Social Science Research Methods - Essay Example

? Social Science Research Methods – Research Design Social science research methods include research design, sampling strategy and data compilation instruments. This paper defines and describes the key methodological advance, sampling strategy and data collection instruments chosen for the proposed research while giving the definition of the elements mentioned above. Social Science Research Methods - Research Design The key methodological approach, sampling strategy and data collection apparatus that have been chosen for the proposed study project define how the study is performed in the natural setting of the event under inquiry. This paper will seek to issue a description of each of the key elements, which includes the research design, sampling strategy and data collection apparatus and thereafter explore into detail the rationale as to why the stipulated approaches and strategies have been chosen. Research methodology The methodological moves applied in Sociological investigation are roughly grouped under two sub-categories, the qualitative methodologies and quantitative methodologies. The categorization depends on the techniques employed in the investigation and representation of the understanding of event under study. Quantitative, which are normally in use in Sociological investigations, place emphasis on techniques based on direct observation, text analysis, strain on appropriate and objective accuracy greater than generality, make contact with participants and texts analysis. Qualitative move toward social experiences through scientific evidence and often depend on statistical analysis of multiple cases to formulate valid and consistent general assertions. Both methodologies are applicable in analyzing data of a study (Robson, 1997, p.503). The methodological option usually depends on the type observable fact the researcher aims to investigate. Some are portrayed better using qualitative measures while others best use quantitative scales. Also some events under study are better understood by use of either of the two methodologies subjectively. Some complex insights take on an approach which is a fusion of both methodologies whereby it is carried out in levels employing each method uniquely according to the approach that best suits each level. The quantitative are referred to as systematic methods and qualitative as the descriptive methods of social assessment. In this basis, it is upon the researcher to first be aware of the events under study and analyze which methodology to apply. For example, an investigator concerned with statistical generalization crosswise to the total population may possibly administer a survey questionnaire to correspond to sample population. In contrast, an examiner interested in understanding full individual’s social reaction may prefer participant scrutiny. Qualitative methods are in most situations restricted by the mind of the examiner. This is as a result of the subjectivity and bias related to the situation of the events under scrutiny (Sargent, 1994). Some of the most regular methods comprise: Participant observation – it is a technique where the investigator indulges into the culture of the event and participates in shaping its reality at the same time colleting relevant data. Direct observation – here the investigator makes annotations from a secondhand position whereby bias is limited by not participating or not indulging into the cultures but can associate. Unstructured interviewing - this entails candid interaction of respondent and investigator. This kind of interviewing lacks clear guidelines on what is to be inquired. The interviewer directs the conversation into the point of interest that comes up. It is best for broad topic explorations and collecting unparallel data attitude measuring. Case studies – this can be portrayed as a thorough inquiry of a particular occurrence or character. This is the case where numerous approaches are used in the course. Unobtrusive procedures – these don’t require the researcher to intrude into the study situation. They are principally best in capturing the original attitudes of the respondents. Indirect measures – are the unremarkable actions happening physically in the research framework where the investigator is capable of drawing together information devoid of establishing any strict measurement system (Scott, 1998). The choice of any of these will largely be determined by a combination of factors ranging from the type of data to be acquired, the location of the data, the availability and nature of the targeted population, the experience of the investigators and attitude of researcher and targets. Theoretical perspectives Deductive reckoning - researchers build up on research questions posing questions about the nature of variables or the correlation amid variables creating the report of a hypothesis, a testable affirmation about how variables are connected. Investigators applying deductive techniques begin with a specific theoretical perspective and review the previous inquiry that examines that particular theory developing assumptions and check on these assumptions using social investigation methods. After scrutinizing the collected information, they formulate arbitrations about whether or not the information supports the theory (Epstein, 1996). Inductive reckoning - research on the other hand commences with the data compilation and on the basis of this data the researcher makes an observation about the social world not requiring a statement of theory or an examination of the literature at the outset. Founded on what is observed the researcher develops a tentative assumption maybe consulting with other study literature