what is systematic research in sociology

Doc’s Things and Stuff

Systematic Research | Definition

Fundamentals of Sociology - Adam McKee and Scott Bransford

Systematic Research refers to the organized method of investigation used in sociology to study social phenomena, ensuring objective and reliable results.

What is Systematic Research in Sociology?

Systematic research in sociology is the structured process used to explore, analyze, and understand human social behavior and societal patterns. Unlike casual observation or anecdotal evidence, systematic research follows a well-defined methodology that allows sociologists to produce valid, consistent, and replicable findings. This approach is critical because it helps avoid biases and ensures that conclusions are based on data rather than assumptions or personal opinions. Systematic research can involve various methods, such as surveys, experiments, field studies, or content analysis, but its key characteristic is its reliance on rigorous, structured inquiry.

Importance of Systematic Research in Sociology

Systematic research is central to the discipline of sociology. Without it, the field would lack the credibility and scientific rigor needed to inform public policy, guide social programs, or contribute to the understanding of human behavior. By adhering to systematic methods, sociologists can:

Ensure objectivity : A structured research process minimizes the influence of the researcher’s personal biases or preconceived notions, which can distort findings.
Provide reliability : When research follows a standardized approach, it can be replicated by other researchers, which builds confidence in the results.
Generate valid data : Systematic research helps sociologists gather data that truly reflect the social world, avoiding misleading or inaccurate conclusions.

This method is foundational because sociology often deals with complex and sometimes invisible societal structures that require careful, methodical study to be fully understood.

Components of Systematic Research

Several key components form the backbone of systematic research in sociology:

1. Research Questions and Hypotheses

Systematic research begins with a clear research question or hypothesis. This question guides the entire research process, ensuring the investigation stays focused. In sociology, research questions often address issues related to inequality, socialization, deviance, or institutions. For example, a sociologist might ask, “How does income inequality impact educational attainment?” Hypotheses, on the other hand, are specific, testable predictions that stem from these questions. They suggest what the researcher expects to find based on existing theories or previous studies.

2. Literature Review

Before conducting research, sociologists examine existing studies on their topic. This is known as the literature review. It provides context and helps to refine the research question by showing what is already known and where gaps in knowledge may exist. This step ensures that the research contributes something new and meaningful to the field.

3. Research Design

The design of the research refers to the plan for collecting and analyzing data. Sociologists use various designs depending on their research question and the nature of the topic. Some common research designs include:

Surveys : Gathering data from a large group of people, often through questionnaires or interviews, to identify patterns or trends in attitudes or behaviors.
Experiments : Conducting controlled studies, typically in a laboratory setting, to isolate variables and establish cause-and-effect relationships.
Field Studies : Observing people in their natural environments to understand how they behave in real-world settings.
Content Analysis : Analyzing media, documents, or other cultural artifacts to understand societal values, norms, and communication patterns.

4. Data Collection

Data collection involves gathering information from various sources, such as participants, archival records, or media. The method used depends on the research design. For example, in survey research, sociologists might collect data through online questionnaires or face-to-face interviews. In experiments, they gather data by manipulating variables and observing the outcomes. Systematic research emphasizes the importance of collecting data in a consistent and unbiased manner to ensure that it accurately reflects the social world.

5. Data Analysis

Once data is collected, it must be analyzed to answer the research question. This analysis can be quantitative, involving statistical techniques to identify patterns, relationships, or trends, or qualitative, focusing on interpreting meaning from non-numerical data such as interview transcripts or field notes. Regardless of the method, the goal is to systematically evaluate the data to draw conclusions that are both valid and reliable.

6. Interpretation of Results

After analyzing the data, sociologists interpret their findings in the context of the original research question and hypothesis. They assess whether the data supports the hypothesis or suggests a different conclusion. Interpretation is an important step because it connects the research to broader sociological theories and debates.

7. Publication and Peer Review

To ensure that research is credible, it often undergoes peer review before being published in academic journals. This process allows other experts in the field to assess the research methods, analysis, and conclusions to ensure they meet high standards of scientific rigor. Peer-reviewed research contributes to the body of sociological knowledge and serves as a foundation for future studies.

Types of Systematic Research Methods in Sociology

Sociologists employ various research methods, each suited to different types of questions and subjects of study. The choice of method depends on what the researcher aims to discover.

1. Quantitative Research

Quantitative research involves collecting and analyzing numerical data. It is often used to test hypotheses and establish patterns across large populations. Examples of quantitative methods include surveys with closed-ended questions and statistical analysis of demographic data. Quantitative research is highly structured and produces results that are easily replicable.

2. Qualitative Research

Qualitative research focuses on understanding social phenomena from the perspective of the individuals involved. It often uses open-ended questions, interviews, and observations to gather in-depth insights into people’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. This approach is less structured than quantitative research but provides rich, detailed data that can uncover complex social dynamics.

3. Mixed-Methods Research

Mixed-methods research combines both quantitative and qualitative approaches to provide a more comprehensive understanding of a research problem. Sociologists may use this approach when they believe that neither quantitative nor qualitative methods alone can fully answer their research question.

Challenges in Systematic Research

While systematic research is essential for producing credible sociological knowledge, it is not without challenges. Some of these challenges include:

Ethical issues : Researchers must ensure they protect the privacy and well-being of participants, especially when studying sensitive topics like poverty, crime, or discrimination.
Bias : Even with systematic methods, there is always the potential for bias in how questions are framed, data is collected, or results are interpreted.
Complexity of social phenomena : Human societies are complex and constantly changing, making it difficult to establish definitive conclusions or causality.

Despite these challenges, systematic research remains the best tool sociologists have to uncover the truths about the social world and contribute to solutions for social issues.

Systematic research in sociology is a critical process that enables sociologists to explore social phenomena in a structured and unbiased manner. By following clear steps such as formulating research questions, designing studies, and analyzing data, this method ensures the reliability and validity of sociological findings. While it may face challenges like bias and ethical concerns, systematic research is fundamental for advancing the field and improving our understanding of human societies.

References and Further Reading

Conrad, R. (1952). A Systematic Analysis of Current Researchers in the Sociology of Education . American Sociological Review , 17 (3), 350-355.

On This Site

Fundamentals of Sociology

This work is licensed under an Open Educational Resource-Quality Master Source (OER-QMS) License .

Approaches to Sociological Research

Define and describe the scientific method
Explain how the scientific method is used in sociological research
Understand the function and importance of an interpretive framework
Define what reliability and validity mean in a research study

When sociologists apply the sociological perspective and begin to ask questions, no topic is off limits. Every aspect of human behavior is a source of possible investigation. Sociologists question the world that humans have created and live in. They notice patterns of behavior as people move through that world. Using sociological methods and systematic research within the framework of the scientific method and a scholarly interpretive perspective, sociologists have discovered workplace patterns that have transformed industries, family patterns that have enlightened family members, and education patterns that have aided structural changes in classrooms.

It might seem strange to use scientific practices to study social trends, but, as we shall see, it’s extremely helpful to rely on systematic approaches that research methods provide. Sociologists often begin the research process by asking a question about how or why things happen in this world. It might be a unique question about a new trend or an old question about a common aspect of life. Once the sociologist forms the question, he or she proceeds through an in-depth process to answer it. In deciding how to design that process, the researcher may adopt a scientific approach or an interpretive framework. The following sections describe these approaches to knowledge.

The Scientific Method

Sociologists make use of tried and true methods of research, such as experiments, surveys, and field research. But humans and their social interactions are so diverse that these interactions can seem impossible to chart or explain. It might seem that science is about discoveries and chemical reactions or about proving ideas right or wrong rather than about exploring the nuances of human behavior.

However, this is exactly why scientific models work for studying human behavior. A scientific process of research establishes parameters that help make sure results are objective and accurate. Scientific methods provide limitations and boundaries that focus a study and organize its results.

The scientific method involves developing and testing theories about the world based on empirical evidence. It is defined by its commitment to systematic observation of the empirical world and strives to be objective, critical, skeptical, and logical. It involves a series of prescribed steps that have been established over centuries of scholarship.

The figure shows a flowchart that states that scientific method. One: Ask a Question. Two: Research Existing Sources. Three: Formulate a Hypothesis. Four: Design and Conduct a Study. Five: Draw Conclusions. Six: Report Results.

But just because sociological studies use scientific methods does not make the results less human. Sociological topics are not reduced to right or wrong facts. In this field, results of studies tend to provide people with access to knowledge they did not have before—knowledge of other cultures, knowledge of rituals and beliefs, or knowledge of trends and attitudes. No matter what research approach they use, researchers want to maximize the study’s reliability , which refers to how likely research results are to be replicated if the study is reproduced. Reliability increases the likelihood that what happens to one person will happen to all people in a group. Researchers also strive for validity , which refers to how well the study measures what it was designed to measure. Returning to the crime rate during a full moon topic, reliability of a study would reflect how well the resulting experience represents the average adult crime rate during a full moon. Validity would ensure that the study’s design accurately examined what it was designed to study, so an exploration of adult criminal behaviors during a full moon should address that issue and not veer into other age groups’ crimes, for example.

In general, sociologists tackle questions about the role of social characteristics in outcomes. For example, how do different communities fare in terms of psychological well-being, community cohesiveness, range of vocation, wealth, crime rates, and so on? Are communities functioning smoothly? Sociologists look between the cracks to discover obstacles to meeting basic human needs. They might study environmental influences and patterns of behavior that lead to crime, substance abuse, divorce, poverty, unplanned pregnancies, or illness. And, because sociological studies are not all focused on negative behaviors or challenging situations, researchers might study vacation trends, healthy eating habits, neighborhood organizations, higher education patterns, games, parks, and exercise habits.

With its systematic approach, the scientific method has proven useful in shaping sociological studies. The scientific method provides a systematic, organized series of steps that help ensure objectivity and consistency in exploring a social problem. They provide the means for accuracy, reliability, and validity. In the end, the scientific method provides a shared basis for discussion and analysis (Merton 1963).

Typically, the scientific method starts with these steps—1) ask a question, 2) research existing sources, 3) formulate a hypothesis —described below.

Ask a Question

The first step of the scientific method is to ask a question, describe a problem, and identify the specific area of interest. The topic should be narrow enough to study within a geography and time frame. “Are societies capable of sustained happiness?” would be too vague. The question should also be broad enough to have universal merit. “What do personal hygiene habits reveal about the values of students at XYZ High School?” would be too narrow. That said, happiness and hygiene are worthy topics to study. Sociologists do not rule out any topic, but would strive to frame these questions in better research terms.

Independent Variable (IV)- This is the ‘driver’ variable, the one creating change
Dependent Variable (DV)- the is the ‘receiving’ variable, the one that is changed

The question above has personal hygiene habits as shaped by the cultural value placed on appearance. IV = the cultural value placed on appearance and DV = personal hygiene.

All of your sociological research questions need an independent variable and a dependent variable .

When forming basic research questions, sociologists develop an operational definition , that is, they define the concept in terms of the physical or concrete steps it takes to objectively measure it. The operational definition identifies an observable condition of the concept. By operationalizing a variable of the concept, all researchers can collect data in a systematic or replicable manner.

The operational definition must be valid , appropriate, and meaningful. And it must be reliable , meaning that results will be close to uniform when tested on more than one person. For example, “good drivers” might be defined in many ways: those who use their turn signals, those who don’t speed, or those who courteously allow others to merge. But these driving behaviors could be interpreted differently by different researchers and could be difficult to measure. Alternatively, “a driver who has never received a traffic violation” is a specific description that will lead researchers to obtain the same information, so it is an effective operational definition.

Research Existing Sources: A Literature Review

The next step researchers undertake is to conduct background research through a literature review , which is a review of any existing similar or related studies. A visit to the library and a thorough online search will uncover existing research about the topic of study. This step helps researchers gain a broad understanding of work previously conducted on the topic at hand and enables them to position their own research to build on prior knowledge. In conducting a literature review, sociological researchers should be paying attention to these three aspects of research in all of the literature they examine:

method used
theory used
topic of study

Researchers—including student researchers—are responsible for correctly citing existing sources they use in a study or that inform their work. While it is fine to borrow previously published material (as long as it enhances a unique viewpoint), it must be referenced properly and never plagiarized.

To study hygiene and its value in a particular society, a researcher might sort through existing research and unearth studies about child-rearing, vanity, obsessive-compulsive behaviors, and cultural attitudes toward beauty. It’s important to sift through this information and determine what is relevant. Using existing sources educates researchers and helps refine and improve studies’ designs.

Formulate a Hypothesis

For example, a researcher might hypothesize that teaching children proper hygiene (the independent variable) will boost their sense of self-esteem (the dependent variable). Or rephrased, a child’s sense of self-esteem depends, in part, on the quality and availability of hygienic resources.

Think about some other examples: How does gender (the independent variable) affect rate of income (the dependent variable)? How does one’s religion (the independent variable) affect family size (the dependent variable)? How is social class (the dependent variable) affected by level of education (the independent variable)?

At this point, a researcher’s operational definitions help measure the variables. In a study asking how tutoring improves grades, for instance, one researcher might define a “good” grade as a C or better, while another uses a B+ as a starting point for “good.” Another operational definition might describe “tutoring” as “one-on-one assistance by an expert in the field, hired by an educational institution.” Those definitions set limits and establish cut-off points that ensure consistency and replicability in a study.

In a study of education, a researcher might predict that high school dropouts have a hard time finding rewarding careers. While it has become at least a cultural assumption that the higher the education, the higher the salary and degree of career happiness, there are certainly exceptions. People with little education have had stunning careers, and people with advanced degrees have had trouble finding work. A sociologist prepares a hypothesis knowing that results will vary.

Once the preliminary work is done, it’s time for the next research steps: designing and conducting a study and drawing conclusions. These research methods are discussed below.

Interpretive Framework

While many sociologists rely on the scientific method as a research approach, others operate from an interpretive framework . While systematic, this approach doesn’t follow the hypothesis-testing model that seeks to find generalizable results. Instead, an interpretive framework , sometimes referred to as an interpretive perspective, seeks to understand social worlds from the point of view of participants, which leads to in-depth knowledge.

Interpretive research is generally more descriptive or narrative in its findings. Rather than formulating a hypothesis and method for testing it, an interpretive researcher will develop approaches to explore the topic at hand that may involve a significant amount of direct observation or interaction with subjects. This type of researcher also learns as he or she proceeds and sometimes adjusts the research methods or processes midway to optimize findings as they evolve.

