Research Methods in Social Science

Question: Discuss about the Research Methods in Social Science. Answer: Introduction: Ability to listen is an important attribute of conducting a qualitative research as it helps to acquire more knowledge and understanding about the research. It also helps the participants to recount their individual experience to the maximum possible extent without any interruption (Yin 2015). It also helps to build up the rapport of the researcher with the participants that facilitates the research process. For example, good listening skills during a personal interview with a manager of the organization upon which the research is being conducted can influence the manager to tell about his personal experience with the organization. Qualitative research is messier than purely scientific research because it has plenty of choices and the researcher negotiates actively between multiple methods, multiple theories and multiple paradigms for creating meaningful research. It allows the researchers to conduct research activity in parallel to other activities as it offers the variety, flexibility and opportunities for experimentation in multiple social contexts (Bhattacherjee 2012). Qualitative research has to deal with the humanity issues along which needs more consideration of ethical issues making it messier than pure scientific research. For example, while conducting qualitative research, the researcher need to undergo a set of analytic strategies which includes other activities besides research activities. Managing the field team is done by surveying the individual team members and average their individual scores for creating composite scores for the team variables like conflict and cohesion on the level of the team (Trochim and Donnelly 2001). Based on the scores, tasks are divided within the team in such a way every team member get adequate task based on their eligibility. Research tasks are prioritized by placing the most important tasks on the top of the list structured for the research and the least important tasks on the later part of the schedule, thereby conducting a systematic research. 1. Observes the everyday activities and ordinary events as they occur naturally along with the unusual occurrences. 2. Involvement with the people who are studied and experiences personally the daily social life processes in the field settings. 3. Acquires the viewpoint of the insider with the maintenance of the analytical perspectives while focusing on the specific aspects of settings and usage of theoretical sampling. 4. Usage of the social skills and techniques according to the situation along with the critical thinking skills 5. Data production in the form of written notes, pictures, maps or diagrams with detailed descriptions (Neuman 2006). Presentation of self-affects the work of a field researcher as they ask sensitive questions to the respondents. They feel reluctant to answer those sensitive questions like questions about alcohol or drug abuse, sexual behavior or mental health problems as answering them may threaten their self-estimation and this affects the work of the field researcher. The personal skills of the field researcher, which are reflected in the research work, can also affect the participants and their participation in the research. For example, the behavioral skills can affect the knowledge sharing of a participant which ultimately affects the quality of research. The attitude of strangeness is the process of making the tacit culture visible. It is a technique of field research in which the researchers mentally adjusts themselves to see the field events as an outsider. The researchers tend to adopt this technique in the familiar surroundings as intimate acquaintance with the familiar culture can create blindness. The benefits are that it facilitates discovery of self and cultural elements become easily visible. For example, the researcher always has an expectation from the participants like the expectation of a gift giver to hear thanks for the nice gift.' It influences the researcher to reconsider the own social world. Participant observation tells about the vote canvasser networks that are underpinned by the dyadic relationships that are on a long-term basis, both horizontal and hierarchical between the voters, vote-canvassers and the candidate (Chattharakul 2011). All these factors continue to be the crucial factors for winning elections. Participant observation methodology helps to gain a close and intimate familiarity with the participants that is very important for collecting efficient data in qualitative research. The participant observation in the article provided by Chattharakul (2011) documented the way by which the candidates can draw up a map of an election campaign to identify the voters for maximizing their vote-canvassing strategy. Participant observation allowed the researcher to understand the vote canvassing networks as it offered the researcher to have a close-up study of the underlying mechanisms of a campaign of Thai election. The researcher documented the process by which the candidates draw up the map of election campaign after identification of the voters for enhancing their strategy of vote canvassing. The participate observation helped the researcher to find out the influence of money, political factions and corrupt local politicians upon rural voters. From participant observation, it has been also understood that the middle-class voters are familiarized with alternative policies. Swell Sculpture Festival is celebrated in Queensland in Australia and the managers of the festival implement the concept of participant observation as the strategy for audience development for managing and understanding the expectations of the audiences. This technique of participant