Social Research Methods

    Quantitative data analysis
    What is the name of the test that is used to assess the relationship between two ordinal variables?
    Pearson’s r test is extremely valuable but limited to assessing correlations between interval/ratio variables. Spearman’s rho test is a very similar technique which can be used on pairs of variables when either both are ordinal or one is ordinal and the other is interval/ratio. The result will lie between -1 and +1, indicating the range of possible correlation, from perfectly negative to perfectly positive. The phi coefficient is used for dichotomous variables and Cramer’s V is a test of the strength of the relationship between nominal variables. Chi square, in brief, tests for the likelihood of relationships existing through mere chance, so is usually used in conjunction with the tests discussed in this question.
    Reference: Bryman: Social Research Methods: 5th Edition Page(s) 343
    Author: rikazzz Comment
    Structured observation
    It may not be possible to use a probability sample to observe behaviour in public places because:
    Quantitative research automatically brings probability sampling to mind. If we have defined the population closely and located a sampling frame, random sampling becomes feasible. The problem with observation, is that it is often focussed on an incident and as a result, we cannot know what other kinds of interaction might have gone on, and so we cannot know whether each episode was ‘representative’. It is not possible to develop a “snowball” sample either, because we are limited to observation alone. However, just as other data-gathering tools use non-probability samples, so too can direct observation. Answer (d) may be right – perhaps researchers try to steer clear of random sampling. This question is not concerned with research preference, however, but with research possibility.
    Reference: Bryman: Social Research Methods: 5th Edition Page(s) 274
    Author: rikazzz Comment
    Breaking down the quantitative/qualitative divide
    Which of the following is not one of the contrasts that has been made to distinguish between quantitative and qualitative research?
    The distinction between quantitative and qualitative research has been made in almost stereotypical ways, with contrasts between behaviour and meaning, numbers and words, artificiality and naturalism, being frequently cited. If we accept the “free-floating” nature of methods, though, we could view those contrasts as battles between researchers rather than as valuable differentiators of the methods’ focus. In the commercial world, quantitative and qualitative research often goes hand-in-hand, with results from one type developing testable hypotheses for the other. The over-riding question would seem to be “which type (if a choice must be made) will yield the richest data in my particular circumstances?”
    Reference: Bryman: Social Research Methods: 5th Edition Page(s) 626-629
    Author: rikazzz Comment
    Social research strategies: quantitative research and qualitative research
    An inductive theory is one that:
    A deduction is a conclusion drawn logically from an argument or a discussion of things previously established or known. Deductions can be expressed as hypotheses which can then be tested, so answer (a) must be incorrect. However, when we have gathered and analysed the research data, the research findings can be fed back into our existing knowledge, which is a form of induction. This is because induction means moving from the particular to the general. So answer (b) cannot be correct either. The usual application of inductive theory, however, is to allow theory to emerge from our findings. We find an interesting question, we gather data on it and we ‘theorise’ from our findings. It may be that these ‘theories’ are, in reality, simply ‘interesting insights’ rather than ‘grand theories’ but they can be valuable for all that. The methods used are “neither here nor there” although it may be more likely for deductive theory to use quantitative methods and for inductive approaches to use qualitative methods.
    Reference: Bryman: Social Research Methods: 5th Edition Page(s) 22-24
    Author: rikazzz Comment
    The nature of qualitative research
    The flexibility and limited structure of qualitative research designs is an advantage because:
    A fixed research frame may influence the data gathered. Although almost all research professionals subscribe to this notion, quantitative researchers tend to isolate the elements of the design that may bias the results and measure the probable impact. Qualitative researchers, by contrast, prefer “keeping structure to a minimum” (Bryman, p397), so that the data is free to express itself, as it is. This certainly means that qualitative research enquiries must, of their very nature, be much more open, much vaguer than many would like. However, the flexibility of this approach also allows them to incorporate unexpected events into the research design and adapt their theories as the research progresses.
    Reference: Bryman: Social Research Methods: 5th Edition Page(s) 397
    Author: rikazzz Comment
    Language in qualitative research
    Which of the following is not one of the basic assumptions of CA?
    Interest in CA is often sparked by wondering why something is said in a particular way, or why something might seem to be expressed in the same way in particular circumstances. From this point on, the analysis of conversation rests on a number of assumptions, listed by Heritage (1984, cited on page 527). The three basic assumptions of CA are that talk is structured by implicit rules, that speech “acts” are shaped within their specific context and that analysis is grounded in data. The researcher is, therefore, interested in the talk itself and its context and allows conclusions to be drawn only from the data, rather than from correspondence with a preset theory. Since it is qualitative in nature, CA is not concerned with the measurement or predictability of forms of talk in a quantitative way.
    Reference: Bryman: Social Research Methods: 5th Edition Page(s) 526-527
    Author: rikazzz Comment
    Asking questions
    A vignette question is one that asks respondents to think about:
    A vignette is like a piece of a story, where a family situation might be depicted at a decision point. These are often referred to as ‘scenarios’, which are fictitious, but attempt to portray real decisions in the life of real people. Most ‘soap operas’ are based around this technique, where we wonder from week to week what the characters will decide, and where real fans are at least tempted to offer their advice. In an interview setting, the respondent is shown one of these scenarios and asked for their opinion of the best course of action to be recommended from a fixed list of possibilities. In this way, the vignette question can be seen as another example of a closed question. Answers (a), (b) and possibly (d) in a surrealistic way, may be seen as potential elements of a scenario, but the vignette question is representative of technique rather than content.
    Reference: Bryman: Social Research Methods: 5th Edition Page(s) 259,260
    Author: rikazzz Comment
    Interviewing in qualitative research
    Which of the following is not one of Kvale’s ten criteria of the good interviewer?
    “Tips and skills”, on page 473, shows the ten criteria proposed by Kvale (1996) of a successful interviewer. The suggestion is that the successful interviewer must be knowledgeable, clear, sensitive, gentle and open, able to structure the interview, steer the conversation, remember what has been said, and take an active role in both interpreting and critically challenging the interviewee. Bryman (p473) adds the criteria of getting the balance right between the talking time of interviewer and interviewee; and of being sensitive to ethical concerns.
    Reference: Bryman: Social Research Methods: 5th Edition Page(s) 473
    Author: rikazzz Comment
    The nature of quantitative research
    One of the preoccupations of quantitative researchers is with generalization, which is a sign of:
    The issue here is with the application of the research findings to people who were not part of the research focus. If we select our sample of respondents randomly from the population as a whole, we can be quite sure that the findings can be applied to the whole population. But if we interviewed people casually, we could not generalize our findings beyond the actual people interviewed. This is the essence of external validation of research: how universally can the research findings be applied? It must be said that even with random sampling, we have no right to apply our findings to other populations, no matter how strong the temptation.
    Reference: Bryman: Social Research Methods: 5th Edition Page(s) 163, 164
    Author: rikazzz Comment
    Interviewing in qualitative research
    Which of the following makes qualitative interviewing distinct from structured interviewing?
    In qualitative interviews, the aim is to understand the social world from the perspective of the interviewee, in their own words. The researcher will therefore encourage their participants to define the parameters of the conversation and to talk in detail, rather than imposing a standardized set of questions upon them. The essential point is that structured interviewing is a quantitative research method, so numbers of instances of pre-planned, specific items are the focus, whereas qualitative research is focussed on the respondent. Where the respondent goes, so to speak, the researcher follows. So, going off the topic is good, in that the interview is now moving in the direction of the respondent’s interests rather than the researcher’s.
    Reference: Bryman: Social Research Methods: 5th Edition Page(s) 466-467
    Author: rikazzz Comment