Scientific sociological studies often observe relationships between variables. Researchers study how one variable changes another. Prior to conducting a study, researchers are careful to apply operational definitions to their terms and to establish dependent and independent variables.

A LOOK AT DATA:

Redneck Revolt: Rethinking Discourse and Identity in Activism

Redneck Revolt is a now defunct social movement that challenged capitalism and racial injustice, while advocating for gun rights. After the collapse of Redneck Revolt, I interviewed N = 9 former participants from local chapters around the United States. The primary research questions the study was most interested in, include:

How do the individuals view their own identity and role in the movement?
How is discourse used in the movement?
How does the identity of the activists shape the perception and goals of the movement?
How does this political-cultural moment in the United States inform this activism?

What follows is a short essay that used the N = 9 interviews to provide context for the movement, and to highlight the voices of the activists. The indented quoted segments are direct quotes from interviews. Each number refers to a specific participant. Their names are not used to protect their identity. Read through the essay, then consider the questions below, using what you now know about sociology methods, ethics, and social context.

There have been armed anarchist-based movements on the left for decades in the United States. This is not new. What is new is a 21st century move to anarchist based armed Left movements that are steeped in intersectional discourse with nuanced approaches to tactical innovation . Redneck Revolts starts in 2009, goes in abeyance, re-emerges in 2016, and falls apart by 2019. It was a national activist organization that advocated for the downfall of capitalism through the elimination of racism. They framed their work as connected to a long historical lineage with roots in Marxist ideology. As a member stated:

“The rights to community are inherited – it’s not something the state gives you.” (1).

I wrote about Redneck Revolt earlier, (Rothschild, 2019) and since then was given access to interview a very small sample of members from chapters across the county. The context for these activists who participated for various lengths of time between 2015-2019 – is that in 2017 – prior to Charlottesville, democracy in the U.S. had already failed (Smolla, 2020). The N=9 activists I interviewed that were affiliated with Redneck Revolt primarily joined around 2017 and stayed until its demise in 2019. The short period of time does not minimize the power of the movement for these activists, and why it is important to continue to examine. The narratives of the subjects interviewed provide more insight into what drew them to this movement, how they make sense of activism in the United States today, (Faysee, 2018) what their experience in the movement was, and what their take aways are now, after the decline of the movement.

When questioned about what they were looking for and why they joined this organization, all offered that they found the group online when they were searching for like-minded people. They were drawn to the movement because they viewed it as a radical anarchist organization that was ‘horizontal’ in leadership, emphasizing the importance of community over capitalism. The horizontal nature of the movement was a draw because these members were aware of the pitfalls of more ‘top-down’ social movement infrastructure and leadership. They knew of movements that were hierarchal, as well as those that were leaderless (Occupy Movement), and what the consequences of each structure were.

The participants ranged in age from 23-50, and none identified as woman or female, though several would be labeled that way in mainstream American society. This defies the representation that the movement is white working-class men exclusively. A few of the non-binary respondents were initially skeptical about the inclusion of guns in the movement and saw that as a limitation of the movement. Once they were engaged in the movement, they ‘came around’ and changed their views on guns broadly from advocates of ‘gun control’ to seeing the use of firearms as necessary to fight the state and protect the powerless. The activists received overall support from family and friends for their affiliation with the organization, even though they all came from diverse racial, ethnic, political, and regional backgrounds, with family members from a range of social classes. All people interviewed saw themselves as solidly part of or central to the organization. Some of the members had positions in the national chapter as well as in their specific local state chapters. They were drawn to the history of fighting capitalist oppression and a few mentioned groups such as the Young Patriots, white Appalachian activists who aligned with the Black Panthers in the 1960s.

Overall, they supported the name Redneck Revolt, even though the sample illustrated that they were much more diverse than media had portrayed the activists. Non-binary, queer, and racially and class diverse, the members came from different starting points, but shared anti-capitalist tendencies and embraced the fight for racial justice. Overall, there are very high levels of education among its former members. All the subjects I spoke with had completed college, and some had additional education. In addition to formal education, many had been involved in informally educating themselves through intellectual readings steeped in Marx and Lenin. Many of the younger activists interviewed were very conscious about their identities (Earl, et al, 2017) and articulated who they were and how they presented themselves, even when they were not prompted to do so. This was true among the activists across varied regions that were interviewed and seemed to illustrate a bit of the micro-culture of the movement. Despite the racial, class, and sexuality diversity, many felt the organization was still ‘run by’ a white cis-gender man and woman.

Their activism was two-fold: challenging the state/capitalism and fascism (some see this as 2 or 1). Racism was embedded in both, and they want to challenge both. They argued that both poor white people and poor people of color are fighting against the same enemy – the wealthy. (Bray, 2017). They framed their work as attacking white supremacy. The activists understood white supremacy as central to capitalism. The right to bear arms is entwined in the right to overthrow the state, if necessary. When asked to explain their activism, two different participants shared:

“It is radical politics that is in the same historical family that many of us wanted to participate in.” (5)

“I wanted something above ground that was visible and transparent. I wanted people to be connected to safe community defense.” (8)

Class and community-defense were much used phrases that the activists used when discussing their participation. For these activists, many ‘came to’ progressive politics, and were aware of how others would see them.

“I grew up outside of the Left. I was working-class. We realized to get people in we had to ‘make a plan’. (9)

Community defense was viewed as direct action. For them – to affect change requires guns. All emphasized the importance of firearms for themselves and training for communities who historically have not had access to firearms training. Ideology on what to do with arming is split between viewing guns as tools for self-empowerment and as tools for aiding others in community. Guns provided them the ability to directly fight fascism at its roots at all costs. A few respondents commented that sometimes the left leaning allies were not comfortable with the use and presence of firearms. The firearms of choice for members range from AK 47 machine guns to older Russian rifles that evoke a call to how firearms have been used in the past. Members did work at gaining trust with those on the left that did not carry firearms. They were ‘protecting’ and not initiating violence – and for many of the members, this distances them from Antifa. Though two subjects I spoke to aligned themselves with antifa ideology. Overall, Redneck Revolt activists saw the 2nd Amendment as not just right. They see gun control as racist – disarming black people. One convert to the use of guns as a tool in activism reported: “They showed me that guns were not the tool of the oppressor.” (1)

In addition to the use of guns, central to Redneck Revolt was what they called ‘counter-recruiting’. The Marxist rhetoric framed community and success as only possible with a coalition across classes, and identities to challenge the built-in oppression of capitalism. For Redneck Revolt this meant ‘working with’ white working-class people who might be ‘taught’ to embrace an alt-right or white supremacist ideology. “I didn’t want to do it [counter-recruiting] because I distrusted these people. But you are doing a great service by organizing and changing the way the alt-right think.” (6) Counter-recruiting was dreaded and hard, but it also helped bind the members together, and distinguished them from other Left leaning movements that centered firearms. “No one else was counter-recruiting…It really felt like a community.” (4)

In their counter-recruiting work, they occupied spaces that are often associated with white working-class places: country music concerts, flea markets, gun shows, NASCAR events and rodeos. In these spaces, they stood against white supremacy as an aboveground militant formation that was an anti-capitalist, anti-racist, and anti-fascist group that used direct action to protect the marginalized and argued for the necessity of a revolution, while drawing attention to limits of liberalism. They saw themselves as challenging white nationalist groups, (Sonnie, 2011), arguing that these organizations do not ‘provide a way out’ for white working-class folks, but rather that these white nationalist organizations create more racial divisions while building up the capitalist enterprise. These tactics of Redneck Revolt were designed specifically to connect differing populations with new practices. Multiple responses to white nationalist demonstrations have come out of this as well. A way that the organization tried to practice this was to populate and support events that were not ‘theirs’ to connect to other groups. In the counter-recruiting, particular messaging was altered based on the audience. The necessity of racial and transgender justice might be geared towards rural whites, while the firearms trainings were for people who are typically shut out of gun culture in the United States: women and people of color.

In addition to the work of counter-recruiting, Redneck Revolt engaged in community survival projects and Mutual Aid. The community survival projects included firearm engagement, but also involved creating spaces in rural communities for Pride Parades. The mutual aid component included free stores, meet-ups, and attention to redistributing resources within their own communities. The attention to mutual aid was a way to build community and support as they garnered trust with people they were engaged in recruiting and/or working with. Mutual aid was also a deliberate means to challenge the tenets of capitalism, shunning consumerism in favor of cooperation and collectives. This was a clear activist practice of the group, more present in some regions, (Maine and California), according to my respondents.

Social media was a primary tool of tactical innovation (Kim and Lim, 2019) for the activists. Many participated in memes that initially showed their alliances to, and later their questioning or disdain for Redneck Revolt. Discord was used a way to communicate within and across chapters. Initially, the ability for all members to participate on Discord led to a sense of a ‘leaderless’ organization. The emphasis on a horizontal model of equity was strong initially, but calls of sexism, questions of sexual assault, and insular communication among select members led to a feeling of a more traditional ‘vertical’ organization, with hierarchy ‘built in’. This ultimately led to the downfall of the organization. As one member recalled: “Social media created and destroyed Redneck Revolt.” (9)

Everyone was very savvy and aware of their individual media presence, (Carty and Barron, 2018) and Redneck Revolt’s as well. They saw it as a double edge sword. On the one hand, they did get media coverage because of the perceived juxtaposition between who they are, and what they do. However, this coverage was often reductive and sensationalized, resulting in essentialized narratives of the members and the mission. At times this created more social distance between themselves as a group, as well as between members and society at large.

By the time I spoke to the participants in the Spring and Summer of 2022, no one had remained active in the organization, and the movement was defunct. Some cited social media, others misogyny, still others the press, as the primary reason of the collapse. However, many argued that there was a pseudo-intellectualism that was not healthy for their movement in the long run. Another spoke directly about Lenin and Marxism in reference to intellectualism as having the ability to harm a movement. For the most part though, most of the members spoken to, left the movement because they felt disillusioned with Redneck Revolt as a whole. Two reported not knowing what the movement stood for anymore. One was trying to keep the local chapter he was involved in afloat with a new name, another was repeatedly ‘doxed’, and was unsure if it was from people within or beyond the movement. “People who spend time on the internet have a warped sense of what is reasonable and what is bat-shit insane.” (5) As community eroded, so did the clear message of protest and the purpose of the movement: “People just don’t get collective action.” (5). “It was not in the Mission Statement to be paternalistic white people protecting people of color – but, anyway I think it happened.” (9)

However, despite the decline of the movement, everyone claimed that they are still connected to at least someone in the movement today – and see themselves forever part of a community, even if some of them have never met each other past the keyboard. Many viewed the movement overall as a success. A few pointed out that the success or ‘footprint’ would not be seen until people could look back and see how much Redneck Revolt accomplished by countering militia movements, emphasizing firearm training, and counter-recruiting.

References:

Bray, Mark (2017). Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook . Brooklyn: Melville House Publishing, 2017.

Carty, Victoria and Francisco G. Reynoso Barron. “Social Movement and new technology: The dynamics of cyberactivism in the digital age.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Social Movements and Social Transformation. London: Palgrave Publishers, 2018: 373-397, 2018.

Earl, Jennifer and Thomas Maher and Thomas Elliot. “Youth, Activism, and Social Movements.” Sociology Compass. Volume 11, Number 4, 2017: 1-14.

Faysse, Nicholas. “Finding common ground between theories of collective action: The potential of analyses at a meso-scale.” International Journal of the Commons. Volume 11, Number 2, 2017: 928-949.

Hyun-soo Kim, Harris and Chaeyoan Lim. “From Virtual Space to Public Space: The Roles of Online Political Activism in Protest Participation During Arab Spring. International Journal of Comparative Sociology. 2019, Volume 60, Number 6, 2019: 409-434.

Rothschild, Teal. “ Multiplicity in movements: the case for Redneck Revolt.” Contexts. American Sociological Association Journal. Summer 2019, Volume 18, Issue 3, pp.57-59, 2019.

Smolla, Rodney A. “Rednecks and Saint Paul” in Confessions of a Free Speech Lawyer: Charlottesville and the Politics of Hate. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2020; 243-246.

Sonnie, Amy and James Tracy. Hillbilly Nationalists, Urban Race Rebels, and Black Power: Community Organizing in Radical Times. Brooklyn: Melville House Publishers, 2011

Student Questions:

How do the primary questions that guide this research lend themselves to semi-structured interviews? Are there other methods I could have employed, given these research questions?
Why do you think ‘context’ and ‘history’ are so important to this particular group of activists?
What are some examples of how the narratives (direct quotes from subjects) illustrate how these activists viewed their activism?
Why do you think the participants emphasize aspects of their identity so much?
Try to use their particular (micro) experience with social media and activism to develop a broader more generalized research project (macro) that focuses on social media and activism.
Try and find some narratives that show emotions. The subjects might not say “I am angry”, for example, but there are emotional themes that are present here. Try and find some individual examples, and then locate any emotional themes across interviews.

Section Quiz

Further research.

For a historical perspective on the scientific method in sociology, read “The Elements of Scientific Method in Sociology” by F. Stuart Chapin (1914) in the American Journal of Sociology : http://openstaxcollege.org/l/Method-in-Sociology

Arkowitz, Hal, and Scott O. Lilienfeld. 2009. “Lunacy and the Full Moon: Does a full moon really trigger strange behavior?” Scientific American. Retrieved October 20, 2014 ( http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lunacy-and-the-full-moon ).

Berger, Peter L. 1963. Invitation to Sociology: A Humanistic Perspective . New York: Anchor Books.

Merton, Robert. 1968 [1949]. Social Theory and Social Structure . New York: Free Press.

“Scientific Method Lab,” the University of Utah, http://aspire.cosmic-ray.org/labs/scientific_method/sci_method_main.html .

an established scholarly research method that involves asking a question, researching existing sources, forming a hypothesis, designing and conducting a study, and drawing conclusions

a sociological research approach that seeks in-depth understanding of a topic or subject through observation or interaction; this approach is not based on hypothesis testing

a measure of a study’s consistency that considers how likely results are to be replicated if a study is reproduced

the degree to which a sociological measure accurately reflects the topic of study

a testable proposition

variables that cause changes in dependent variables

a variable changed by other variables

specific explanations of abstract concepts that a researcher plans to study

a scholarly research step that entails identifying and studying all existing studies on a topic to create a basis for new research

Share This Book

Module 2: Sociological Research

The scientific method, learning outcomes.