observation helps to illustrate the understanding of the behaviors of the visitors with their artwork interaction. Through the help of participant observation methodology, the researcher can understand the behavioral features of participants and the important skills of interaction. The participant observation helped in getting structured information about the organization or the event upon which the research is being done. Political ethnography helps to understand the role of politics in everyday life as it focuses on the relationship of everyday life with politics. Some of the mundane aspects of life are rooted in the nation or state politics and ethnography demonstrates the deep roots of politics of a country imbues the subjects with particular practices and discourses. For example, in the article provided by Goffman (2009), the researcher was able to draw implications related to the prior treatments of poor and policing and the area of improvement regarding broader sociological questions of punishment along with the surveillance in the modern era. The limitation of using only ethnography as the basis to develop public policy is its relation with reliability. The replication of the ethnographic research carried out on public policy in the natural setting is not reproducible. In addition, controlling the external variables for the development of public policies is not possible because of longer duration of observation (Goffman 2009). Ethnographers include their personal experience for pursuing questions and reviewing data, it can lead to biases in directing the inquiry and analysis. In addition, this method relies upon presentation of critical incidents which is difficult for hypothesis testing. The author wants to manage the ethical aspect of surveillance and punishment in the modern era as with the increase in imprisonment, the daily life of the Black communities is affected. The poor treatment of the poor and the public policing is the ethical issue the author wants to manage for their betterment. I would, as an ethical manager, laid down the ethical guidelines for abiding the law so that they can avoid the punishment. The author attempted to provide implications for viewing the punishment and imprisonment related matters as major sociological questions which are needed to be solved for improved status of black people. Becker argues that should there be values or not among the sociologists while undertaking the studies to analyze the problems. It has been a point of a dilemma for the sociologists that Becker puts forward whether to stay neutral or exhibit a deep commitment while conducting the studies. Staying neutral is value free and commitment involves a value position that the author argues about which side to take. On considering a situation when researches are carried out especially in the sectors of schools, asylums, hospitals, etc., sociologists consider that their work is biased. In such situations, the conflict exists in the hierarchy but has not turned into openly political (Becker 1966). I agree with the main contention of Becker regarding taking of sides as per our political and personal commitments as it will use our technical and theoretical resources for avoiding the distortions that may be introduced into our work. It will also help to carefully limit the conclusion and recognition of the hierarchical credibility. But at the same time "The hierarchy of credibility" is one such feature of our society whose existence cannot be denied. Sometimes even if there is disagreement in terms of the decision or any other work, we cannot deny the decision of the one at the top position. Basic assumptions of traditional interviews are opinion democratization, respondent-researcher duality and respondents as knowledge vessels. Human beings are expected to share common experiences and the roles of the respondent and the researcher are formalized. All the researches that are being conducted are depended on certain assumptions that constitute valid method. These assumptions shape the process of interview and the practice of the sociologists and therefore have a greater contribution towards the validity of the research. For example, certain qualitative researchers based on their philosophical perspectives reject or accept the framework of "validity" that differs from the quantitative research according to sociology. Structured interviews are mainly concerned with the respondent-researcher duality whereas unstructured interviews are lesser stringent regarding the interviewing assumptions and in-depth interviews are built on the concept that delving into the deeper self of the respondent delivers more of the authentic information (Marsiglio 2013). Structured interview can be conducted for the simple gathering of information and when the participant gets deviated from the original question asked. Unstructured interview can be conducted for an informal communication and questions in such cases are open-ended, flexible and can thus be adapted for modification if required. In-depth interviews are conducted for the important matters requiring serious discussions. In the process of active interviewing, the interview is considered as a social event or occasion and the respondents along with the researchers create the social reality based on interactions. In this process of interview, the respondents are expected to take on many active roles. The unit of analysis in this type of interview is not focused on the individual and it is how the interaction shapes the expression and story of the respondent. The main characteristics of an active interview are a structured plan, a quick interviewer, spontaneous respondent and a descriptive topic to be discussed on. In comparison with the traditional approach of interview, active