Theory and Methods in Social Research

Bridget Somekh, Cathy Lewin, Bridget Somekh, Cathy Lewin

• Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd
• Year: 2011
• ISBN:
  9781446246320
• Edition: 2
• Topic: Sciences sociales
• Subtopic: Recherche scientifique et méthodologie

This new edition provides a scholarly and readable introduction to all the key qualitative and quantitative research methodologies and methods, enabling postgraduate and masters-level students and new researchers to reflect on which ones suit their needs and to receive guidance on how to find out more.

With chapters written by experienced research practitioners, this second edition has been extensively expanded and updated. There are seven completely new chapters, as well as:

- new material on literature reviews

- a new introduction to quantitative methods

- an expanded glossary

- Weblinks with free access to a wide range of peer-reviewed journal articles

- an annotated bibliography with conversational notes from authors in each chapter.

This book will act as your ?expert friend? throughout your research project, providing advice, explaining key concepts and the implications for your research design, and illustrating these with examples of real research studies.

PART I

READING, REVIEWING AND REFLECTING

Introduction

This part of the book is designed to provide a reference point to reading Parts II to VIII. The Introduction to this book is a ‘must read’ (unlike in many other books) because it answers key questions like, What is special about this book? How is the book as a whole organized? and How are the chapters organized? Coming immediately after the Introduction, Part I includes three chapters that provide essential information for every social science researcher.

The first chapter gives a readable but scholarly introduction to the history and development of social science research, including a general overview and six sub-sections focused on individual disciplines. As well as the ‘core’ disciplines of psychology and sociology, these include education, health, social work and business/management.

This is followed by a chapter on Literature Reviewing which places this daunting task – often the first that a new researcher embarks upon – in the context of mapping the field, and learning to identify the core texts in the area and engage in debate with them. This chapter provides examples of literature review draft texts and tracks their improvement after dialogue between graduate student and tutor. Rather than presenting literature reviewing as a monolith, the authors suggest that it can become identity work that moves a new researcher from the position of novice to that of an authority capable of working with texts reflexively.

The third chapter, on Ethical Issues in Generating Public Knowledge, should be read alongside whatever other chapters from Parts II – VIII readers choose as their special focus. All research methods and methodologies have ethical implications which have an impact on the quality of research data (e.g. interviewees are strongly influenced in what they say by the extent to which they trust the interviewer). In addition, these matters are covered by legislation, in most countries, with the result that seeking approval from an IRB (institutional review board) or ethics committee may be one of the first formal tasks that new researchers are asked to undertake.

1

Research in the Social Sciences

Bridget Somekh, Education and Social Research Institute, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK, and the University of Canterbury, New Zealand

Erica Burman, Department of Psychology and Speech Pathology, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

Sara Delamont, Department of Sociology, University of Cardiff, UK

Julienne Meyer, School of Community & Health Sciences, City University London, UK

Malcolm Payne, St Christopher’s Hospice, London, UK

Richard Thorpe, Leeds University Business School, UK

The authors would like to thank Fazal Rizvi, Professor of Education at Melbourne University Graduate School of Education, Australia and Emeritus Professor at the University of Illinois, USA, for providing additional material to strengthen the international perspectives in this chapter.

Summary

• Distinguishing features of social science research
• Variety of research traditions across disciplines
  • Diversification of methods
  • New theoretical understandings emerging from key theorists
  • History and current developments in six disciplines: psychology, sociology, education, health, social policy and management and business studies

Key features of research in the social sciences

Bridget Somekh

Social science research is concerned with people and their life contexts, and with philosophical questions relating to the nature of knowledge and truth (epistemology), values (axiology) and being (ontology) which underpin human judgements and activities. It differs from research in the natural sciences as a result of this focus on people – individuals and groups – and their behaviour within cultures and organizations that vary widely socially and historically. There is an unpredictability in the behaviour of human beings. Medical research is able to use probability theories to develop therapeutic drugs because bodily systems function relatively autonomously from the mind (though it is increasingly recognized that bodies do not all respond to treatment in identical ways). Social science research cannot develop similarly powerful solutions to social problems because people take decisions that vary, based on different cultural assumptions and purposes. Human experience is characterized by complexity, and social science researchers need to work with theories and methods that take account of this.