to see how well their assumption fit with what others have found. The aim of the inductive process is the spawning of theory supported by observations and is probably best demonstrated in “grounded theory” methodologies (Martin, 1986, p.141). The way in which a person views the social atmosphere is referred to as their ontological position and encapsulates what he think actually exists in the social atmosphere which is never truly objective, and sociologists influence their research through their own personal values and the assumptions that are inherent in their research paradigms. The researcher’s alignment with a specific model will also affect their epistemological position which will affect what they consider to be knowledge or evidence of things in the social atmosphere providing the principles and rules by which a researcher decides whether and how aspects of the social atmosphere can be identified and how knowledge of this is shared with others. Research design There are three key systematic types of designs that investigators utilize to design their investigations on the basis of random assignment and multiple groups. Random assignment – it encompasses assigning of the acquired sample to actions in the inquiry, but differs from random picking which is the procedure of drawing the sample of individuals from a mass. They can both be applied in a single study, only a single of them or both absent. It is correlated to sampling, therefore, mostly associated with generalization of results and when it is applied it assures the action groups are equivalent prior to the action. Randomized or true experiment - this type of design is best used in instituting a cause-effect affiliation amongst variables. It is the only design that utilizes randomized assignment. There is the absence of an organization group or compound measures and isolation of a social process from the ordinary situation, and it is reproduced in the laboratory to determine if a change in a variable will tend to affect other captured variables or that are existing in that particular social process but with reference to the dependent variable which has not been subjected to the independent variables being tested. Quasi-experiment – it is similar to the experimental plan, but does not have the random task feature in its application. There is an organizational group and a compound measures. Revering to internal weight they tend to second-rate experimental design, but when taken as a group they are easily more commonly implemented than randomized designs. Non-experiment – this type of design employs neither random assignment nor does it have a control faction or multiple measures. It is the most applied design which is best for evocative research issues. It is the weakest causal assessment though it is a strong design for a one-shot survey that consists of a single observable variable. Sampling strategy This is the process of selecting a detachment of individuals from within the total population in order to approximate the characteristic of the total population. This is all about describing how you are going to choose the people or other items such as documents, that you are going to research. When the field is too wide, for example, covering an entire country, the cost of assessing each individual will be too hefty for the researcher. Thus sampling will ensure cutting down on the expenditure of conducting the census, speed up the process of collecting data as well as maintaining a considerable degree of homogeneity which will improve the accuracy and quality of data. Probability sampling – its modus operandi utilize some form of random selection whereby some sort of criteria is setup to ensure that the various units in the total population have equal selection probabilities. The traditional methods of random selection were substituted by modern computations whereby programs are coded to pick samples using inconspicuous, uniform and random criteria (Scott, 1998). Unsystematic sampling process is the simple form of probability sampling where a table of random number, a computer random number reproducer or a mechanical device number selector is used to pick samples. Stratified random sampling, also known as proportional or quota sampling, entails splitting your population into homogeneous subgroups and subsequently taking a simple random sample in each subgroup. Systematic random sampling is achieved when an period of picking the samples is set according to the entire populace over the necessary sample volume. Cluster random sampling usually engages picking samples from a geographic division where clusters are divided along margins, then samples are randomly picked from within the clusters and then all units within the clusters are measured. Multi-stage sampling engages a combination of all four sampling methods. Survey Method This is the data collection apparatus that are employed in the research work which have been categorized into two, questionnaire and interviews, whereby questionnaires are paper and pencil instruments which respondents fill in while interviews are a one-on-one interaction between the respondent and the researcher. The type of survey method used will depend on the wideness of the topic under investigation, the kind of responses expected as well as the access and availability of the target samples (Scott, 1998). When the topics under investigation are wide interviews are most preferable, whereas in cases where the topic is narrow such as simple attitude measuring, questionnaires are applied. Further questionnaires are of two kinds; mail and group administered. Mails are posted to the respondents who fill them and mail them back to the researcher, but usually the turnout is very