interview allows constructing a bridge to the ongoing interactive contingencies in respect to the interview process. Field research interview is the process of collection of primary data in either the original form or available otherwise using the methods of direct observation, postal surveys, telephone and face to face interviewing whereas survey research interview involves collecting information from the individuals on a specific topic by the methods of questionnaires, interviews and surveys. Field interviews are open-ended and is intended for the collection of the individual experience whereas friendly conversations are informal without any collection of formal information. A field interview involves collecting, conserving and also disseminating the data in order to reach a conclusion. Whereas, a friendly conversation is an informal act that is held between a small group of individual without a purpose. Ethical dilemmas occur as the field researchers get personally involved with the social lives of the respondents. These occur mostly when the researchers are in the field and have lesser time for making moral decisions without consulting others. These situations occur unexpectedly in the process of interacting and observing in the field. The most significant ethical dilemmas of a field interview involve the involvement of a researcher into the personal and social lives of an individual. Although there exist questions on the moral status of such interviews, in certain field survey activities can only be evaluated by studying covertly (Liamputtong 2009). The validity and utility of the information that is obtained by interviewing the elites are dependent on the research design of the analyst. Poorly structured and prepared interviews yield poor information and shift the focus of the interview. Therefore, it is important to be thoroughly prepared when undertaking interviews with the elites. In order to conduct such interviews, it is very important to have a conceptual mapping. An elite individual values time and thus it is very important o conduct the interview with a good knowledge to manage the formal conversation within a specific duration. For example, a study revealed that it took around fifteen to twenty calls to arrange an interview of political elites in Russia. (Beamer 2002). Elite interviews tap into the political constructs, as they are difficult to examine otherwise. They are important as they involve the belief of the political actors. Conceiving the representations by the legislators, extending the institutional co-operation and bipartisan within the state government, coalition building, party leadership and the influence and power of the executives are all answered by the elite interviews. Moreover, the study of such interview reflects on the process-tracing studies, new historical changes of policy ratification or its execution. The elite interviews n also help in the form of a pre-test to aid an individual to distinguish the process that needs to be analyzed in future. Developed procedures of sampling enhance the study validity and reliability and ensure that captures the entire range of interviews. It allows the researcher to gather rich information funds while conserving the resources. In terms of a multiple sampling comparabilities of samples can be done and also information of representative elites from every state can be obtained. Moreover, it reduces the chance of generating biased sample. This also provides an opportunity to get a wide range of view of the elite respondents. Therefore, for carrying out the elite interviews, sampling is an essential factor in its single and multiple states. The chapter on Paula and Kelly provides an in-depth analysis of the political view of the young mothers of Australia. From the interviews, it can be said that both Paula and Kelly have sufficient awareness of politics and Paula had a strong awareness of the complex political affairs of decision making, when compared to Kelly. Both these women viewed politics as a mean for the wellbeing of their children but there viewpoints were different (Brett and Moran 2006). Therefore, it can be well said that both of them were politically aware. Using direct quotations for the presentation of the findings can be attributed to the fact that it clearly reflects the speech and though of the historical figures in the discussion. In this chapter, the views of both the young mothers were quoted to express their opinion regarding the political awareness of the Australian young mothers and the critique by the author has been kept in contrast to support or justify the comments. Direct quotes have also helped to connect the ideas of the young mothers with the authors ideas to produce an argument. There is an intersection of politics, class and nation and that has been specifically exemplified both in the case study and the book. From the case study, it can be found that the young mothers were politically aware, although with different views, and they were concerned about the well-being of their children as the future citizens of the nation with respect to the class of people they belong to. The book discussed the various political ideologies based on the social dimensions of the ordinary people of Australia, belonging to different classes that intersected all the three parameters (Brett and Moran 2006). Qualitative research is the ideal choice for presentation of the detailed account of the excerpts over quantitative as quantitative studies concentrate more on the analysis and measurement of the target concepts and often misses the contextual details. For this kind of studies, individual interpretation of the opinions and events is essential that is possible only with qualitative analysis. The excerpts were rich in the views