Transcript Qualitative research

Knowledge, reality and
different forms of social
science research.
1/10/15 Class 3 Week 2
[email protected]
module coordinator
What is research? What makes it
different from ‘common sense’?
‘Systematic and rigorous enquiry that involves, or
leads to understanding of how things are, or how
they work. This involves gathering information
and producing knowledge. The production of
knowledge requires something more than
description. It requires explanation, which
involves reflection on what is found out, observed
or discovered.’ (Orme & Shemmings 2010: 12)
A scientific attitude towards real
world research means proceeding:
Systematically: ‘being explicit about the nature
of the observations that are made, the
circumstances in which they are made and the
role you take in making them’
Sceptically: subjecting your ideas to possible
disconfirmation and your observations and
conclusions to scrutiny
Ethically: the interests and concerns of those
involved in the research are safeguarded
(Robson 2002; 18)
Can we use the same methods for
studying both the natural world &
social world?
Positivism says yes and claims that:
Reality consists of what is available to the senses
Science is the primary discipline
Natural and social sciences share a common unity
of method
There is a fundamental distinction between fact
and value (Giddens 1977: 28-9)
So a Positivist approach to SW
research would mean:
That by systematically and empirically
collecting enough ‘facts’ and ‘laws’ all social
behaviour could be classified, correlated and
measured. Hypotheses could be made and
tested as true or false; we could then predict
social behaviour – child and adult abuse, illicit
drug misuse, escaping an abusive relationship –
just as we can predict the natural world.
Criticisms of Positivist study of the
social world:
Positivism cannot capture the real nature and
meanings and purposes of social behaviour
Positivism restricts knowledge to what is
empirical (the natural sciences) and logical
(mathematics); but are there are other forms of
‘knowledge’ appropriate to the social world?
The Positivist claim that facts and values can be
separated is not tenable
Research and researchers are not neutral
(Should they be?)
The Social Science reaction:
Positivism verses Interpretivism
‘…unlike atoms or molecules, social actors can
talk about, explain to others or justify their
actions. Knowledge is then not something
created ‘out there’ to be discovered, but
something derived and created from the
experiences of the social actors…Social realities
are constructed, re-constructed, negotiated and
re-negotiated in and through meanings’
(Mclaughlin 2007: 29-30)
Examples of Interpretivist Social
Science approaches:
Phenomenology
Symbolic Interractionism
Interpretative interactionism
New paradigm inquiry
Social Constructionism
Ethnomethodology (e.g. What is ‘Garfinkeling’
and are you brave enough to do it?)
Interpretivist social science is
criticised as lapsing into relativism:
Because what is counted as ‘true’ is paradigm
dependant; there is no objective ‘truth’
But: there is a material world ‘out there’
independent of how we think of it
What happens does matter, as well as how
people ‘construct’ what happens
Social structures also have a form of reality
independent of thought
Are all views really equally valid?
Critical realism avoids the extremes of both
positivism & relativism. Critical realism accepts
the existence of external reality while
acknowledging that knowledge is a historical &
social product. What counts as facts are theory
laden; the concepts we have to use mean that
our understandings of reality are always
provisional ways of knowing rather than a direct
mirror of reality. Social Science studies open
not closed systems so rejects the role of
prediction. Explanations of an event are always
in contexts. Material reality is given due weight
& not reduced to biochemical processes
Space can be created for democratic
emancipatory knowledge production
– & action
Critical realist SW research means:
Addressing both social causation and personal
constructions (the sociological debate on
structure v agency, the philosophical debate on
determinism v free will)
Open to the use of grounded theory approaches
to understanding
Dominant ideas can be critically challenged (do
our SW service users get given a ‘hard time’ by
dominant ideas?)
Rather than reductionist explanations the true
complexities that contribute to SW problems can
be explored (Houston 2001)
Dissertation hint from philosophy
visit:
‘A good literature review will not take what has
previously been written at face value but will be
aware of the contested nature of knowledge in
which alternative views and positions may be
taken. It will also be sensitive to power, where
some viewpoints are privileged while others are
subjugated’ (Whittaker 2009: 29)
So does this give you food for thought for how to
approach your dissertation topic…?
The Social Research you explore can
be understood as either:
Qualitative research (associated with
interpretative accounts of knowledge - seeking
meaning). Research is successful if it is
credible/transferable/dependable/ confirmable
Quantitative research (associated with
positivist accounts of knowledge – seeking facts).
Research is successful if it is
reliable/replicable/valid
Mixed methods (Bryman 1989)
Qualitative research characterised
by:
Tends to understand behaviour from the
researchers framework. Observes what is
naturally occurring. Tends to subjectivity & is
close to the data. Discovery orientated,
exploratory, descriptive. Process orientated.
Valid: real, rich deep data. Ungeneralizable case
studies. Dynamic reality.
Inductive (from observations/findings theory is
generated).
Quantitative Research characterised
by:
Tends to understand behaviour without
accounting for a persons subject state.
Obtrusive and controlled measurement.
Tends to objectivity & to be removed from the
data. Verification orientated, reductionist,
inferential, hypothetical. Outcome orientated.
Reliable: hard, replicable data.
Generalizable multiple case studies.
Stable reality. Deductive: From a theory,
observations/findings are generated
Research strategies & research
design:
Questionnaires: both quantitative & qualitative
research
Interviews: both quantitative & qualitative
research
Experiments: quantitative research
Focus groups: qualitative research
Observation: qualitative research
Mixed methods research:
Measure a social phenomenon in different ways
to gain a more accurate account-triangulation
Using different methods can show the layers &
complexity of a social phenomenoncomplimentarity
Using one method (a focus group; qualitative) can
develop using another method (more specific
questionnaires; quantitative)-development
Using one method to explore discrepancies from
another method-initiation
Using different methods to reach a greater range
of possible respondents
Social Research Design is not about
right or wrong ways:
Choosing social research methods is partly about
what kind of knowledge we are intending to
produce & can involve a ‘trade off’ between
validity (gaining the right information needed),
reliability (getting an accurate picture as possible
of the social phenomena being studied &
practicality).
As SW researchers the subject & our methods of
research may be influenced by our professional &
personal values e.g. emancipatory & participatory
research
Questions please: are you
completely sure you know
what to do, by when and why?
If not ask now…
Hopes…and fears…?
References:
Giddens A (1977) Studies in Social and Political
Theory London: Hutchinson
Houston S (2001) Beyond Social
Constructionism: Critical Realism and Social
Work BJSW 31(6) 845-861
McLaughlin H (2007) Understanding Social
Work Research London: Sage
Orme J & Shemmings D (2010) Developing
research based social work practice Basingstoke:
Macmillan.
Robson C (2002) Real World Research
Chichester: Wiley