Describe the scientific method as it applies to sociological research
Distinguish reliability from validity in a research study
Distinguish an independent variable from a dependent variable

When sociologists apply the sociological perspective and begin to ask questions, no topic is off limits. Every aspect of human behavior is a source of possible investigation. Sociologists question the world that humans have created and live in. They notice patterns of behavior as people move through that world. Using sociological methods and systematic research within the framework of the scientific method and a scholarly interpretive perspective, sociologists have discovered workplace patterns that have transformed industries, family patterns that have led to legislative changes, and education patterns that have aided structural changes in classrooms.

Figure 1. Research provides no evidence that crime rates increase during a full moon.

The “crime rate during a full moon” discussion mentioned earlier put forth a few loosely stated opinions. The good news is we can look at data sets that show us if there is a connection between full moons and crime rates. If there appears to be a trend of increased crime during those times, we should begin to investigate other variables to see whether there is something else that could account for this relationship. If we were to discover that more crime occurs during full moons, this information could inform policing strategies and potentially make cities safer during full moons. Of course, we would be left with more questions! What is it about full moons that lead to increases in crime? Is this true for men and women? Young and old? In cities and in rural areas?

Connecting crime to a full moon might not seem like common sense to the skeptic. What about crime and hot weather? Or crime and holidays? Or crime during natural disasters? Are there more violent crimes in states with less restrictive gun policies? You can see how there are many, many questions that can be asked about any given topic, also how this type of research can be extremely important for informing and shaping public policy.

Sociologists make use of tried and true methods of research, such as experiments, surveys, and field research, but humans and their social interacti ons are so diverse that these examples might seem un-scientific. However, this is exactly why scientific models work for studying human behavior. A scientific process of research establishes parameters that help make sure results are sound. The scientific method involves developing and testing theories about the world based on empirical evidence. It is defined by its com mitment to systematic observation of the empirical world and strives to be objective, critical, skeptical, and logical. It involves a series of prescribed steps that have been established over centuries of scholarship.

The figure shows a flowchart that states the scientific method. One: Ask a Question. Two: Research Existing Sources. Three: Formulate a Hypothesis. Four: Design and Conduct a Study. Five: Draw Conclusions. Six: Report Results.

Figure 2. The scientific method is an essential tool in research.

Results of studies tend to provide people with access to knowledge they did not have before—knowledge of other cultures, knowledge of rituals and beliefs, or knowledge of trends and attitudes. No matter what research approach they use, researchers want to maximize the study’s reliability , which refers to how likely research results are to be replicated if the study is reproduced. If another sociologist follows the same research protocols, will they come up with the same results? If so, then the study is reliable . The more exciting the findings, and the more they challenge prevailing understandings, the more likely it is that other sociologists will try to replicate them.

Researchers also strive for validity , which refers to how well the study measures what it was designed to measure. Returning to the crime rate during a full moon topic, the reliability of a study would reflect how well the results represent the average adult crime rate during a full moon. Validity would ensure that the study’s design accurately examined what it was designed to study and not something else such as one’s perception of criminal activity. If police officers believe there is more criminal activity during a full moon, they might be more likely to see criminal activity and to formalize it by making arrests instead of giving warnings, which would actually create the appearance of increased criminal activity–via documentation–during a full moon. This evidence would be created even if the amount of criminal activity were no different than on any other night. Thus, what is actually being measured is police officers’ perception of crime, and their subsequent actions during a full moon, rather than criminal activity.

Sociologists can use the scientific method not only to collect but also to interpret and analyze the data. They deliberately apply scientific logic and objectivity. They are interested in—but not attached to—the results. They work outside of their own political or social agendas. This doesn’t mean researchers do not have their own personalities, complete with preferences and opinions. But sociologists deliberately use the scientific method to maintain as much objectivity, focus, and consistency as possible in a particular study. In the end, the scientific method provides a shared basis for discussion and analysis (Merton 1963). Typically, the scientific method starts with these steps—1) ask a question, 2) research existing sources, and 3) formulate a hypothesis.

Ask a Question

computer-generated image of a man with his hand on his chin in a thinking pose, with a question mark behind him.

Figure 3. The scientific process begins with a good question.

The first step of the scientific method is to ask a question, describe a problem, and identify the specific area of interest. The topic should be narrow enough to study within a geography and time frame. “Are societies capable of sustained happiness?” would be too vague. Are married people happier than single people? Are people with children happier than people without children? These questions are more specific, but how is happiness defined and measured?

The question should also be broad enough to have universal merit. “What do personal hygiene habits reveal about the values of college freshman at XYZ College?” would be too narrow so we might want to broaden it to a particular age group (i.e. traditional college students ages 18-22). Also, if you sensed some implicit bias in this question, you would be correct to question whether hygiene, a series of behaviors, should be studied as behaviors or as values (beliefs).

That said, happiness and hygiene are worthy topics to study but must be framed as research questions. As you can probably see, this is a difficult process even for veteran sociologists. Sociologists are careful to define their terms. When forming these basic research questions, sociologists develop an operational definition , that is, they define the concept in terms of the physical or concrete steps it takes to objectively measure it. The operational definition identifies an observable condition of the concept. By operationalizing a variable of the concept, all researchers can collect data methodically in a way that supports the overarching goals of validity and reliability in sociological research.

In a hygiene study, for instance, hygiene could be defined as “personal habits to maintain physical appearance (as opposed to health);” however that might be difficult to measure. Would brushing one’s teeth be considered physical appearance (i.e white teeth) or health (i.e. healthy gums, prevent tooth decay, etc.)? To operationalize hygiene, one must be clear about what constitutes personal hygiene for appearance. A researcher could develop a checklist, for example, of things that are included.

Many times, a research question changes. Perhaps after thinking about hygiene and values, the question changes to “How do differing personal hygiene habits reflect cultural gender role norms?” Thus, the ways in culture shapes something very personal would be the topic of this study. Should a woman shave or not shave her legs? Should a man have a beard? Some facial hair? No facial hair? What about nail care for women? For men?

Watch this video to learn more about the importance of using the scientific method in sociology.

Research Existing Sources

The next step researchers undertake is to conduct background research through a literature review , which is a review of any existing similar or related studies. A visit to the library or a thorough online search of research databases will uncover existing research about the topic of study. This step helps researchers gain a broad understanding of work previously conducted on the topic at hand and enables them to position their own research to build on prior knowledge. Researchers—including student researchers—are responsible for correctly citing existing sources they use in a study or that inform their work. While it is fine to borrow previously published material (as long as it enhances a unique viewpoint), it must be referenced properly and never plagiarized. This step might also prompt the researcher to revisit their research question!

Formulate a Hypothesis

People commonly try to understand the happenings in their world by finding or creating an explanation for an occurrence, which is what we referred to earlier as common sense. Social scientists may develop a hypothesis for the same reason. A hypothesis is a testable educated guess about predicted outcomes between two or more variables; it’s a possible explanation for specific happenings in the social world and allows for testing to determine whether the explanation holds true in many instances, as well as among various groups or in different places. The hypothesis will often predict how one form of human behavior influences another. The independent variable s is the cause of the change or the variable that in fluences the other variable. The dependent variable is the effect , or variable that is changed. It depends on the independent variable.

For example, researchers establish one form of human behavior as the independent variable and observe the influence it has on a dependent variable. How does gender (the independent variable) affect rate of income (the dependent variable)?

How does one’s religion (the independent variable) affect family size (the dependent variable)? How is annual income (the dependent variable) affected by level of education (the independent variable)? It is important to note that we are suggesting relationships or correlations between variables and not causation. This is known as correlation .

As the table shows, an independent variable is the one that influences the other variable. Rather than being “right,” sociologists are interested in the relationships between variables. If we were to examine the last example, what other variables might come into play? Would we see similar patterns of income for all college-educated people or are there disparities for racial and ethnic minorities? Gender minorities? First, we must move into the next research steps: designing and conducting a study and drawing conclusions. You’ll learn more about these types of research methods in the next section of the course.

Think It Over

Sociology is a broad discipline covering many topics. Think about something that interests you and/or relates to your experience or your life. As a college student, you operate within a social world ripe for research!

From competitive sports teams to fraternities or sororities to ROTC to intramural sports and student clubs, there are a plethora of groups on college campuses that would make good topics of study.
The proverbial college experience is different based on one’s statuses, particularly minority statuses, such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and social class.
Consider your college’s relationship to the surrounding community and that community’s relationship with the state and/or country.

If you were to formulate a research question a nd do some preliminary research on these topics, you would likely find that there have been sociological studies conducted on many of these topics. Furthermore, you would find statistical information about student groups and participation, student demographics, and community demographics.

What value does this type of research have for understanding individuals, groups, and communities?

dependent variable: a variable changed by other variables

Candela Citations

Modification, adaptation, and original content. Authored by : Sarah Hoiland and Lumen Learning. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
Approaches to Sociological Research. Authored by : OpenStax CNX. Located at : http://cnx.org/contents/02040312-72c8-441e-a685-20e9333f3e1d/Introduction_to_Sociology_2ehttps://cnx.org/contents/[email protected]:uu5Nth4o@9/Approaches-to-Sociological-Research . License : CC BY: Attribution . License Terms : Download for free at http://cnx.org/contents/[email protected]
image of moon. Authored by : Biswarup Ganguly. Located at : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Supermoon_-_Howrah_2011-03-20_1944.JPG . License : CC BY: Attribution
The Scientific Method. Provided by : Sociology Live!. Located at : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcnpuhrnE28 . License : Other . License Terms : Standard YouTube License
question mark. Authored by : Peggy Marco. Located at : https://pixabay.com/en/question-mark-question-response-1019820/ . License : CC0: No Rights Reserved

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 2. Sociological Research

2.1. Approaches to Sociological Research

New Adventure of Sherlock Holmes by Conan Doyle published in The Strand Magazine.

When sociologists apply the sociological perspective and begin to ask questions, no topic is off limits. Every aspect of human behaviour is a source of possible investigation. Sociologists question the world that humans have created and live in. They notice patterns of behaviour as people move through the world. Using sociological methods and systematic research within the framework of the scientific method, sociologists have discovered workplace patterns that have transformed industries, family patterns that have enlightened parents, and education patterns that have aided structural changes in classrooms.

Depending on the focus and the type of research conducted, sociological findings could be useful in addressing any of the three basic interests or purposes of sociological knowledge discussed in the last chapter: the positivist interest in quantitative evidence to determine effective social policy decisions, the interpretive interest in understanding the meanings of human behaviour to foster mutual understanding and consensus, and the critical interest in knowledge useful for dismantling power relations and building alternatives to conditions of servitude. It might seem strange to use scientific practices to study social phenomena — a bit like the contents of a petri dish examining themselves — but, as argued above, if the goal of sociology is to improve the operation of society, it is extremely helpful to rely on systematic approaches that research methods provide.

Sociologists often begin the research process by asking a question about how or why things happen. It might be a unique question about a new trend or an old question about a common aspect of life. Once a question is formed, a sociologist proceeds through an in-depth process to answer it. Depending on the nature of the topic and the goals of the research, sociologists have a variety of methodologies to choose from. In deciding how to design that process, the researcher may adopt a positivist methodology or an interpretive methodology . Both types of methodology can be useful for critical research strategies . The following sections describe these approaches to acquiring knowledge.

Science vs. Non-Science

Contemporary society is going through an interesting time in which the certitudes and authority of science are frequently challenged. In the context of the natural sciences, people doubt scientific claims about climate change and the safety of vaccines. In the context of the social sciences, people doubt scientific claims about the declining rate of violent crime or the effectiveness of needle exchange programs. Sometimes there is a good reason to be skeptical about science, when scientific technologies prove to have adverse effects on the environment, for example. Sometimes skepticism has dangerous outcomes, when people act on conspiracy theories and misinformation or epidemics of diseases like measles suddenly break-out in schools due to low vaccination rates. In fact, skepticism is central to both natural and social sciences; but from a scientific point of view, the skeptical attitude needs to be combined with systematic research in order for knowledge to move forward.

In sociology, science provides the basis for being able to distinguish between everyday opinions or beliefs and propositions that can be sustained by evidence. In his paper, The Normative Structure of Science (1942/1973), the sociologist Robert Merton argued that science is a type of empirical knowledge organized around four key principles, often referred to by the acronym CUDOS :

Communalism: The results of science must be made available to the public; science is freely available, shared knowledge, open to public discussion and debate.
Universalism: The results of science must be evaluated based on universal criteria, not parochial criteria specific to the researchers themselves.
Disinterestedness: Science must not be pursued for private interests or personal reward.
Organized Skepticism: The scientist must abandon all prior intellectual commitments, critically evaluate claims, and postpone conclusions until sufficient evidence has been presented; scientific knowledge is provisional.

For Merton, therefore, non-scientific knowledge is knowledge that fails in various respects to meet these criteria. Types of esoteric or mystical knowledge, for example, might be valid for someone on a spiritual path, but because this knowledge is passed from teacher to student through direct transmission and it is not available to the public for open debate, or because the validity of this knowledge might be specific to the individual’s unique spiritual configuration, esoteric or mystical knowledge is not scientific per se . Claims that are presented to persuade (rhetoric), to achieve political goals (propaganda, of various sorts), or to make profits (advertising) are not scientific because these claims are structured to satisfy private interests. Propositions which fail to stand up to rigorous and systematic standards of evaluation are not scientific because they can not withstand the criteria of organized skepticism and scientific method.

The basic distinction between scientific and common, non-scientific claims about the world is that in science “seeing is believing” whereas in everyday life “believing is seeing” (Brym, Roberts, Lie, & Rytina, 2013). Science is, in crucial respects, based on systematic observation following the principles of CUDOS. Only on the basis of observation (or “seeing”) can a scientist believe that a proposition about the nature of the world is correct. Research methodologies are designed to reduce the chance that conclusions will be based on error. In everyday life, the order is typically reversed. People “see” what they already expect to see or what they already believe to be true. They do not systematically test what they believe to be true. Prior intellectual commitments or biases predetermine what people observe and the conclusions they draw.

