Experiments and Observations

Experiments and Observations

1. Causality - experiments are used by natural scientists, they start with a hypothesis and then tested; variables kept constant apart from independant variable, this is used to measure dependent variable. results then quantified to look for patterns and causality; this method has been adapted by social scientists.

2. Lab experiments - controlled environment, researcher changes IV to measure DV, control is usually used to see what happens when IV not altered.

   • Advantages
     • researcher has control
     • get quantitative data
     • replicate the research
   • Disadvantages
     • hard to reproduce real social situations, low ecological validity, lacks mundane realism
     • difficult to isolate single variables as social behaviour influence by many factors
     • often moral and ethical issues
     • people may act differently in a lab

3. Field Experiments - take place outside the lab in real social situations, those involved are often unaware.

   • Advantages
     • high mundane realism and ecological validity
     • show hidden meanings of everyday social situations
   • Disadvantages
     • no control of variables
     • if people know they're being studied they change their behaviour.
     • ethical problems of studying someone unaware

4. Observation - the british sociological association advise that covert participant observation should only be used if there is no other way to get the data; e.g. nigel fielding (1981) infiltrated the national front bc he thought they would not accept him if they knew he was a sociologist.

   • Covert Observation - researcher doesn't tell the group they're being observed.
   • Overt observation - where group is aware of researcher and they know who they are.
     • Beverly Skeggs (1991) - studied female sexuality among students at a college
   • Participant Observation - researcher actively involves themselves in the group.
     • Advantages
       • check out dynamics of the group up close
       • allows to research the workings of deviant groups
       • first hand insight in a natural setting
       • if it's covert people can't mislead the researcher
     • Disadvantages
       • may get too involved and find it hard to objectively observe the group
       • overt research may influence behaviour of group
       • researcher may join in in criminal acts
       • research isn't repeatable, lacks reliability
       • ethical and practical problems in getting in, staying in and getting out.
       • usually small group so not representative
       • hard work, time consuming and expensive
   • Non-participant - researcher observes the group, but isn't actively part of the group.
     • advantages
       • researcher isn't drawn in so more objective
       • if you observe deviant groups you have to be extremely inconspicuous
     • disadvantages
       • observing from outside stops you getting where the action is
       • overt research may influence behaviour of the group