Research_Methods

Assessment 1 Section 1 Deductive reasoning - the rationalist approach, an according to Williman (2006:17) ‘An argument based on deduction begins with a general statements and trough logical argument, comes to a specific conclusion’. A syllogism is the simplest form of this kind of argument and can consists a statement followed by a minor more specific statement and a conclusion which follows logically. Example given by Williman (2006: 17) of this could be; all mammals breathe. This cow is a live mammal. Therefore, this cow breathes. Problems can occur when testing theories in real life. An important issue that confronts the study of social sciences is the question of the position of the subject and the researcher. Is human society subject to laws that exist independent of humans that make up society, or do individuals and groups create their own version of social forces' The two extremes of this approach Positivism and Interpretivism. Positivism is known as the application of the natural sciences to the study of social reality. This is an objective approach that can test theories and establish scientific laws. It aims to establish causes and effects. Hacking (cited in Wiliman 2006:19) describes how the positivist approach to an scientific investigation is based on ‘realism’. Positivism, Deductive reasoning and Inductive methodology are closely linked. An inductive approach to developing scientific theories begins with a social phenomenon. Data is then collated on the possible reasons why it occurs, and trends in the data are examined. The positivist approach also involves deduction, to find ‘social laws’ theories need to be developed and tested through deductive methods. Deductive and Inductive reasoning are two different approaches of a way of coming to a conclusion. We use both these in our thinking processes a lot of the time not even knowing whether we are adapting to inductive or deductive reasoning. Glynis M (2000:9) believes that ‘induction entails inferring a general law from particular instance’. To summary the process of induction allows us to produce theoretical generalizations which are based on evidence about a range of specific instances; one reason for doing research is to collect this evidence. The best example of inductive reasoning is by Sir Isaac Newton who reasoned the presence of gravity from an apple that fell down. In this kind of reasoning, the inductive method creates a conclusions based on the observation of the available facts by generalizing the assumptions. This actually leads to generalization of an outcome from the given facts. Bryman (2008:384) ‘considers that quantitive and qualitative research can be viewed as exhibiting a set of distinctive but contrasting preoccupations. These preoccupations reflect epistemologically grounded beliefs about what constitutes acceptable knowledge’. Quantative research is mainly influenced by natural science approach to what should count as acceptable knowledge; Qualitative researchers are more influenced by ‘Interpretivism’. The recognition that subjective meanings play a crucial role in social actions. It aims to reveal interpretations and meanings. According to Williman (2006:206), ‘Interpretivism’ rejects the assertion that human behavior can be confide in laws by identifying underlying regularities, and that society can be studied from detached, objective and impartial view point by the researcher’. Qualitive research tends to be concerned with words rather than numbers in the collection an analysis of data. As a research strategy it is inductvist, constructionist, and interpretivist. The differences between Inductive and Deductive can been seen in Williman (2006:27), ‘ Inductive thinking – going for the specific to the general. Deductive thinking – going from the general to the specific’. This is an important distinction because it determines what data can be collected and how it’s collected. An example of this, an inductive approach is used to generate theory whereas deductive approach is used to test theory. Section 2 Ethic are the rules of conduct in research, particularly about conduct with other people and organizations, aimed at causing no harm and providing, if possible, benefits. Ethical issues cannot be ignored as they relate directly to the integrity of a piece of research and of the disciplines that are involved Diener and Crandall (cited in Bryman 2006:118) talks about ethical principles in social research they broke these down into four main areas; whether there id harm to participants, whether there is a lack of informed consent, whether there is invasion of privacy, whether deception is involved’. Research is likely to harm participant is regarded by most people as unacceptable. Harm can entail a number of facets; physical harm; harm to participants, development: loss of self esteem stress. The issue of harm to participants is further addressed in the confidentiality of records. This means the identities and records of people should be maintained as confidential. Bryman (2006:119) provides one aspect of confidentiality and the management of it is that, in the UK, the Data Protection Act (1998) ‘confers obligations on people and organisations who hold personal data on others and it confers rights on those about whom such information in held’. The issue of informed consent within social research is hotly debated. The principle means that prospective research participants should be given as much information as might be needed to make an informed decision about whether or not they wish to participate in a study. Responsibilities of research with respect to confidentiality are also laid down in the Research of Governance Framework for Health and Social Care ( RGF) of (2005) this provides a framework for research in the field of health and social care that reduces the risks and ensures the well – being of research participants. The third area of ethical concern relates to the issue of the degree to which invasions of privacy can be condoned. Bryman (2006:123) provides an example, ‘when people agree to be interviews, they will frequently refuse to answer certain questions on whatever grounds they feel are justified. Examples may be questions about income, religious beliefs, or sexual activities’. Deception occurs when researchers represent their work as something other than what it is. Studies by Milgram, in Obedience to Authority Experiment, participants are led to believe that they are administrating real electric shocks. Questions on ethics bring in the role of professional associations, such as the Social Research Association (SRA), which have formulated codes of ethics. According to the SRA ethical guidelines (2003) ‘The SRA’s guidelines are intended to inform and advise. Consequently, the current guidelines have been reviewed for consistency with other ethical codes across the profession. (Such as those provided by the MRS, IQS, MARQESA, BSA, and BPS.)’. Section 3 The word ‘sample’ is used in a variety of different ways. Sample as it is used in research literature and as suggested also by Henry (1990:10) ‘means a part of the population that is used to gain information about an entire population’. A sample in this sense is a model of the population. Williman (2006: 210) further suggests that population is a collective term used to describe the total quantity of cases of the type which is subject of the stud. It can consist of objects. Researchers collect data on all subjects of interest in a particular study. Samples provide an efficient means to collect data. The sample serves as a model for the population. However, for a researcher to extend study findings to a population, the model must be accurate representation of the population as stated by Henry (1990:13). A good sample will represent the population well. There are two different approaches to sampling Non – probability sampling and probability sampling. Non – probability sampling is a useful method of selecting a sample in certain circumstances. In many cases it is appropriate, and in some cases he only method available. An example could be for instance in studies off certain populations, such as drug user, it would be impossible to put together a list needed to draw a probability sample. There are six frequently used non – probability sample designs; Convince samples, typical case samples, critical case sample, snowball samples, most similar samples and quota samples. The referral method in the snowball sampling where group members identify additional members to be included in the sample, could be the only viable approach Henry (1990:18) suggests. Probability samples have the characteristic that each unit in the population has a known, probability of being included in the sample there are five basic techniques for selecting probability samples, Simple random sampling, systematic sampling, stratified sampling, cluster sampling and multistage sampling. Multistage sampling is where Clusters are selected as in the cluster sample, and then sample members are selected from the cluster members by simple random sampling. Clustering may be done at more than one stage. Bibliography * Bryman A (2008) ‘Ethics and politics in social research’: Bryman A [Ed], Social Research Methods. 3rd ed. London, Oxford University Press. Pp 113 – 135 * Bryman A (2008) ‘Social Research Strategies’: Bryman A [Ed], Social Research Methods. 3rd ed. London, Oxford University Press. Pp 4 – 28 * Glynis M. Brekwell & Rose D (2000) ‘Research: Theory and Method’: Glynis: Sage publications. Pp 9 – 11. * Henry T G (1990) Practical Sampling. London: Sage publications. * M. Breakwell. Hammond S & Fife-scaw C [Eds] Research Methods in Psychology. 2nd (Eds). London * Social Research Association (2003) Ethical Guidelines.UK: SR * Walliman N (2006) Social Research Methods. London: Sage publications