Many people know things about the social world without having a background in sociology. Sometimes their knowledge is valid; sometimes it is not. It is important, therefore, to think about how people know what they know, and compare it to the scientific way of knowing. Four types of non-scientific reasoning are common in everyday life: knowledge based on casual observation, knowledge based on selective evidence, knowledge based on overgeneralization, and knowledge based on authority or tradition.

Many people know things simply because they have experienced them directly. Someone who has grown up in Manitoba has probably observed what plenty of kids learn each winter, that it really is true that one’s tongue will stick to metal when it is very cold outside. Direct experience may provide accurate information, but only if the observer is lucky. Unlike the fictional detective Sherlock Holmes, in general, people are not very careful observers. In this example of the “winged ship” in Figure 2.4, the observation process is not deliberate or systematic. Instead, the observers come to know what they believe to be true through casual observation . The problem with casual observation is that sometimes it is right, and sometimes it is wrong. Without any systematic process for observing or assessing the accuracy of observations, a person can never really be sure if their informal observations are accurate.

what is systematic research in sociology

Many people know things because they overlook disconfirming evidence. Suppose a friend declared that all men are liars shortly after she had learned that her boyfriend had deceived her. The fact that one man happened to lie to her in one instance came to represent a quality inherent in all men. But do all men really lie all the time? Probably not. If the friend is prompted to think more broadly about her experiences with men, she would probably acknowledge that she knew many men who, to her knowledge, had never lied to her and that maybe even her boyfriend did not generally make a habit of lying. This friend committed what social scientists refer to as selective observation by noticing only the pattern that she wanted to find at the time. She ignored disconfirming evidence. If, on the other hand, the friend’s experience with her boyfriend had been her only experience with a man, then she would have been committing what social scientists refer to as overgeneralization , assuming that broad patterns exist based on very limited observations.

Another way that people claim to know what they know is by looking to what they have always known to be true. There is an urban legend about a woman who for years used to cut both ends off of a ham before putting it in the oven (Mikkelson, 2005). She baked ham that way because that is the way her mother did it, so clearly that was the way it was supposed to be done. Her knowledge was based on a family tradition or traditional knowledge . After years of tossing cuts of perfectly good ham into the trash, however, she finally asked her mother why she did it and learned that the only reason her mother cut the ends off ham before cooking it was that she did not have a pan large enough to accommodate the ham without trimming it.

Without questioning what one thinks one knows is true, one may wind up believing things that are actually false. This is most likely to occur when an authority tells us that something is true, a case of authoritative knowledge . Mothers are not the only possible authorities people might rely on as sources of knowledge. Other common authorities people might rely on are political figures, churches and ministers, media influencers and social media networks. Although it is understandable that someone might believe something to be true if they look up to, or respect the person who has said it is so, this way of knowing differs from the sociological way of knowing. Whether quantitative, qualitative, or critical in orientation, sociological research is based on the scientific method.

The Scientific Method

Sociologists make use of tried-and-true methods of research, such as experiments, surveys, field research, and textual analysis. But humans and their social interactions are so diverse that they can seem impossible to chart or explain. It might seem that science is about discoveries and chemical reactions, or about proving hypotheses about elementary particles right or wrong, rather than about exploring the nuances of human behaviour. However, this is exactly why scientific models work for studying human behaviour. A scientific process of research establishes parameters that help make sure results are objective and accurate. Scientific methods provide limitations and boundaries that focus a study and organize its results. This is the case for both positivist quantitative methodologies, which seek to translate observable phenomena into unambiguous numerical data, and interpretive qualitative methodologies, which seek to translate observable phenomena into definable units of meaning. The social scientific method in both cases involves developing and testing theories about the world based on empirical (i.e., observable) evidence. The social scientific method is defined by its commitment to systematic observation of the social world, and it strives to be objective, critical, skeptical, and logical. It involves a series of established steps known as the research cycle .

No matter what research approach is used, researchers want to maximize the study’s reliability and validity . Reliability refers to how likely research results are to be replicated if the study is reproduced. Reliability increases the likelihood that what is true of one person will be true of all people in a group. Validity refers to how well the study measures what it was designed to measure. If the researcher wishes to examine people’s depth of religiosity — i.e., how strong is someone’s religious belief? How central is religious belief to their life? — does a measure like “frequency of church attendance” accurately measure that? Maybe not. People attend church for a variety of reasons and some religions are not organized on the basis of churches and congregations.

A subtopic in the field of political violence would be to examine the sources of homegrown radicalization: What are the conditions under which individuals in Canada move from a state of indifference or moderate concern with political issues to a state in which they are prepared to use violence to pursue political goals? The reliability of a study of radicalization reflects how well the social factors unearthed by the research apply to similar individuals who were not directly part of the research. Would another sociologist come up with the same results if they replicated the study? How well can the researcher extrapolate from the research subjects studied to individuals in the broader society? Does research on violent jihadi radicalization apply to violent neo-Nazi radicalization?

Validity ensures that the study’s design accurately examined what it was designed to study. Do the concepts and measures of radicalization accurately represent the actual experience of political radicals? An exploration of an individual’s propensity to plan or engage in violent acts or to go abroad to join a terrorist organization should address those specific issues and not confuse them with other topics such as why an individual adopts a particular faith or espouses radical political views. There is a key difference between religiosity, radicalization, and violent radicalization. As research from the UK and United States on jihadism has in fact shown, while jihadi terrorists typically identify with an Islamic world view, a well-developed Islamic identity counteracts jihadism . Similarly, research has shown that while it intuitively makes sense that people with radical views would adopt radical means like violence to achieve them, there is in fact no consistent homegrown terrorist profile, meaning that it is not possible to predict whether someone who espouses radical views will move on to committing violent acts without taking into account the specific stages in the process (Patel, 2011).

To ensure validity, research on political violence should focus on individuals who engage in political violence and be able to distinguish between simply holding radical political beliefs and acting violently on radical political beliefs. Dalgaard-Nielsen (2010) distinguishes between radical, radicalization, and violent radicalization as follows:

a radical is understood as a person harboring a deep-felt desire for fundamental sociopolitical changes and radicalization is understood as a growing readiness to pursue and support far reaching changes in society that conflict with, or pose a direct threat to, the existing order. [V]iolent radicalization [is]a process in which radical ideas are accompanied by the development of a willingness to directly support or engage in violent acts.

The scientific method provides a systematic, organized series of steps that help ensure objectivity and consistency in exploring a social problem. These steps provide the means for accuracy, reliability, and validity. Typically, the scientific method starts with these steps, which are described below: 1) ask a question; 2) research existing sources; and 3) formulate a hypothesis.

Ask a Question

The first step of the scientific method is to ask a question, describe a problem, and identify the specific area of interest. The topic should be narrow enough to study within a specific geographical location and time frame. “Are societies capable of sustained happiness?” would be too vague. The question should also be broad enough to have universal merit. “What do personal hygiene habits reveal about the values of students at XYZ High School?” would be too narrow. That said, happiness and hygiene are worthy topics to study.

Sociologists do not rule out any topic, but would strive to frame these questions in better research terms. That is why sociologists are careful to define their terms. Karl Popper (1902–1994) described the formulation of scientific propositions in terms of the concept of falsifiability (1963). He argued that the key demarcation between scientific and non-scientific propositions was not ultimately their factual truth, nor their verification, but simply whether or not they were stated in such a way as to be falsifiable; that is, whether a possible empirical observation could prove them wrong. If one claimed that evil spirits were the source of criminal behaviour, this would not be a scientific proposition because there is no possible way to definitively disprove it. Evil spirits cannot be observed. However, if one claimed that higher unemployment rates are the source of higher crime rates, this would be a scientific proposition because it is theoretically possible to find an instance where unemployment rates were not correlated to higher crime rates. As Popper said, “statements or systems of statements, in order to be ranked as scientific, must be capable of conflicting with possible, or conceivable, observations” (Popper, 1963).

Once a proposition is formulated in a way that would permit it to be falsified, the variables to be observed need to be operationalized. In a hygiene study, for instance, hygiene could be defined as “personal habits to maintain physical appearance (as opposed to health),” and a researcher might ask, “How do differing personal hygiene habits reflect the cultural value placed on appearance?” When forming these basic research questions, sociologists develop an operational definition ; that is, they define the concept in terms of the physical or concrete steps it takes to objectively measure it. The concept is translated into an observable variable , a measure that has different values. The operational definition identifies an observable condition of the concept.

By operationalizing a variable of the concept, all researchers can collect data in a systematic or replicable manner. The operational definition must be valid in the sense that it is an appropriate and meaningful measure of the concept being studied. It must also be reliable , meaning that results will be close to uniform when tested on more than one person. For example, good drivers might be defined in many ways: Those who use their turn signals; those who do not speed; or those who courteously allow others to merge. But these driving behaviours could be interpreted differently by different researchers, so they could be difficult to measure. Alternatively, “a driver who has never received a traffic violation” is a specific description that will lead researchers to obtain the same information, so it is an effective operational definition. Asking the question, “how many traffic violations has a driver received?” turns the concepts of “good drivers” and “bad drivers” into variables which might be measured by the number of traffic violations a driver has received. Of course the sociologist has to be wary of the way the variables are operationalized. In this example we know that black drivers are subject to much higher levels of police scrutiny than white drivers, so the number of traffic violations a driver has received might reflect less on their driving ability and more on the crime of “driving while black.”

Research Existing Sources

The next step researchers undertake is to conduct background research through a literature review , which is a review of any existing similar or related studies. A visit to a university library and a thorough online search will uncover existing research about the topic of study. This step helps researchers gain a broad understanding of work previously conducted on the topic at hand and enables them to position their own research to build on prior knowledge. It allows them to sharpen the focus of their research question and avoid duplicating previous research. Researchers — including student researchers — are responsible for correctly citing existing sources they use in a study or sources that inform their work. While it is fine to build on previously published material (as long as it enhances a unique viewpoint), it must be referenced properly and never plagiarized. To study hygiene and its value in a particular society, a researcher might sort through existing research and unearth studies about childrearing, vanity, obsessive-compulsive behaviours, and cultural attitudes toward beauty. At the literature review stage it is important to sift through this information and determine what is relevant. Using existing sources educates a researcher by showing what others have found relevant about a topic, and helps refine and improve a study’s design.

Formulate a Hypothesis

A hypothesis is an assumption about how two or more variables are related; it makes a conjectural statement about the relationship between those variables. It is an educated guess because it is not random but based on theory, observations, patterns of experience, or the existing literature. The hypothesis formulates this guess in the form of a testable or falsifiable proposition. However, how the hypothesis is handled differs between the positivist and interpretive approaches in sociology.

Hypothesis Formation in Positivist Research

Positivist methodologies are often referred to as hypothetico-deductive methodologies . A hypothesis is derived from a theoretical proposition. On the basis of the hypothesis, a prediction or generalization is logically deduced. If the prediction is confirmed by observation, the theoretical proposition is regarded as valid (at least provisionally). In positivist sociology, the hypothesis predicts how one form of human behaviour influences another. How does being a black driver affect the number of times the police will pull the driver over?

Successful prediction will determine the adequacy of the hypothesis and thereby test the theoretical proposition. Typically positivist approaches operationalize variables as quantitative data ; that is, by translating a social phenomenon like health into a quantifiable or numerically measurable variable like “number of visits to the hospital.” This permits sociologists to formulate their predictions using mathematical language, like regression formulas, to present research findings in graphs and tables, and to perform mathematical or statistical techniques to demonstrate the validity of relationships.

Variables are examined to see if there is a correlation between them. When a change in one variable coincides with a change in another variable there is a correlation. This does not necessarily indicate that changes in one variable causes a change in another variable, however — just that they are associated. A key distinction here is between independent and dependent variables. In research, independent variables are the cause of the change. The dependent variable is the effect, or thing that is changed. For example, in a basic study, the researcher would establish one form of human behaviour as the independent variable and observe the influence it has on a dependent variable. How does gender (the independent variable) affect rate of income (the dependent variable)? How does one’s religion (the independent variable) affect family size (the dependent variable)? How is social class (the dependent variable) affected by level of education (the independent variable)?

For it to become possible to speak about causation , three criteria must be satisfied:

There must be a relationship or correlation between the independent and dependent variables.
The independent variable must be prior to the dependent variable.
There must be no other intervening variable responsible for the causal relationship.

It is important to note that while there has to be a correlation between variables for there to be a causal relationship, correlation does not necessarily imply causation. The relationship between variables can be the product of a third intervening variable that is independently related to both. For example, there might be a positive relationship between wearing bikinis and eating ice cream, but wearing bikinis does not cause eating ice cream. It is more likely that the heat of summertime causes both an increase in bikini wearing and an increase in the consumption of ice cream.

The distinction between causation and correlation can have significant consequences. For example, Indigenous Canadians are overrepresented in prisons and arrest statistics. As noted in Chapter 1. An Introduction to Sociology , in 2020 Indigenous people accounted for about 5% of the Canadian population, but they made up 30% of the federal penitentiary population (Correctional Investigator Canada, 2020). There is a positive correlation between being an Indigenous person in Canada and being in jail. Is this because Indigenous people are racially or biologically predisposed to crime? No. In fact there are at least four intervening variables that explain the higher incarceration of Indigenous people (Hartnagel, 2004): Indigenous people are disproportionately poor and poverty is associated with higher arrest and incarceration rates; Indigenous lawbreakers tend to commit more detectable “street” crimes than the less detectable and actionable “white collar” crimes of other segments of the population; the criminal justice system disproportionately profiles and discriminates against Indigenous people; and the legacy of colonization has disrupted and weakened traditional sources of social control in Indigenous communities.

The divorce rate in Maine correlates with the per capita consumption of margarine (US).

At this point, a researcher’s operational definitions help measure the variables. In a study asking how tutoring improves grades, for instance, one researcher might define “good” grades as a C or better, while another uses a B+ as a starting point for good. Another operational definition might describe “tutoring” as “one-on-one assistance by an expert in the field, hired by an educational institution.” Those definitions set limits and establish cut-off points, ensuring consistency and replicability in a study. As the chart shows, an independent variable is the one that causes a dependent variable to change. For example, a researcher might hypothesize that teaching children proper hygiene (the independent variable) will boost their sense of self-esteem (the dependent variable). Or rephrased, a child’s sense of self-esteem depends, in part, on the quality and availability of hygienic resources.