Empirical social science research – that is research which involves the collection of data about people and their social contexts by a range of methods – draws heavily upon the traditions and practices of disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, psychology, history and the creative arts. Anthropology contributes a tradition of participant observation and interviews, field note-taking and heuristic interpretation of culture. For example, from Geertz we learn the importance of reading the cultural meanings in details of behaviour such as winks, and writing about research using ‘thick description’ to give readers the experience of ‘being there’ (Geertz, 1973). From sociology, we learn how social relations are formed and reproduced. Psychology provides us with an understanding of human behaviour. History contributes a tradition of document analysis (the weighing of evidence in the light of the likely biases of the informant) and accords importance to contemporary records including personal testimony in letters and note books. The creative arts contribute a tradition of aesthetics (discernment and judgement of worth) and accord importance to creativity and imagination in interpretation. The notion of the social scientist creating knowledge by bringing vision to the interpretation of evidence was central to the work of Mills (1959) and more recently researchers such as Eisner (1998: 63) have emphasized the importance of the social scientist as a connoisseur, who is able to ‘appreciate’ empirical data through a process of ‘artistry’.

The social science disciplines, which categorize and operationalize social knowledge and its production, have their origins in the emergence of the nation-state with its political demands for the classification and analysis of individuals and populations. Anthropology, for example, emerged in the service of colonialism. During the twentieth-century, the certainties of nineteenth century expansionism were challenged and gave way to new ways of conceptualizing politics and human identity. Social scientists such as Marx (1818–83) and Freud (1856–1939) fundamentally influenced the development of theoretical understandings of the human condition and social formations. Marx’s historical materialism turned attention to the oppressive power of capitalism that appropriated and commoditized the labour power of individuals; and to the ideologies that privileged the upper classes and created the false consciousness whereby working people colluded in their own oppression (McLellen, 1977). These ideas provided analytical tools for researching the processes of social class and economic power. Freud’s theory of psychoanalysis, although it was highly contentious, was inspirational among artists and stimulated the development of new ways of exploring human consciousness in the social sciences (Freud, 1986). Other specialist branches of the social sciences have provided a range of concepts and theories for the study of people. For example, in anthropology Benedict (1935: 161–201) explored the way in which individuals are shaped by their society, while at the same time reconstructing and shaping society itself. In cultural psychology, Wertsch (1998) built on the work of Vygotsky to explore the ways human activity is ‘mediated’ by cultural tools and artefacts so that human agency is constantly enabled or constrained by cultural and current contexts.

The very term social science indicates its emergence in relation to, sometimes in opposition to, natural science. Early twentieth-century social scientists struggled to extricate themselves from the accusations made by logical positivism that research which lacked the solid foundation of measurement was no better than fancy and invention. They sought to develop methods which conformed to the methodology of the natural sciences, and researchers such as Homans (1950) (‘general theory’) focused on seeking generalizable laws governing the behaviour of human groups. Today there is a strong tradition of social science research using quantitative methods, such as surveys which provide decision-makers with statistical information on uptake of resources and the impact of reforms. Sometimes these data are collected by the researchers but often analysis is carried out on large-scale databases already existing in the public record. Research of this kind needs to be large scale to provide a sufficient number of records to carry out analyses of correlations between variables, for example when using randomized controlled trials to measure the impact of something new (a ‘treatment’). It is in the use of quantification and statistical analysis that social science methods come closest to natural science methods and their strength lies in answering What? How many? and When? questions. To use these data to answer Why? and How? questions, it is usually essential to collect additional qualitative data.