of the common Australians from their perspectives and data collection would not have been possible with data collection tools, as it is done in quantitative research. Therefore, the researcher for conducting the research aptly selected qualitative research. Cyr analyzed from the past ten years that focus groups are currently under-utilized as data collection method and this can be found from the fact that relatively less number of articles over the past ten years have included the focus groups. The presentation and content of the focus group data also vary significantly. This can be seen from the fact that few of the articles carefully specified the type and number of participants whereas others have missed it. For example, it has been observed that most of the researchers mostly on individual focus group although more information can be obtained from the interactive and individual pool. Focus groups aim to generate the conversations that help to uncover the opinions of the individuals regarding an issue. The group consensus also is revealed in cases where they are found as the issues at hand (Cyr 2015). The data collection potential rises from the range of perspectives and experiences for the focused conversations that are uncovered. One of the most significant uses of the focus group is learning of the socially marginalized pool and understanding of society dynamics. Moreover, it has been reported that the focus group is presently used in the practice of arrangement or gathering of a manageable set of conversations which gets uncovered during the study. 1. An individual unit of analysis is essential for triangulating the other methods and the focus groups play an important role to elicit and survey the multiple reactions to a question and the group dynamic is not important in this form of analysis. The norms of an individual unit analysis suggest that the scientifically identified findings are the most precious if and when applied to all types of individuals. The research articles do not rely exclusively on the focus groups for making their arguments and the focus groups here do not represent the general population. 2. The group unit of analysis is efficient as a pretest for assessment of the measurement validity. Here, the focus groups inform the researchers of the existing consensus for the interesting phenomenon. In this process of analysis, the researchers are confronted with the desirability bias for the methods of data collection that includes surveys and interviews. Every group unit of analysis entails a confined population which must be outlined in the study design procedure of operationalization. Although the group unit of analysis might be operationalized as mean of individual scores, they are of interest to the researchers. 3. Sometimes interactions amid social beings are considered to be a unit of analysis in study. Interactive unit of analysis is appropriate for the exploration studies and exploits the comparative advantage of the focus groups regarding their social setting and dynamics. They rarely confirm the expectations that are derived from the previous theory and data and are oriented to derive new hypothesis. For example, research where books, jokes, wars, laws, etc. are involved in the interactions. Focus groups offer to provide several advantages to the feminist research that includes addressing the ethical concerns demonstrating the ability of the researcher in the process of data collection. It also helps to provide interactive and high quality data and offers a route for studying an individual in context to the social world. Historical studies reveal that the individualistic investigation methods have always dominated the feminist research and psychology. The feminist qualitative research thus can be strengthened through the construction and expansion of interviews conducted on feminist group. The focus group data should be differentiated from the data collected from the in-depth qualitative interviews as it is a distinctive form of analysis and allows observing the interactions taking place between the group members. The strength of the opinion of an individual is analyzed by the focus group that is not possible by the in-depth analysis and therefore, they should be differentiated. Moreover, in-depth qualitative interview needs to be more structured and interactive, whereas the focus group data collection method involves more statistical analysis. Focus group aids the concern of co-construction of reality as it helps to build the understanding of the social world rather than atomistic individualism of individual interviewing (Wilkinson 1998). They focus on the social context influences and the self-relational aspects and give a clear understanding of the reality of the situation. Individual interviews are differentiated from the focus groups on the basis that focus groups provide a better understanding of the individual along with his environment in the context of realities. Focus group simulates more real world response than individual interview. The focus group helps in understanding the commonalities and differences within a segment, whereas an in-depth qualitative interview is very narrow or specific. Running a focus group takes the research into the unexpected and new directions and help the researchers to get engaged in the interaction that is argumentative and complementary. Argumentative includes the parameters of disagreement, challenging and questioning whereas complimentary includes the parameters of sharing of common experiences. Data collection process includes the similarities and differences of the group participants. It is a cost-effective technique where contradictory views can be challenged, and new ideas can be formed. The final result is that running a focus group