Of course, this hypothesis can also work the other way around. Perhaps a sociologist believes that increasing a child’s sense of self-esteem (the independent variable) will automatically increase or improve habits of hygiene (now the dependent variable). Identifying the independent and dependent variables is very important. As the hygiene example shows, simply identifying two topics, or variables, is not enough: Their prospective relationship must be part of the hypothesis. Just because a sociologist forms an educated prediction of a study’s outcome does not mean data contradicting the hypothesis are not welcome. Sociologists analyze general patterns in response to a study, but they are equally interested in exceptions to patterns.

In a study of education, a researcher might predict that high school dropouts have a hard time finding a rewarding career. While it has become at least a cultural assumption that the higher the education, the higher the salary and degree of career happiness, there are certainly exceptions. People with little education have had stunning careers, and people with advanced degrees have had trouble finding work. A sociologist prepares a hypothesis knowing that results will vary.

Hypothesis Formation in Qualitative Research

While many sociologists rely on the positivist hypothetico-deductive method in their research, others operate from an interpretive approach . While still systematic, this approach typically does not follow the hypothesis-testing model that seeks to make generalizable predictions from quantitative variables. Instead, an interpretive framework seeks to understand social worlds from the point of view of participants, leading to in-depth knowledge. It focuses on qualitative data, or the meanings that guide people’s behaviour. Rather than relying on quantitative instruments, like fixed questionnaires or experiments, which can be artificial, the interpretive approach attempts to find ways to get closer to the informants’ lived experience and perceptions.

Interpretive research is generally more descriptive or narrative in its findings than positivist research. It can begin from a deductive approach by deriving a hypothesis from theory and then seeking to confirm it through methodologies like in-depth interviews. However, it is ideally suited to an inductive approach in which the hypothesis emerges only after a substantial period of direct observation or interaction with subjects. This type of approach is exploratory in that the researcher also learns as they proceed, sometimes adjusting the research methods or processes midway to respond to new insights and findings as they evolve.

For example, Glaser and Strauss’ (1967) classic elaboration of grounded theory proposed that qualitative researchers working with rich sources of qualitative data from interviews or ethnographic observations need to go through several stages of coding the data before a strong theory of the social phenomenon under investigation can emerge. In the initial stage, the researcher is simply trying to listen carefully and to tentatively categorize and sort the data. The researchers do not predetermine what the relevant categories of the social experience are, but analyze carefully what their subjects actually say. For example, what are the working definitions of health and illness that hospital patients use to describe their situation? In the first stage, the researcher tries to distinguish and succinctly code or label the numerous themes emerging from the data: different ways of describing the experience of health and illness. In the second stage, the researcher takes a more analytical approach by organizing the initial interview data into a few key reoccurring themes: Perhaps these are key assumptions that lay people make about the physiological mechanisms of the body, or the metaphors they use to describe their relationship to illness (e.g., a random occurrence, a battle, a punishment, a message, etc.). In the third stage, the researcher returns to the interview subjects with a new set of questions that would seek to either affirm, modify, or discard the analytical themes derived from the initial categorization of the interview material. This process can then be repeated back and forth until a thoroughly grounded theory is ready to be proposed. At every stage of the research, the researchers are obliged to follow the emerging data by revising their conceptions as new material is gathered, contradictions accounted for, commonalities categorized, and themes re-examined with further interviews.

Once the preliminary work is done and the hypothesis defined, it is time for the next research steps: choosing a research methodology, conducting a study, and drawing conclusions. These research steps are discussed below.

Making Connections: Classic Sociologists

Harriet martineau: the first woman sociologist.

As was noted in Chapter 1. An Introduction to Sociology , Harriet Martineau (1802–1876) was one of the first women sociologists in the 19th century. She was a British sociologist known at the time especially for her translation of August Comte’s sociological works. Particularly innovative was her early work on sociological methodology, How to Observe Manners and Morals (1838) . In this volume she developed the ground work for a systematic social-scientific approach to studying human behaviour. She recognized that the issues of the researcher-subject relationship would have to be addressed differently in a social science as opposed to a natural science.

The observer, or “traveler,” as she put it, needed to respect three criteria to obtain valid research: impartiality, critique, and sympathy. The impartial observer could not allow herself to be “perplexed or disgusted” by foreign practices that she could not personally reconcile herself with. Yet at the same time she saw the goal of sociology to be the fair but critical assessment of the moral status of a culture. In particular, the goal of sociology was to challenge forms of racial, sexual, or class domination in the name of autonomy: the right of every person to be a “self-directing moral being.” Finally, what distinguished the science of social observation from the natural sciences was that the researcher had to have unqualified sympathy for the subjects being studied (Lengermann & Niebrugge, 2007). This later became a central principle of Max Weber’s interpretive sociology, although it is not clear whether Weber read Martineau’s work.

A large part of her research in the United States analyzed the situations of contradiction between stated public morality and actual moral practices. For example, she was fascinated with the way that the formal democratic right to free speech enabled slavery abolitionists to hold public meetings, but when the meetings were violently attacked by mobs, the abolitionists and not the mobs were accused of inciting the violence (Zeitlin, 1997). This emphasis on studying contradictions followed from the distinction she drew between morals — society’s collective ideas of permitted and forbidden behaviour — and manners — the actual patterns of social action and association in society. As she realized the difficulty in getting an accurate representation of an entire society based on a limited number of interviews, she developed the idea that one could identify key “Things” experienced by all people — age, gender, illness, death, etc. — and examine how they were experienced differently by a sample of people from different walks of life (Lengermann & Niebrugge, 2007). Martineau’s pioneering sociology, therefore, focused on surveying different attitudes toward “Things,” and studying the anomalies that emerged when manners toward them contradicted a society’s formal morals.

Critical Research Strategies

As Karl Marx (1977 /1845) said: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.” Critical research strategies build on positivist and interpretive methodologies but bring the focus of research to the problems of social transformation and emancipation. Critical sociologists emphasize that the social world is not simply given or natural. It is the ongoing product of human actions and is therefore transformable. Domination and injustice are not inevitable. In this context, critical sociologists note that in a world characterized by extreme inequities and injustices, knowledge and ways of knowing can be caught up and implicated in power relations. “In a socially unjust world, knowledge of the social that does not challenge injustice is likely to play a role in reproducing it” (Carroll, 2004). Critical research strategies are therefore approaches that utilize positivist, interpretive, and critical methods to produce knowledge that maximizes the human potential for freedom and equality.

Paulo Freire’s (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed is a key reference point for critical research. Working with the illiterate poor in North-Eastern Brazil in the 1940s and 1950s, Freire recognized that effective education and knowledge were not simply about things, but were emancipatory practices themselves. Through the development of critical consciousness, people could understand the circumstances in which they were living and act effectively to change the conditions of oppression they experienced. This was the basis of critical pedagogy , an approach to teaching and learning based on fostering the agency of marginalized communities, and empowering learners to emancipate themselves from oppressive social structures.

Carroll (2004) describes three types of critical research strategy: Oppositional or activist strategies investigate and oppose visible structures and practices of domination by taking up the standpoint of the oppressed; Radical strategies focus on analyzing deeper systematic bases of domination at the roots of societal structures; Subversive strategies subvert or deconstruct received notions of reality/identity and everyday, common sense binary oppositions (man/woman, culture/nature, self/other, reason/emotion, Black/white, etc.), which opens the door to alternatives and new political spaces of contestation.

One contemporary application of critical research strategies is in the critique of colonial structures. Decolonization , or the process of dismantling colonial power structures, also involves a process of decolonizing knowledge and research methods. Eurocentric patterns of thinking are often embedded in the concepts and methods used in sociology and other disciplines. In the 19th century, for example, social hierarchies and evolutionary schemes were central to the understanding of Indigenous people in Canada as alternately “savage” and “childlike,” in need of suppressing, civilizing and assimilating. Decolonizing research “means centering concerns and world views of non-Western individuals, and respectfully knowing and understanding theory and research from previously ‘Other(ed)’ perspectives” (Thambinathan & Kinsella, 2021). Thambinathan & Kinsella (2021) outline four practices of decolonization:

Exercising Critical Reflexivity: Critical reflexivity in research is about the researcher’s awareness of their own methodological assumptions — what they consider valid knowledge and proper ways of knowing — as well as of their social position (often as privileged outsiders) with respect to the research and the research subjects.
Reciprocity and Respect for Self-Determination: Research should be practiced as an ongoing collaboration with research subjects to establish collective ownership over the entire research process, and to make accountable the researchers to the research subjects.
Embracing Other(ed) Ways of Knowing: Research methods should be expanded to integrate traditional knowledge, theories and frameworks used by the research subjects.

Embodying a Transformative Praxis: Along the lines of Freire’s critical pedagogy, the goal of the research is to enable research subjects to transform the colonial conditions of their existence, to bring to light historically silenced voices, and to build capacities and agency in colonized peoples.

Image Descriptions

Figure 2.5 Long Description: The Scientific Method has a series of steps which can form a repeating cycle.

Ask a question.
Research existing sources
Formulate a hypothesis.
Design and conduct a study
Draw conclusions.
Report results. [Return to Figure 2.5]

Media Attributions

Figure 2.3 Cover of The Strand Magazine featuring the publication of the last Sherlock Holmes story written by Arthur Conan Doyle from The Strand Magazine , vol. 73, April 1927, via Wikimedia Commons, is used under a CC BY-SA 2.0 licence.
Figure 2.4 “Mystery Airship” – Headline by The San Francisco Call, via Wikimedia Commons, is in the public domain .
Figure 2.5 The Scientific Method , by Heather Griffiths and Nathan Keirns, via OpenStax, is used under a CC BY 4.0 licence.
Figure 2.6 Karl Popper in the 1980’s by LSE Library, via Wikimedia Commons, has no known copyright restrictions .
Figure 2.7 Mistaking Correlation for Causation by Altimeter, via Flickr, is used under a CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 licence .
Figure 2.8 Harriet Martineau by Richard Evans, via Wikimedia Commons, is in the public domain .
Figure 2.9 Photo of Paulo Freire (1977) by Slobodan Dimitrov, via Wikimedia Commons, is used under a CC BY-SA 3.0 licence.

Share This Book

school Campus Bookshelves
menu_book Bookshelves
perm_media Learning Objects
login Login
how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

Download Page (PDF)
Download Full Book (PDF)
Periodic Table
Physics Constants
Scientific Calculator
Reference & Cite
Tools expand_more
Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

2.2: Approaches to Sociological Research

Last updated
Save as PDF
Page ID 558

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}} % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}} % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

The crime during a full moon discussion put forth a few loosely stated opinions. If the human behaviors around those claims were tested systematically, a police officer, for example, could write a report and offer the findings to sociologists and the world in general. The new perspective could help people understand themselves and their neighbors and help people make better decisions about their lives. It might seem strange to use scientific practices to study social trends, but, as we shall see, it’s extremely helpful to rely on systematic approaches that research methods provide.

Sociologists often begin the research process by asking a question about how or why things happen in this world. It might be a unique question about a new trend or an old question about a common aspect of life. Once the sociologist forms the question, he or she proceeds through an in-depth process to answer it. In deciding how to design that process, the researcher may adopt a scientific approach or an interpretive framework. The following sections describe these approaches to knowledge.

The Scientific Method

The scientific method is an essential tool in research.

But just because sociological studies use scientific methods does not make the results less human. Sociological topics are not reduced to right or wrong facts. In this field, results of studies tend to provide people with access to knowledge they did not have before—knowledge of other cultures, knowledge of rituals and beliefs, or knowledge of trends and attitudes. No matter what research approach they use, researchers want to maximize the study’s reliability, which refers to how likely research results are to be replicated if the study is reproduced. Reliability increases the likelihood that what happens to one person will happen to all people in a group. Researchers also strive for validity, which refers to how well the study measures what it was designed to measure. Returning to the crime rate during a full moon topic, reliability of a study would reflect how well the resulting experience represents the average adult crime rate during a full moon. Validity would ensure that the study’s design accurately examined what it was designed to study, so an exploration of adult criminal behaviors during a full moon should address that issue and not veer into other age groups’ crimes, for example.

Typically, the scientific method starts with these steps—1) ask a question, 2) research existing sources, 3) formulate a hypothesis—described below.

Ask a Question

That is why sociologists are careful to define their terms. In a hygiene study, for instance, hygiene could be defined as “personal habits to maintain physical appearance (as opposed to health),” and a researcher might ask, “How do differing personal hygiene habits reflect the cultural value placed on appearance?” When forming these basic research questions, sociologists develop an operational definition, that is, they define the concept in terms of the physical or concrete steps it takes to objectively measure it. The operational definition identifies an observable condition of the concept. By operationalizing a variable of the concept, all researchers can collect data in a systematic or replicable manner.

The operational definition must be valid, appropriate, and meaningful. And it must be reliable, meaning that results will be close to uniform when tested on more than one person. For example, “good drivers” might be defined in many ways: those who use their turn signals, those who don’t speed, or those who courteously allow others to merge. But these driving behaviors could be interpreted differently by different researchers and could be difficult to measure. Alternatively, “a driver who has never received a traffic violation” is a specific description that will lead researchers to obtain the same information, so it is an effective operational definition.

Research Existing Sources

The next step researchers undertake is to conduct background research through aliterature review, which is a review of any existing similar or related studies. A visit to the library and a thorough online search will uncover existing research about the topic of study. This step helps researchers gain a broad understanding of work previously conducted on the topic at hand and enables them to position their own research to build on prior knowledge. Researchers—including student researchers—are responsible for correctly citing existing sources they use in a study or that inform their work. While it is fine to borrow previously published material (as long as it enhances a unique viewpoint), it must be referenced properly and never plagiarized.

Formulate a Hypothesis

A hypothesis is an assumption about how two or more variables are related; it makes a conjectural statement about the relationship between those variables. In sociology, the hypothesis will often predict how one form of human behavior influences another. In research, independent variables are the cause of the change. The dependent variableis the effect , or thing that is changed.

For example, in a basic study, the researcher would establish one form of human behavior as the independent variable and observe the influence it has on a dependent variable. How does gender (the independent variable) affect rate of income (the dependent variable)? How does one’s religion (the independent variable) affect family size (the dependent variable)? How is social class (the dependent variable) affected by level of education (the independent variable)?

