Transcript Qualitative Research lecture

Qualitative Research
What if everything we’ve learned
so far is total crap?
WHAT WE’VE DONE IN THIS
CLASS
• The social science idea is that reality is out
there, and we need symbols (numbers) to
represent them. So we put numbers on
things and worry a lot about measurement
issues (reliability and validity and control
and artificiality).
A BORING ALTERNATIVE
• A BORING ALTERNATIVE: Stats focus on broad
conclusions across a large number of people;
they allow broad conclusions but lose depth.
Example: If you study verbal aggression you ask
very general statements, but you don’t learn the
many different ways it can manifest itself.
• So, you do either in-depth interviews, get openended data and try to make sense of it, or do
something like focus groups. This is called
“qualitative research.”
A COOL ALTERNATIVE:
Ethnography.
• An alternative thought is that language
creates reality. Here’s a list of famous
dead people you’ve need heard of
(FDPYNHO):
• Kant: Some but not all knowledge can be
gained empirically
• Husserl: Who we are and what we expect
will shape how we view the world.
“Phenomenology.”
MORE FAMOUS DEAD PEOPLE:
• Weber: “Social action.” All knowledge must be
communicated to be of value, and communication is
always a social act, which is one subjective being trying
to get a point across to another subjective being. That
means it will always be subjective, and what you
eventually get is a series of subjective interpretations of
reality, but not a clear picture of reality itself. Plato called
this “shadows on the cave wall.”
• Schutz: (a) There’s a lot of reality out there, and we
choose what to pay attention to. That’s always a
subjective choice. (b) Reality is socially constructed;
what we take reality to be (Iraq is evil) is a product of our
own subjective experience and our culture (our own fear
and our country’s way of viewing others).
HOW TO DO IT:
• 1) Immerse yourself in a culture. Like “local
anthropology.” Anthropologists go and live in an
indigenous culture and report back; ethnographers live in
local subcultures (like street gangs, or nursing homes, or
hospitals, or steel mills, or clam bakes).
• 2) Use induction (not deduction) and subjective
experience. Take lots of field notes and tape recordings,
video if you can get it. Called “participant observation.”
• 3) Take all that experience, all those notes, and write it
up in an “ethnography.” It’s a mix of literature and
science.
DIFFERENT VERSIONS
• The strong version: Social science is crap because (a) it’s
ontologically flawed, and (b) it’s an abuse of power (you are stealing
knowledge; why the hell does the British Museum need the bones of
Native Americans?). Only ethnography is good, and what really
matters is power.
• The moderate version: All inquiry is good, and different approaches
are better for different questions. Ethnography is good for questions
like “What’s going on?” and social science is good for questions like
“How much?” or “How often?” Example: Ethnography could tell that
there was Dr/Patient power difference and how that showed up, a
social scientist could code video tapes and see how often it
happened, and measure health care outcomes.
• Keep in mind that this should be its own class.