helps to build a cognitive structure of research after eliminating unwanted ideas and takes the research into a new direction (Kitzinger 2003). Interactions are fundamental in a focus group as it leads to an interventionist style, helps to continue the debate, which would have otherwise ended, challenging the casual reality of the people and encouraging them further to discuss the inconsistencies between their own thinking and participants (Kitzinger 1994). Interaction in focus group allows comparison of views and evaluating the threat present in research. Proper interaction between focus groups allows researcher the time to frame their research in a correct way based on shared perception of ideas. Therefore, interaction plays a significant role in building up the communication process between the participants (Kitzinger 2003). Differences between participants are important when undertaking the research of focus group, as the research participants in a group are never homogeneous entirely. Kitzinger states that there might be unanimous agreement to some views or disagreement with certain ideas. The group dynamics in focus the group may sometimes deviate people from taking about the central theme of research. It does not always mean that it is an inhibitive group as many a time they have helped break the ice and speak about taboo topics. This causes the facilitator to explore the opinion differences and encourage the participants for theorizing the existence of diversity for their viewpoints (Kitzinger 2003). Qualitative methods include specific demands for actively engaging the researcher. Reflexivity is not only individual's interview. It is represented by the entire research approach that begins with a good understanding of self-perception in the research procedure with a clear research conclusion. In the qualitative research methods, the researcher has to think critically beyond the results got from the data analysis thus reflexivity is very important for qualitative research (Walter 2006). It is important because it acknowledges that the researcher has analyzed the data collected during the research. Coding is an essential part of qualitative data analysis. It can be defined as the process by which the collected data are being organized for data analysis during research. While coding, the segments of data are marked with descriptive words, symbols or category names. The purpose of coding data during a research work is to categorize data according to the type or nature of the data collected (Walter 2006). It is done for making the data analysis process easy. After coding the data, similar data under a particular category can be treated in a similar way which would reduce the risk of misinterpretation of data. While dealing with data, transcripts and coding for analysis of the collected data during qualitative research, some specific concepts or ideas would be found assisting in the explanation or interpretation of data, these concepts are known as themes. Codes are given to each data and based on the codes similar data are categories and from similar data having the same code, a theme generates (Walter 2006). The primary analytical procedures identified by Kitzinger include organizing the data, researching the data, developing categories and themes, coding the data, giving interpretation through analytic memos, finding alternative information and writing the report for presentation. Each phase involves reducing redundant data to maintain the purpose of work and guides the researcher to manage information competently. Interpretation is the most crucial process as it imparts meaning to raw data and transforms it into valuable findings. Finally, the data may be presented in different formats by balancing description and analysis. Researchers may take different approaches in reporting and delivering the content accurately (Stevenson 2016). Coding of data is enabled long-term storage of the data by compressing it and is profitable to the researcher especially in the later stages of analysis when he requires the information. Codes like an abbreviation, dots, numbers, highlighting passages, etc. helps in generating categories and themes which facilitate analysis. The constant comparison and coding of data are necessary to achieve theoretical saturation and refinement of the data. The assembling of code helps in organizing themes and linking each of them coherently. It minimizes the chance of error in research work and increases the credibility of data (Stevenson 2016). Ways of writing a report include Presentation of data through interviews where participant response guides the report. Linking of descriptive data and practices to theories. Trying to build a theory with data collected from various institutions and drawing theoretical consideration. Storylining, where the relationships and categories are utilized to clarify the findings in the form of a story. Concept mapping includes representation by a graph, by using graphical software programs. I think presenting data by linking theory with practice is an ideal method as it helps in analyzing practices and views which are complementary to relevant theories (Stevenson 2016). The Silvermans assessment of qualitative research data identifies the aesthetic aspects of qualitative research. He feels that contemporary cultural responses hamper understanding of researchers, and he finds a modern culture of qualitative research to be inaccurate. He uses the word bullshit' to describe some qualitative methods because, in recent research, aesthetic values of research are ignored. He analyzed that researcher pays more attention to theory but not how to apply it. Secondly, the focus is on the perception of the participant but not on the origin of the particular idea. Modern