low despite the efficiency and low costs in their administering. Group questionnaires are physically administered to the selected sample by the researcher and the feedback is filled in the presence of the researcher. Here, there is usually no interference or influence from the researcher. Interviews are also classified in line with their administering- personal and telephone interviews. Personal interviews engross the researcher accessing the targeted sample in their remote location and obtaining responses from them and telephone interviews engross the researcher ringing the respondents from the remote locations and get responses over the lines (Neuman, 1999). For the key methodology a combination of the approaches will be most preferable due to the wide array of variables involved in the study as some will be described using quantifiable principles while others are better described in qualitative perspective. A combination of the two approaches will better place the study to cover a wider scope in the analysis of the social environment. The theoretical perspectives are better employed in unison in order to have accurate assumption which will determine the effectiveness of the study. Deductions are critical in that they enable the researcher to develop the vital connections that exist between variables and inductions enable the researcher to utilize the vital “funnel mechanism” where there is the approach of topics from the general to the specific (Hagan, 2005, p.205-209). The sampling stratagem employed will be the multi-stage sampling which will ensure the accurate representative sample is achieved for the study as it is necessary to have as much of an accurate sample for the study as possible. This will ensure the sufficient generalization of the research finding to the population is achieved and the elimination of discrepancies that were existing. Depending on the depth of the study the regions covered will dictate the various sampling strategies utilized and as a result this is possible to use various strategies for the study. The size of the population will also dictate which sampling strategy is best for achieving an accurate representation, whereby the population size will vary regionally dictating the employment of various strategies so as to a achieve a representative sample on regional scales. The data gathering instrument strategy preferred is interviewing method as the examination will deem necessary the direct responses of the targets, but some of those that are hard to access due to availability will have to be accessed through questionnaires. This will ensure a wider capturing of data from the sampled population which will enhance the accurate representation of the population. This will deem a combination of the two techniques inevitable to increase the effective data collection that is vital for a healthy study. Depending on the attitudes of the sampled targets it is necessary to have both techniques deployed because relying on only a single technique may result to data lose whereby the targets may have been required to be interviewed instead of questionnaire administration (Gray, 2009). For the research plan it is best to contain the experimental design since the merits are expressed by its formational functionality. This is because it ensures a random scale factor for targeting the population and the increased economy of energy for the researcher as it eliminated the use of control treatments which are most of the time hectic for the study on time and finance scales. There is also the establishment of the cause-effect connections of variables that are captured in the scope of the study which is the best way to explain the social realities as they occur because each variable usually does not exist in vacuum environments. As such there is also the possibility of having a recreated social environment in a controlled setting which enables the researcher to deal with a variety of altered settings which could be impossible to obtain in the real social world (Hagan, 2005, p.211-213). Conclusion For an effective research, it is reasonable to use a combination of assorted methodologies and viewpoints, for some realities are captured best in their natural settings using some specific systems and are better explained and understood using some unique perspective. As seen above, it is also of significant importance to maintain varying degrees of subjectivity and objectivity at different stages in the research cycle for achieving a perfect study. Understanding all the events associated with the study is best attained through an extensive literature review. The data collection instruments preferably will be of the two techniques discussed above for they ensure capturing of the attitudes portrayed by the sampled targets efficiently and sufficiently. Works Cited Epstein, J., & Robert, A. (1996). Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up. Washington: Brookings Institute Press. Gray, D. E. (Ed.). (2009). Doing research in the real world. Belmont: CA Wadsworth Publishing Co. Hagan, F. (2005). Research Methods in Criminal Justice and Criminology. New York: MacMillan Publishing Co. Martin, P., & Barry, T. (1986). Grounded Theory and Organizational Research. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22(2), 141. Neuman, L. (Ed.). (1997). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Robson, C. (1997). Real World Research: A resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers. Blackwell: Oxford Press. Sargent, M. (Ed.). (1994). The New Sociology for Australians. Melbourne: Longman Chesire. Scott, J., & Marshall, G. (Ed.). (1998). Sociology of Education: A Dictionary of Sociology. New York: Oxford University Press. Read More