview methods too
Weakness
- They can be relatively time consuming
- Hawthorne effect
- difficult to repeat
- usually small sample size
strengths
- there is no Hawthorne effect
- find out more in depth detail about why, who, where, when, etc...
weakness
- ethical issues, it is immoral to deceive people
- researcher has to gain trust and accpetance, which may be time consuming
- secondary data created by individuals, groups and organisations
- they are either personal or public
- they usually contain qualitatitve data that expresses beliefs or meaning
- they can be statistical (quantitative)
- they can be contemporary or historical
- favoured by interpretivists
- data is analysed through content analysis, which looks and the meanings attached to the words and images
-
These can be letters, diaries, memoirs, auto biographies, notes, and photographs
strengths
- as they are usually written for personal purposes, usually very high in validity
- they are usually cheap and quick
Weakness
- Not all groups produce personal documents
- hindsight may change data - if an audience is in mind, this may change data
-
these are reports from governments, charities and bussinesses
strengths
- they are usually cheap and quick to access. the government reports on all areas of policy
- they are usually rich in detail
Weaknesses
- the author is aware the documents will be public, so there may be bias in selection and presentation of data
-
quantitative data collected by government bodies, the police, criminal justice system, the NHS, etc...
strengths
- the are very easy to access
- usually free
- carried out over periods of time, so you can see trends
- often cover the entire country
weakness
- the government collect statistics for their own benefit, so they may not cover exactly what the researcher is looking for
- definitions of key concepts may be different, for example how a sociologist defines poverty may not be what the government defines poverty