As the table shows, an independent variable is the one that causes a dependent variable to change. For example, a researcher might hypothesize that teaching children proper hygiene (the independent variable) will boost their sense of self-esteem (the dependent variable). Or rephrased, a child’s sense of self-esteem depends, in part, on the quality and availability of hygienic resources.

Just because a sociologist forms an educated prediction of a study’s outcome doesn’t mean data contradicting the hypothesis aren’t welcome. Sociologists analyze general patterns in response to a study, but they are equally interested in exceptions to patterns. In a study of education, a researcher might predict that high school dropouts have a hard time finding rewarding careers. While it has become at least a cultural assumption that the higher the education, the higher the salary and degree of career happiness, there are certainly exceptions. People with little education have had stunning careers, and people with advanced degrees have had trouble finding work. A sociologist prepares a hypothesis knowing that results will vary.

Once the preliminary work is done, it’s time for the next research steps: designing and conducting a study and drawing conclusions. These research methods are discussed below.

Interpretive Framework

While many sociologists rely on the scientific method as a research approach, others operate from an interpretive framework. While systematic, this approach doesn’t follow the hypothesis-testing model that seeks to find generalizable results. Instead, an interpretive framework , sometimes referred to as an interpretive perspective, seeks to understand social worlds from the point of view of participants, which leads to in-depth knowledge.

Section Quiz

A measurement is considered ______ if it actually measures what it is intended to measure, according to the topic of the study.

sociological
quantitative

Sociological studies test relationships in which change in one ______ causes change in another.

test subject
operational definition

In a study, a group of ten-year-old boys are fed doughnuts every morning for a week and then weighed to see how much weight they gained. Which factor is the dependent variable?

The doughnuts
The duration of a week
The weight gained

Which statement provides the best operational definition of “childhood obesity”?

Children who eat unhealthy foods and spend too much time watching television and playing video games
A distressing trend that can lead to health issues including type 2 diabetes and heart disease
Body weight at least 20 percent higher than a healthy weight for a child of that height
The tendency of children today to weigh more than children of earlier generations

Short Answer

Write down the first three steps of the scientific method. Think of a broad topic that you are interested in and which would make a good sociological study—for example, ethnic diversity in a college, homecoming rituals, athletic scholarships, or teen driving. Now, take that topic through the first steps of the process. For each step, write a few sentences or a paragraph: 1) Ask a question about the topic. 2) Do some research and write down the titles of some articles or books you’d want to read about the topic. 3) Formulate a hypothesis.

Further Research

Arkowitz, Hal, and Scott O. Lilienfeld. 2009. "Lunacy and the Full Moon: Does a full moon really trigger strange behavior?" Scientific American. Retrieved October 20, 2014 ( http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...-the-full-moon ).

Berger, Peter L. 1963. Invitation to Sociology: A Humanistic Perspective . New York: Anchor Books.

Merton, Robert. 1968 [1949]. Social Theory and Social Structure . New York: Free Press.

“Scientific Method Lab,” the University of Utah, aspire.cosmic-ray.org/labs/sc...thod_main.html.

Sociological Research

7 Approaches to Sociological Research

Learning objectives.

Define and describe the scientific method
Explain how the scientific method is used in sociological research
Understand the function and importance of an interpretive framework
Define what reliability and validity mean in a research study

The Scientific Method

Typically, the scientific method starts with these steps—1) ask a question, 2) research existing sources, 3) formulate a hypothesis—described below.

Ask a Question

That is why sociologists are careful to define their terms. In a hygiene study, for instance, hygiene could be defined as “personal habits to maintain physical appearance (as opposed to health),” and a researcher might ask, “How do differing personal hygiene habits reflect the cultural value placed on appearance?” When forming these basic research questions, sociologists develop an operational definition , that is, they define the concept in terms of the physical or concrete steps it takes to objectively measure it. The operational definition identifies an observable condition of the concept. By operationalizing a variable of the concept, all researchers can collect data in a systematic or replicable manner.

The operational definition must be valid, appropriate, and meaningful. And it must be reliable, meaning that results will be close to uniform when tested on more than one person. For example, “good drivers” might be defined in many ways: those who use their turn signals, those who don’t speed, or those who courteously allow others to merge. But these driving behaviors could be interpreted differently by different researchers and could be difficult to measure. Alternatively, “a driver who has never received a traffic violation” is a specific description that will lead researchers to obtain the same information, so it is an effective operational definition.

Research Existing Sources

The next step researchers undertake is to conduct background research through a literature review , which is a review of any existing similar or related studies. A visit to the library and a thorough online search will uncover existing research about the topic of study. This step helps researchers gain a broad understanding of work previously conducted on the topic at hand and enables them to position their own research to build on prior knowledge. Researchers—including student researchers—are responsible for correctly citing existing sources they use in a study or that inform their work. While it is fine to borrow previously published material (as long as it enhances a unique viewpoint), it must be referenced properly and never plagiarized.

Formulate a Hypothesis

Once the preliminary work is done, it’s time for the next research steps: designing and conducting a study and drawing conclusions. These research methods are discussed below.

Interpretive Framework

Section Quiz

A measurement is considered ______ if it actually measures what it is intended to measure, according to the topic of the study.

sociological
quantitative

Sociological studies test relationships in which change in one ______ causes change in another.

test subject
operational definition

In a study, a group of ten-year-old boys are fed doughnuts every morning for a week and then weighed to see how much weight they gained. Which factor is the dependent variable?

The doughnuts
The duration of a week
The weight gained

Which statement provides the best operational definition of “childhood obesity”?

Children who eat unhealthy foods and spend too much time watching television and playing video games
A distressing trend that can lead to health issues including type 2 diabetes and heart disease
Body weight at least 20 percent higher than a healthy weight for a child of that height
The tendency of children today to weigh more than children of earlier generations

Short Answer

Further Research

Berger, Peter L. 1963. Invitation to Sociology: A Humanistic Perspective . New York: Anchor Books.

Merton, Robert. 1968 [1949]. Social Theory and Social Structure . New York: Free Press.

“Scientific Method Lab,” the University of Utah, http://aspire.cosmic-ray.org/labs/scientific_method/sci_method_main.html .

Introduction to Sociology 2e Copyright © 2012 by OSCRiceUniversity (Download for free at https://openstax.org/details/books/introduction-sociology-2e) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

2 Sociological Research

Learning Objectives

2.1. Approaches to Sociological Research

Define and describe the scientific method.
Explain how the scientific method is used in sociological research.
Understand the difference between positivist and interpretive approaches to the scientific method in sociology.
Define what reliability and validity mean in a research study.

2.2. Research Methods

Differentiate between four kinds of research methods: surveys, experiments, field research, and secondary data or textual analysis.
Understand why certain topics are better suited to different research approaches.

2.3. Ethical Concerns

Understand why ethical standards exist.
Demonstrate awareness of the Canadian Sociological Association’s Code of Ethics.
Define value neutrality, and outline some of the issues of value neutrality in sociology.

Introduction to Sociological Research

After the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said, “this is not a time to commit sociology.” He thought we should condemn the violence, not discuss sociological research about causes of political violence. Harper’s statement suggests that talking about social causes of violence can weaken a stand against terrorism.

Behind statements like Harper’s are beliefs about the nature of a “terrorist”. In this view, the terrorist is a person beyond reason and morality. Therefore, sociological analysis is not useful. Sociology would interfere with our determination to prevent terrorism.

However, Robert Pape’s (2005) research shows a different picture of terrorists. Pape studied 462 suicide bombers. They were not mentally imbalanced or blindly motivated by religious zeal or unconcerned by morality. They were ordinary individuals caught up in extraordinary circumstances. Other studies of suicide bombers in confirm this. How would this understanding affect public policy and public responses to terrorism?

Sociological research is important for public policy. For example, what’s the most effective way to respond to terrorism or violent crime? Often, the news talks about terrorism and violence in moral terms. Then the solutions are narrowed to either being “tough” or “soft” on crime. Tough and soft are moral categories. A question framed by moral categories cannot be solved using evidence-based procedures. Narrow moral categories can prevent asking about responses to crime that actually work.

The sociological approach differs. Sociology examines the effectiveness of strategies for preventing violent behaviour. Sociologists ask who commits violent acts and why. Sociologists rely on systematic research rather than opinion.

Sociological researchers use empirical evidence (evidence gathered by direct experience and observation) combined with the scientific method. Scientific sociological study of the social causes of crime or terrorism would involve careful steps:

defining a research question that can be answered through empirical observation
gathering information through detailed observation
forming a hypothesis
testing the hypothesis
analyzing data and drawing conclusions from the data
publishing the results and thinking about future research on the topic.

A starting point might be the question “What are the social conditions of individuals who commit terrorist acts?”

Unwillingness to “commit sociology” and think about the roots of political violence might lead to moral outrage, but not to violence prevention. Events like the Boston Marathon bombing are precisely the moment to commit sociology to find causes.

Sociologists study the social world created by humans. They notice patterns of behaviour as people move through the world. Sociological research methods are based on the scientific method rather than casual observation.

There are three basic approaches to sociological knowledge:

positivist interest in quantitative evidence: This evidence can be used to make good social policy decisions.
interpretive interest in understanding the meanings of human behaviour. This can help greater mutual understanding.
critical interest in knowledge useful for challenging power relations and liberating people.

Sociologists often begin the research process by asking a question about how or why things happen. A sociologist then goes though through a scientific process to answer the question. Sociologists can choose from different research methods. Choice of method depends on the topic and goals of the research.

The researcher may use a positivist methodology or an interpretive methodology . Both methods can be used by critical research . The following sections describe these approaches.

Science vs. Non-Science

Sometimes we need to be skeptical about science: for example, when technologies based on science destroy the natural environment. But skepticism can be dangerous: for example, when epidemics like measles occur because of low vaccination rates. Skepticism is important to both natural and social sciences, but a skeptical attitude needs to be combined with systematic research. The scientific method allows sociologists to distinguish between everyday opinions and ideas supported by evidence.

Here is one distinction between scientific and non-scientific claims about the world: In science “seeing is believing” but in everyday life “believing is seeing” (Brym, Roberts, Lie, & Rytina, 2013). Science is based on systematic observation. Only by observation (or “seeing”) can a scientist believe that an idea about the world is correct. Research methodologies reduce the chance that conclusions will made in error. In everyday life, people often “see” what they already expect to see or what they already believe to be true.

Many people know things about the social world without having a background in sociology. Sometimes their knowledge is valid; sometimes it is not. Think about how people know what they know, and compare this to the scientific way of knowing. Four types of non-scientific reasoning are common in everyday life:

knowledge based on casual observation,
knowledge based on selective evidence,
knowledge based on overgeneralization,
knowledge based on authority or tradition.

Ways of Knowing

Science and research methods.

Scientific Research Methods are organized, logical ways of learning and knowing about our social world. Many people know things because they experienced them directly. If you grew up in Manitoba, you may have observed what some kids learn each winter: it is true that tongues will stick to metal when it’s very cold outside. Direct experience may get us accurate information, but only if we are lucky. We are not very careful observers. In this example, the observation process is not really deliberate or formal. Instead, you would come to know what you believe to be true through casual observation . Sometimes casual observation is right, and sometimes it’s wrong. Without a systematic process for observing and judging the accuracy of observations, we can’t be sure if informal observations are accurate.

Many people overlook contrary evidence. Suppose a friend insists that all men are liars shortly after she had learned that her boyfriend cheated. One man’s lies started to represent a quality of all men to her. But do all men really lie all the time? Probably not. If you asked your friend to think about her experiences with men, she would probably admit that she knew many men who had never lied to her. Maybe even her boyfriend did not habitually lie. This friend committed what social scientists refer to as selective observation: She notices only the pattern that she wanted to find. She ignored contrary evidence. If, on the other hand, your friend’s experience with her boyfriend had been her only experience with any man, then she would have been committing what social scientists call overgeneralization , assuming that patterns exist based on very limited observations.

Another way that people claim to “know” is believing what they hear. An urban legend claims a woman used to cut both ends off a ham before putting it in the oven (Mikkelson, 2005). She baked ham that way for years because that’s the way her mother did it, so clearly that was the way it was supposed to be done. She based her knowledge on a family tradition ( traditional knowledge ). After years of tossing perfectly good ham into the trash, she learned that her mother cut the ends off ham only because she did not have a pan large enough for the ham.

Without questioning what we think we know is true, we can believe false statements. This is more likely when an authority tells us that something is true ( authoritative knowledge ). Sometimes we might need to rely on authorities like government, school or churches. This way of knowing differs from the sociological way of knowing, however. Whether quantitative, qualitative, or critical, sociological research is based on the scientific method.

The Scientific Method

Sociologists use research methods such as experiments, surveys, field research, and secondary data analysis.

Social interactions are complicated. They can seem impossible to measure and explain. This is sociology uses scientific methods to study human behaviour. Scientific research establishes rules to help ensure results are as objective and accurate as possible. Scientific methods focus a study and organize results.

Positivist quantitative methodologies seek to translate observable phenomena into numerical data.
Interpretive qualitative methodologies seek to translate observable phenomena into units of meaning.

The scientific method. Long description available at the end of the chapter.

The social scientific method in both cases involves developing and testing theories about the world based on empirical (observable) evidence. The social scientific method commits to systematic observation of the social world. It strives to be objective, skeptical, and logical. It involves a series of established steps known as the research process .

No matter what research approach is used, researchers want studies to have reliability (how likely research results are to be the same if the study conducted again). Reliability increases the likelihood that what is true of one person will be true of all people in a group.

Researchers also want to maximize the study’s validity (how well the study measures what it was designed to measure).

Sociologists use the scientific method to be as objective and consistent as possible. The scientific method steps provide the means for accuracy, reliability, and validity.

Typically, the scientific method starts with these steps:

ask a question
research existing sources
formulate a hypothesis.

Ask a Question

The first step of the scientific method: ask a question, describe a problem, and identify the specific area of interest. The topic should be narrow enough to study within a geography and period. “Are societies capable of sustained happiness?” would be too vague. The question should also be broad enough to have wide interest. “What do personal hygiene habits reveal about the values of students at Scuzi High School?” might be too narrow.

Next, ideas need to be clearly defined or operationalized . In a hygiene study, for instance, hygiene could be defined as “personal habits to maintain physical appearance.” A researcher might ask, “How do differing personal hygiene habits reflect the cultural value placed on appearance?” When forming research questions, sociologists develop an operational definition ; they define a concept by the concrete steps needed to measure it. The concept is translated into an observable variable , a measure that has different values. An operational definition identifies an observable condition.