The early twentieth century was also the time when social science was diversifying and growing in both confidence and status. In the political turmoil of Europe in the 1920s and 1930s, a group of philosophers and social scientists, known as ‘The Frankfurt School’, developed an interdisciplinary social science method, ‘critical theory’, that focused on critiquing the assumptions springing from powerful ideologies. Rather than seeking to confirm and strengthen the existing order, for them social science should be concerned with critiquing and changing society. Influenced by Marx, they sought to understand the cultural factors that produced social conformity. They used a dialectic method to critique the assumptions of fashionable ideologies, including Marxism. During the period 1934–51, due to the political turmoil in Europe, the group were based in New York and California where their ideas were confronted by the celebrity culture of Hollywood. From 1956 onwards, after their return to Frankfurt, Habermas became a leading figure, focusing on ways in which language can empower and transform human interactions (Habermas, 1984). Another influential thinker of those years was the German Jewish political theorist, Arendt, who had escaped from Europe to New York in 1941. Much of her work focuses on human freedom and responsibility, challenging accepted orthodoxies, most famously in her book on the war trial of the Nazi war criminal, Eichmann, where she used the term ‘the banality of evil’ to describe the tendency in ordinary people to commit evil thoughtlessly because of a failure to think critically (Arendt, 1963). The work of Arendt and critical theorists, such as Habermas, illustrates the political dimension to being a social science researcher, pursuing knowledge and understanding of individuals, social groups and organizations, in a world where status is not accorded equally and researchers feel a responsibility to make a difference.

Since around 1970 social science research methods have considerably diversified, due largely to the influence of feminist theories that challenged many assumptions – such as the personal/political dichotomy – on the grounds that they derived from masculine hegemonies. The work of Harding (1987) was particularly important in challenging the concept of methodology as a set of theories, within a well-defined epistemology, with rules to which researchers must adhere. For Harding, a method is a technique or process for data collection, methodology incorporates both theory and the analytical process that guides the research, and epistemology incorporates ‘strategies for justifying beliefs’ (1987: 3). Partly due to Harding’s concept of ‘standpoint’ theories, the period since 1970 has seen enormous growth in research into areas such as gender and race (Harding, 1991). Researchers working in areas where there is systemic disadvantage have a responsibility to adopt a standpoint that will counter the bias ingrained in society. Butler’s work (1990) made another important contribution by challenging the notion that categories, such as ‘woman’, can be used as stable or abiding terms, pointing out that the category ‘woman’ contains within it multiple variables, for example to name just three: ‘black’, ‘lesbian’ or ‘abused’. Feminist research ‘puts social construction of gender at the center of one’s inquiry’ (Lather, 1991: 71), reconstructing the process of research at all levels from the chosen focus of study, to relationships with participants, methods of data collection, choice of analytical concepts and approaches to reporting. In terms of research on race, the founding of the Du Bois Review in 2004 has provided a platform for scholars across the social sciences to share their work and cross-fertilize their ideas. It has also given a public voice to work that was previously silenced or marginalized (Bobo and Dawson, 2004).

As a result of its focus on people, ethical issues are centrally important in social science research. Knowledge confers power, so in collecting data researchers need to be sensitive to the possible ways in which participation in the research may have an impact on participants. Drawing on moral and ethical principles, social science researchers vary considerably in terms of the kinds of relationship they establish with participants, as indicated by the terms they use to describe them – ‘subjects’, ‘informants’ or ‘co-researchers’. These different ‘namings’ all imply different ways of distributing power within the relationship, but whatever stance is adopted power differentials are never entirely within the researcher’s control and can never be excised. This in turn has an impact on the quality and reliability of the data that can be collected. Social science researchers typically emphasize the need to establish a relationship of trus...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Contributor biographies
• Foreword
• Introduction
• Part I: Reading, Reviewing and Reflecting
• Part II: Listening, Exploring the Case and Theorizing
• Part III: Addressing Issues of Power and Researching for Impact
• Part IV: Observing, Querying, Interpreting
• Part V: Identity, Community and Representation
• Part VI: Quantitative Methods: Theories and Perspectives
• Part VII: Quantitative Methods in Action
• Part VIII: Researching in Postmodern Contexts
• Glossary
• Index