research is also at the risk of leaving standard methods and relying on creating methods (Li 2014). Silverman regard experience as particularly important because it facilitates the application of qualitative research. The role of qualitative research is often ignored in real life, so experience helps in being aware of stereotyped views. This kind of experience helps in the practical application of research in society. He stresses that experience helps in knowing the standards of qualitative research. It facilitates understanding the needs of the responsive audience as well as the maintaining credibility of research. Therefore, experience promotes proper mobilization and dissemination of research findings. It helps in knowing the strength and weakness of qualitative research (Li 2014). The anti-bullshit agenda was triggered by Silverman's critical diagnosis of the modern culture of qualitative research as bullshit'. The anti-bullshit agenda by Silverman is an approach to outline certain criteria, which a social researcher should try to abide by. It includes factors such as clarity, economy, reason, beauty, and truth. This agenda enables the researchers to keep certain criteria in mind while presenting data. Silverman is commending this agenda because he feels that in current qualitative research, researchers ignore the aesthetic value of qualitative research. His main aim is to form research idea with precise reasoning so that research report is presented in aesthetically pleasing style and language (Li 2014). The most challenging aspect according to me was the coding of research data, as I was thoroughly confused the topics I should code and the number of codes I should include in my analysis of interview transcript. Things can get haphazardly arranged if codes are not assembled in a logical and systematic manner. So, I was very cautious during the coding process and tried not to make my presentations go wrong in any way. However watching the video of a qualitative analysis of interview data helped me much in understanding the procedure for coding of research data. The best part of analyzing interview transcript was reading the different interview articles. It was a learning experience for me and allowed me to review and understand the various aspects of an interview. It also eased the collection of required data, since it facilitated access to the necessary information by looking up the text rather than listening to an audio or video repetitively (YouTube, 2016). Secondly, collecting information from different journal articles expanded my knowledge about the research topic. It helped me in developing my analytical skills as I focused on identifying new information from journal articles or recognizing any discrepancy or ideas that have not yet been explored. The main themes incorporated by me include Adaptation - This includes updating rulebook changing schedules and new routines. Seeking information - This encompasses reading journals, attending meetings and talking to co-workers Problem Solving - which includes identifying and quick fixing of problems. Presentation of research- I learned many methods of presenting and reporting my findings. It will help me in the future to present data according to situations of work. Knowing the importance of focus group- The work on focus group helped me realize the importance of interaction in getting new ideas and cross-comparison of opinions. References Beamer, G., 2002. Elite interviews and state politics research.State Politics Policy Quarterly,2(1), pp.86-96. Becker, H.S., 1966. Whose side are we on.Soc. Probs.,14, p.239. Bhattacherjee, A., 2012. Social science research: principles, methods, and practices. Brett, J. and Moran, A., 2006. Ordinary People's Politics: Australians talk about life, politics and the future of their country. Chattharakul, A., 2011. Thai electoral campaigning: Vote-canvassing networks and hybrid voting.Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs,29(4), pp.67-95. Cyr, J., 2015. The pitfalls and promise of focus groups as a data collection method.Sociological Methods Research, p.0049124115570065. Goffman, A., 2009. On the run: Wanted men in a Philadelphia ghetto.American Sociological Review,74(3), pp.339-357. Kitzinger, J., 1994. The methodology of focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants.Sociology of health illness,16(1), pp.103-121. Kitzinger, J., 2003. The methodology of focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants.Interviewing,1(1), p.347. Li, L., 2014. The Unremarkable Things Matter: A Book Review of David Silverman's A Very Short, Fairly Interesting and Reasonably Cheap Book about Qualitative Research.The Qualitative Report,19(9), pp.1-4. Liamputtong, P., 2009. The in-depth interviewing method.Qualitative research methods, pp.42-63. Marsiglio, W., 2013. Conducting qualitative in-depth interviews. Neuman, W.L., 2006. Field research.Social Research Methods-Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, pp.378-414. Stevenson, C.N., 2016. Analyzing Qualitative Data: Visualizing Lived Experiences.Mixed Methods Research for Improved Scientific Study, p.123. Trochim, W.M. and Donnelly, J.P., 2001. Research methods knowledge base. Walter, M., 2006. Social research methods. South Melbourne, Vic.: Oxford University Press. Wilkinson, S., 1998, February. Focus groups in feminist research: Power, interaction, and the co-construction of meaning. InWomen's studies international forum(Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 111-125). Pergamon. Yin, R.K., 2015.Qualitative research from start to finish. Guilford Publications. YouTube. (2016).Qualitative analysis of interview data: A step-by-step guide. [online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRL4PF2u9XA [Accessed 9 Jul. 2016