Operationalizing variables allows researchers to collect data systematically. The operational definition must be a meaningful measure. It must also be reliable, meaning that results will be similar when tested on more than one person. For example, good drivers might be defined in many ways: Those who use their turn signals; those who do not speed; or those who allow others to merge. But these driving behaviours could be interpreted differently by different researchers, so they could be difficult to measure. Alternatively, “a driver who has never received a traffic violation” is a specific description that will lead researchers to obtain the same information, so it is a good operational definition. Asking the question, “how many traffic violations a driver has received?” turns the concepts of “good drivers” and “bad drivers” into variables which might be measured by the number of traffic violations.

Sociologists need to be careful how they operationalize variables. In this example we know that Black drivers receive much higher levels of police scrutiny than white drivers, so the number of traffic violations a driver has received might reflect less on their driving ability and more on the crime of “driving while Black.”

Research Existing Sources

Next researchers conduct background research through a literature review. The researcher reads similar and related studies. This lets them build on prior knowledge. They focus their research question and avoid duplicating previous research. Researchers—including student researchers—are responsible for correctly citing all existing sources they use.

Formulate a Hypothesis

A hypothesis is an assumption about how two or more variables are related; A hypothesis makes a statement about the relationship between those variables. It’s sometimes called an educated guess because it’s based on theory, observations or the existing literature. The hypothesis puts this guess in the form of a testable statement. In positivist sociology, the hypothesis predicts how one form of human behaviour influences another.

Positivist approaches operationalize variables as quantitative data : They translate a social phenomenon like health into numerically measurable variable like “number of visits to the hospital.” This permits sociologists to make predictions using math. They can perform statistical techniques to demonstrate the validity of relationships.

Variables are examined to see if there is a correlation between them. When a change in one variable coincides with a change in another variable, there is a correlation. This does not necessarily mean that one variable causes another variable, however; just that changes in the variables are associated.

The difference between independent and dependent variables is important. In research, independent variables are the cause of the change. The dependent variable is the effect or thing that is changed. For example, how does gender (the independent variable) affect income (the dependent variable)? How does religion (the independent variable) affect family size (the dependent variable)? How is social class (the dependent variable) affected by level of education (the independent variable)? (Why is the third example different?)

To claim causation , three criteria must be satisfied:

There must be a correlation between the independent and dependent variables.
The independent variable must happen before the dependent variable.
There must be no other intervening variable responsible for the causal relationship.

While there needs to a correlation between variables for a causal relationship, correlation does not necessarily mean causation. The relationship between variables can be the result of a third, intervening variable.

For example, there might be a positive relationship between wearing bikinis and eating ice cream. But wearing bikinis does not cause eating ice cream. It is more likely that the heat of summer causes both an increase in bikini wearing and an increase in the consumption of ice cream.

The distinction between causation and correlation can have significant consequences. For example, Indigenous Canadians are overrepresented in prisons. In 2013, Indigenous people made up about 4 percent of the Canadian population, but they made up 23.2 percent of the federal penitentiary population (Correctional Investigator Canada, 2013). There is a positive correlation between being an Indigenous person in Canada and being in jail. Is this because Indigenous people are predisposed to crime? No. There are at least four intervening variables that explain the higher imprisonment of Indigenous people (Hartnagel, 2004):

Indigenous people are more likely to live in poverty, and poverty is associated with higher arrest and incarceration rates
Indigenous lawbreakers tend to commit more detectable “street” crimes than the less detectable “white collar” crimes
the criminal justice system profiles and discriminates against Indigenous people
the legacy of colonization disrupted and weakened traditional Indigenous communities.

Operational definitions help measure variables reliably. In a study asking how tutoring improves grades, for instance, one researcher might define “good” grades as a C or better, while another uses a B+ as a starting point for good. Another operational definition might describe “tutoring” as “one-on-one assistance by an expert in the field, hired by an educational institution.” Those definitions set limits and establish cut-off points, ensuring consistency and replicability in a study.

Simply identifying two topics, or variables, is not enough: Their relationship must be part of the hypothesis.

A sociologist makes a hypothesis, but that doesn’t mean data contradicting the hypothesis are not welcome. Sociologists analyze general patterns, but they are equally interested in exceptions to patterns.

In a study of education, a researcher might predict that high school dropouts have a hard time finding a rewarding career. While many assume the higher the education, the higher the salary and degree of career happiness, there are many exceptions. People with little education have had stunning careers, and people with advanced degrees have had trouble finding work. A sociologist prepares a hypothesis knowing that results will vary.

Hypothesis Formation in Qualitative Research

While many sociologists rely on positivist methods in their research, others operate from an interpretive approach . While still systematic, this interpretive approach does not follow the hypothesis-testing model using quantitative variables. Instead, an interpretive framework wants to understand social worlds from the point of view of participants. This leads to in-depth knowledge. The interpretive approach focuses on qualitative data, or the meanings that guide people. Rather than relying on quantitative instruments, like fixed questionnaires or experiments, the interpretive approach tries to find ways to get closer to the lived experience. Interpretive research is usually more descriptive than positivist research.

Once the hypothesis defined, it is time for the next research steps:

choosing a research methodology,
conducting a study,
and drawing conclusions.

2.2. Sociological Research Methods

Sociologists examine the world, see a problem or interesting pattern, and study it. They use research methods to design a study. Planning the research design is very important in any sociological study.

When entering a social environment, a researcher must be careful. There are times to remain anonymous and times to be open. There are times to conduct interviews and times to just observe. Some participants need to be thoroughly informed; others should not know that they are being observed. A researcher would not stroll into a high crime neighbourhood at midnight, calling out, “Any gang members around?” And if a researcher walked into a coffee shop and told the employees they would be observed as part of a study on work efficiency, the self-conscious servers might not behave naturally. Human research subjects can react to the researcher and change their behaviour under observation.

In planning a study’s design, sociologists generally choose from four widely used methods of social investigation:

field research
secondary data analysis (or use of existing sources).

The topic of study influences which method is used. Every research method comes with advantages and disadvantages.

1. Surveys and Interviews

A survey collects data from subjects who answer questions about opinions or behaviour. Surveys are often written questionnaires. Surveys are one of the most widely used sociological research methods. The standard survey format allows individuals to express personal ideas anonymously.

Questionnaires for Statistics Canada's 2011 Census

The Statistics Canada census is an excellent example of a large-scale survey. Customers also fill out questionnaires at stores and events, responding to questions such as “How did you hear about the event?” and “Were the staff helpful?” Telephone surveys ask for participation in a political poll or a survey: “Do you eat hot dogs? If yes, how many per month?”

Not all surveys are sociological research. Marketing polls help companies with marketing goals and strategies; they are generally not conducted as part of a scientific study, meaning they are not designed to test a hypothesis or to contribute knowledge to the field of sociology. The results are not published in a scholarly journal where design, methodology, results, and analyses are examined.

TV polls do not represent the general population, but are merely answers from a specific show’s audience. Polls conducted by programs such as Canadian Idol represent the opinions of fans but are not scientific. A good contrast to these are Numeris ratings, which determine the popularity of television programming in Canada through scientific market research. Researchers ask a large random sample of Canadians to fill out a television diary for one week, noting the times and the broadcasters they listened to or viewed. Based on this methodology they are able to generate an accurate description of consumer preferences.

While surveys are not great at capturing the ways people really behave in social situations, they are a good method for discovering how people feel and think—or at least how they say they feel and think. Surveys can track attitudes and opinions, political preferences, individual behaviours such as sleeping, driving, dietary, or texting habits, or factual information such as employment status, income, and education levels. A survey targets a specific population , people who are the focus of a study, such as university athletes, international students, or teenagers living with type 1 (juvenile-onset) diabetes.

Most researchers choose to survey a small sector of the population, or a sample: A sample is a smaller number of subjects who represent a larger population. The success of a study depends on how well a sample represents a population. In a random sample, every person in a population has an equal chance of being chosen for the study.

According to the laws of probability, random samples represent the population as a whole. The larger the sample size, the more accurate the results will be in characterizing the population being studied. For practical purposes, however, a sample size of 1,500 people will give acceptably accurate results even if the population being researched was the entire adult population of Canada. For instance, an Ipsos Reid poll, if conducted as a nationwide random sampling, should be able to provide an accurate estimate of public opinion whether it contacts 1,500 or 10,000 people.

Typically, surveys include a figure that gives the margin of error of the survey results. Based on probabilities, this gives a range of values within which the true value of the population characteristic can be. This figure also depends on the size of a sample. A political poll based on a sample of 1,500 respondents might state that if an election were called tomorrow the Conservative Party would get 30% of the vote, plus or minus 2.5%, based on a confidence interval of 95%. That is, there is a 5% chance that the true vote would fall outside of the range of 27.5% to 32.5%, or. If the poll was based on a sample of 1,000 respondents, the margin of error would be higher.

Problems with accuracy or validity can result if sample sizes are too small because there is a stronger chance the sample size will not represent the whole population. In small samples, the characteristics of unusual individuals have a greater chance of influencing the results. The validity of surveys is damaged when part of the population is inadvertently excluded from the sample (e.g., telephone surveys that rely on landlines exclude people that use only cell phones) or when there is a low response rate.

After selecting subjects, the researcher develops a plan to ask a list of standardized questions and record responses. Researchers must inform subjects of the nature and purpose of a study in advance. Researchers thank the subjects and offer them a chance to see the results of the study if they are interested. The researchers present the subjects with an instrument for gathering the information. A common instrument is a structured written questionnaire in which subjects answer a series of questions. For some topics, the researcher might ask yes-or-no or multiple-choice questions, allowing subjects to choose possible responses to each question.

This kind of quantitative data —research collected in numerical form that can be counted— is easy to tabulate. Just count the number of “yes” and “no” answers or count the “strongly agree,” “agree,” “disagree,” etc. responses and chart them into percentages. This is also the chief drawback of questionnaires, however: they are artificial. In real life, there are rarely any unambiguous yes or no answers.

Some topics are impossible to observe directly. Sometimes they can be sensitive and difficult to discuss honestly in a public or with a stranger. People are more likely to share honest answers if they can respond to questions anonymously. This type of information is qualitative data —results are subjective and often based on what is experienced in a natural setting. Qualitative information is harder to organize and tabulate. The researcher will end up with a wide range of responses, and some may be unexpected.

An interview is a one-on-one conversation between the researcher and the subject. Interviews are similar to short answer questions on surveys because the researcher asks questions. They can be quantitative if the questions are standardized and have numerically quantifiable answers: Are you employed? (Yes=0, No=1); On a scale of 1 to 5 how would you describe your level of optimism?

Interviews can also be qualitative if participants are free to respond as they wish. In the back-and-forth conversation of an interview, a researcher can ask for clarification, spend more time on a subtopic, or ask additional questions. In an interview, a subject will ideally feel free to open up and answer questions that are more complex. There are no right or wrong answers. The subject might not even know how to answer the questions honestly. Questions such as “How did society’s view of alcohol consumption influence your decision whether or not to take your first sip of alcohol?” or “Did you feel that the divorce of your parents would put a social stigma on your family?” involve so many factors that the answers are difficult to categorize. A researcher needs to avoid steering or prompting the subject to respond in a specific way; otherwise, the results will prove to be unreliable.

2. Experiments

You have probably tested personal social theories. “If I study at night and review in the morning, I’ll improve my marks.” Or, “If I stop drinking soda, I’ll feel better.” When you test “if this, then that” you are looking for cause and effect,. When you test a theory, your results either prove or disprove your hypothesis. One way researchers test social theories is by conducting an experiment , meaning they investigate relationships to test a hypothesis. There are two main types of experiments: lab-based experiments, and natural or field experiments.

In a lab setting, the research can be controlled. In field-based experiment, the data cannot be controlled, but the information might be considered more accurate since it was collected without interference by the researcher. As a research method, either type of sociological experiment is useful for testing if-then statements: if a particular thing happens, then another particular thing will result.

To set up a lab-based experiment, sociologists create artificial situations that allow them to manipulate variables. The sociologist selects a set of people with similar characteristics, such as age, class, race, or education. Those people are divided into two groups. One is the experimental group and the other is the control group . The experimental group is exposed to the independent variable(s) and the control group is not. This is similar to pharmaceutical drug trials in which the experimental group is given the test drug and the control group is given a placebo or sugar pill.

To test the benefits of tutoring, for example, a researcher might arrange tutoring for an experimental group of students, while the control group does not receive tutoring. Then both groups would be tested for differences in grades to see if tutoring influenced the experimental group. The researcher would not want to jeopardize either group of students, so the setting would be artificial. The test would not be for a grade on their transcript, for example.

The Stanford Prison Experiment is one of the most famous social science experiments. In 1971, 24 healthy, middle-class male university students were selected to take part in a simulated jail environment. The purpose: to examine the effects of social setting and social roles on individual psychology and behaviour. They were randomly divided into 12 guards and 12 prisoners. The prisoner subjects were arrested at home and taken blindfolded to the simulated prison in the basement of a Stanford University building. Within a day of arriving, the prisoners and the guards began to display signs of trauma and sadism, respectively.

After some prisoners revolted by blockading themselves in their cells, the guards resorted to using increasingly humiliating and degrading tactics to control the prisoners through psychological manipulation. The experiment had to be abandoned after only six days because the abuse had grown out of hand (Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo, 1973). While the insights into the social dynamics of authoritarianism are fascinating, the Stanford Prison Experiment also serves as an example of the ethical issues when experimenting on human subjects.

3. Field Research

A group of young people sitting on a hill. Many of them have brightly dyed mohawks.

Sociologists seldom study subjects in laboratories. Sociologists go out into the world. They meet subjects where they live, work, and play. Field research is doing research in a natural environment without doing a lab experiment or a survey. It is an interpretive approach rather than a positivist approach. The researcher interacts with or observes people, gathering data along the way. Field research takes place in the subject’s natural environment, whether it’s a coffee shop or tribal village, a homeless shelter or a care home, a hospital, airport, mall, or beach resort.

Fieldwork is useful for observing how people behave. It is less useful, however, for developing causal explanations of why they behave that way. From the small size of the groups studied in fieldwork, it is difficult to make predictions to a larger population. Similarly, it can be difficult to know whether another researcher would see the same things or record the same data. We will look at two types of field research: participant observation and the case study.

Participant Observation

In participant observation , researchers join people and participate in a group’s routine to observe in their natural context. This method lets researchers study a naturally occurring social activity without imposing artificial or intrusive research devices, like fixed questionnaire questions. A researcher might work as a waitress in a diner, or live as a homeless person for several weeks, or ride with police officers on patrol. Often, these researchers try to blend in with the population they study, and they may not tell their true identity if that would interfere with the research results.

At the beginning of a field study, researchers might have a question: “What really goes on in the kitchen of the most popular diner in town?” or “What is it like to be homeless?” Participant observation can help explore an environment from the inside. In such a setting, the researcher will be alert and open minded to whatever happens, recording all observations. Soon, as patterns emerge, questions will become more specific, observations will lead to hypotheses, and hypotheses will guide the researcher in shaping data into results.

Researchers must pretend to be something they are not. The process could involve role playing, making contacts, networking, or applying for a job. Once inside a group, some researchers spend months or even years pretending to be one of the people they are observing. However, as observers, they cannot get too involved. They must keep their purpose in mind and apply the sociological perspective. That way, they illuminate social patterns that are often unrecognized. Because information gathered during participant observation is mostly qualitative, rather than quantitative, the results are often descriptive or interpretive. The researcher might present findings in an article or book, describing what he or she witnessed and experienced.

Street cafe scene with a woman taking a couple's order.

Barbara Ehrenreich conducted this type of research for her book Nickel and Dimed . One day over lunch with her editor, Ehrenreich mentioned an idea. “How can people exist on minimum-wage work? How do low-income workers get by?” she wondered. “Someone should do a study.” To her surprise, her editor responded, “Why don’t you do it?”

Ehrenreich joined the low-wage service sector. For several months, she left her comfortable home, lived, and worked with people who lacked higher education and job skills. Undercover, she worked minimum wage jobs as a waitress, a cleaning woman, a nursing home aide, and a retail chain employee. During her participant observation, she used only her income from those jobs to pay for food, clothing, transportation, and shelter. She discovered the obvious: In the United States, it’s almost impossible to get by on minimum wage work.

She also experienced and observed the treatment of service work employees. She saw the extreme measures people take to make ends meet and to survive. She described fellow employees who held two or three jobs, worked seven days a week, lived in cars, could not pay to treat illnesses, got randomly fired, submitted to drug tests, and moved in and out of homeless shelters. She described difficult working conditions and the poor treatment that low-wage workers suffer in her book.

The Case Study

Sometimes a researcher wants to study one specific person or event. A case study is an in-depth analysis of a single event, situation, or individual. A researcher examines existing documents, conducts interviews, engages in direct observation, and even participant observation. Researchers might use this method to study a single case of, for example, a foster child, drug lord, cancer patient, criminal, or rape victim.

While a case study gathers in-depth information, it does not provide enough evidence to make a generalized conclusion. Researchers can’t make universal claims based on just one person. One person does not verify a pattern. This is why most sociologists do not use case studies.

4. Secondary Data or Textual Analysis

Sociologists use secondary data analysis . Secondary data do not result from firsthand research but come from previous work of others. Sociologists might study texts written by historians, economists, or teachers. They might search through newspapers or magazines from any period in history. Using available information not only saves time and money, but it can add depth to a study.

Sociologists often interpret findings in a new way, a way that was not part of an author’s original purpose. To study how women were encouraged to behave in the 1960s, for example, a researcher might watch movies and television shows from that period.

One kind of secondary data analysis is content analysis . Content analysis is a quantitative approach to textual research that selects an item of textual content ( a variable) that can be reliably and consistently observed and coded. Content analysis counts the frequency of that item in a sample of text.

For example, Gilens (1996) wanted to understand why survey research shows that the American public exaggerates the percentage of African Americans among the poor. He examined whether media representations influence public perception. He did content analysis of photographs of poor people in American news magazines. He coded and then recorded incidences of three variables: (1) race: white, black, indeterminate; (2) employed: working, not working; and (3) age.

Gilens discovered that not only were African Americans overrepresented in news magazine photographs of poverty, but that the photos also tended to under-represent other subgroups of the poor—the elderly and working poor—while over-representing less sympathetic groups—unemployed, working age adults. Gilens concluded that through a distorted representation of poverty, U.S. news magazines “reinforce negative stereotypes of blacks as mired in poverty and contribute to the belief that poverty is primarily a ‘black problem’” (1996).

Social scientists also learn by analyzing the research of a variety of agencies like government departments, public research groups, and organizations like Statistics Canada and the World Health Organization. These all publish studies useful to sociologists. Statistics that measure income inequality are useful understanding who benefited or lost as a result of federal budget, for example.

Secondary data analysis is not always easy. Public records are sometimes not easy to access. Sometimes there is no way to check their accuracy. It is easy, for example, to count how many drunk drivers are pulled over by the police. But how many are not? While it’s possible to discover the percentage of teenage students who drop out of high school, it might be more challenging to determine the number who return to school or get their high school diplomas later.

Secondary data analysis must consider the publication date of sources. Attitudes and common cultural ideas may have influenced the research.

Different research methods. Long description available.

There are not only several theoretical perspectives in sociology, but also many research methodologies. The choice of research methodology depends on the research question. The choice of the research question depends on:

the sociology perspective of the researcher
the nature of the social phenomenon being studied
and the purpose of the research.

Sociologists conduct studies to understand human behaviour. Many also use sociological studies to improve people’s lives. Conducting a sociological study comes with much responsibility. Sociologists must consider their ethical duty to avoid harming people while conducting research.

The Canadian Sociological Association (CSA) has a code of ethics —formal guidelines for conducting sociological research — consisting of principles and ethical standards to be used in the discipline. It also describes procedures for filing, investigating, and resolving complaints of unethical conduct.

Some of the guidelines state that researchers must try to be skillful and fair-minded in their work, especially as it relates to human subjects. Researchers must obtain participants’ informed consent, and before participants agree to participate, researchers must inform subjects of the responsibilities and risks. During a study, sociologists must ensure the safety of participants and immediately stop work if a subject is potentially endangered.

Researchers are required to protect the privacy of participants. Even if pressured by authorities, such as police or courts, researchers are not ethically allowed to release confidential information. Researchers must make results available to other sociologists, must make public all sources of financial support, and must not accept funding from any organization that might seek to influence the research results for its own purposes. The CSA’s ethical considerations shape not only the study but also the publication of results.

Although some aspects of research design might be influenced by personal values, it’s inappropriate to allow personal values to shape the interpretation of results. Sociologists must establish value neutrality , a practice of remaining impartial, without bias or judgement, during the course of a study and in publishing results (Weber 1949). Sociologists must disclose research findings without omitting or changing significant data.

Value neutrality does not mean having no opinions. It means striving to overcome personal biases when analyzing data. It means avoiding spinning data to match a desired outcome, such as a political or moral point of view. Investigators are ethically obligated to report results, even when they contradict personal views, predicted outcomes, or widely accepted beliefs. Is value neutrality possible?

Many sociologists believe it is impossible to set aside personal values and retain complete objectivity. Individuals inevitably see the world from a partial perspective. Their interests affect topics they choose, the types of questions they ask, the way they frame their research, and the research methodologies they select to pursue it. Moreover, facts, however objective, do not exist in a vacuum.

Positivist sociology researches knowledge useful for controlling and administering social life. Interpretive sociology pursues knowledge to promote greater mutual understanding. Critical sociology pursues knowledge to liberate people. Readers need to know the perspective of the research to judge its validity and applicability.

Making Connections: Sociological Research

The hawthorne effect.

In the 1920s, leaders of a Chicago factory called Hawthorne Works commissioned a study to determine whether or not changing certain aspects of working conditions could increase or decrease worker productivity. Sociologists were surprised when the productivity of a test group increased when the lighting of their workspace was improved. They were even more surprised when productivity improved when the lighting of the workspace was dimmed. In fact almost every change of independent variable — lighting, breaks, work hours — resulted in an improvement of productivity. But when the study was over, productivity dropped again.

Why did this happen? In 1953, Henry A. Landsberger analyzed the study results to answer this question. He realized that employees’ productivity increased because sociologists were paying attention to them. The sociologists’ presence influenced the study results. Worker behaviours were altered not by the lighting but by the study itself. From this, sociologists learned the importance of carefully planning their roles as part of their research design (Franke & Kaul, 1978). Landsberger called the workers’ response the Hawthorne effect — people changing their behaviour because they know they are being watched as part of a study.

The Hawthorne effect is unavoidable in some research. In many cases, sociologists have to make the purpose of the study known for ethical reasons. Subjects must be aware that they are being observed, and a certain amount of artificiality may result (Sonnenfeld, 1985). Making sociologists’ presence invisible is not always realistic for other reasons. That option is not available to a researcher studying prison behaviours, early education, or the Ku Klux Klan. Researchers cannot just stroll into prisons, kindergarten classrooms, or Ku Klux Klan meetings and unobtrusively observe behaviours. In situations like these, other methods are needed. All studies shape the research design, while research design simultaneously shapes the study. Researchers choose methods that best suit their study topic and that fit with their overall goal for the research.

An Experiment in Action: Mincome

The historic Dauphin Canadian Northern Railway Station, in Dauphin, Manitoba

A real-life example will help illustrate the experimental process in sociology. Between 1974 and 1979 an experiment was conducted in the small town of Dauphin, Manitoba (the “garden capital of Manitoba”). Each family received a modest monthly guaranteed income — a “mincome” — equivalent to a maximum of 60 percent of the “low-income cut-off figure” (a Statistics Canada measure of poverty, which varies with family size). The income was 50 cents per dollar less for families who had incomes from other sources. Families earning over a certain income level did not receive mincome. Families that were already collecting welfare or unemployment insurance were also excluded. The test families in Dauphin were compared with control groups in other rural Manitoba communities on a range of indicators such as number of hours worked per week, school performance, high school drop out rates, and hospital visits (Forget, 2011). A guaranteed annual income was seen at the time as a less costly, less bureaucratic public alternative for addressing poverty than the existing employment insurance and welfare programs. Today it is an active proposal being considered in Switzerland (Lowrey, 2013).

Intuitively, it seems logical that lack of income is the cause of poverty and poverty-related issues. One of the main concerns, however, was whether a guaranteed income would create a disincentive to work. The concept appears to challenge the principles of the Protestant work ethic (see the discussion of Max Weber in Chapter 1). The study did find very small decreases in hours worked per week: about 1 percent for men, 3 percent for married women, and 5 percent for unmarried women. Forget (2011) argues this was because the income provided an opportunity for people to spend more time with family and school, especially for young mothers and teenage girls. There were also significant social benefits from the experiment, including better test scores in school, lower high school drop out rates, fewer visits to hospital, fewer accidents and injuries, and fewer mental health issues.

Ironically, due to lack of guaranteed funding (and lack of political interest by the late 1970s), the data and results of the study were not analyzed or published until 2011. The data were archived and sat gathering dust in boxes. The mincome experiment demonstrated the benefits that even a modest guaranteed annual income supplement could have on health and social outcomes in communities. People seem to live healthier lives and get a better education when they do not need to worry about poverty. In her summary of the research, Forget notes that the impact of the income supplement was surprisingly large given that at any one time only about a third of the families were receiving the income and, for some families, the income amount would have been very small. The income benefit was largest for low-income working families, but the research showed that the entire community profited. The improvement in overall health outcomes for the community suggest that a guaranteed income would also result in savings for the public health system.

Making Connections: Sociology in the Real World

When is sharing not such a good idea.

Choosing a research methodology depends on a number of factors, including the purpose of the research and the audience for whom the research is intended. If we consider the type of research that might go into producing a government policy document on the effectiveness of safe injection sites for reducing the public health risks of intravenous drug use, we would expect public administrators to want “hard” (i.e., quantitative) evidence of high reliability to help them make a policy decision. The most reliable data would come from an experimental or quasi-experimental research model in which a control group can be compared with an experimental group using quantitative measures.

This approach has been used by researchers studying InSite in Vancouver (Marshall et al., 2011; Wood et al., 2006). InSite is a supervised safe-injection site where heroin addicts and other intravenous drug users can go to inject drugs in a safe, clean environment. Clean needles are provided and health care professionals are on hand to intervene in the case of overdoses or other medical emergency. It is a controversial program both because heroin use is against the law (the facility operates through a federal ministerial exemption) and because the heroin users are not obliged to quit using or seek therapy. To assess the effectiveness of the program, researchers compared the risky usage of drugs in populations before and after the opening of the facility and geographically near and distant to the facility. The results from the studies have shown that InSite has reduced both deaths from overdose and risky behaviours, such as the sharing of needles, without increasing the levels of crime associated with drug use and addiction.

On the other hand, if the research question is more exploratory (for example, trying to discern the reasons why individuals in the crack smoking subculture engage in the risky activity of sharing pipes), the more nuanced approach of fieldwork is more appropriate. The research would need to focus on the subcultural context, rituals, and meaning of sharing pipes, and why these phenomena override known health concerns. Graduate student Andrew Ivsins at the University of Victoria studied the practice of sharing pipes among 13 habitual users of crack cocaine in Victoria, B.C. (Ivsins, 2010). He met crack smokers in their typical setting downtown and used an unstructured interview method to try to draw out the informal norms that lead to sharing pipes. One factor he discovered was the bond that formed between friends or intimate partners when they shared a pipe. He also discovered that there was an elaborate subcultural etiquette of pipe use that revolved around the benefit of getting the crack resin smokers left behind. Both of these motives tended to outweigh the recognized health risks of sharing pipes (such as hepatitis) in the decision making of the users. This type of research was valuable in illuminating the unknown subcultural norms of crack use that could still come into play in a harm reduction strategy such as distributing safe crack kits to addicts.

Chapter Summary

Approaches to sociological research.

Using the scientific method, a researcher conducts a study in five phases: asking a question, researching existing sources, formulating a hypothesis, conducting a study, and drawing conclusions. The scientific method provides a clear method of organizing a study. Some sociologists conduct scientific research through a positivist framework utilizing a hypothesis as a research question. Other sociologists conduct scientific research using an interpretive framework that is often inductive in nature. Scientific sociological studies often observe relationships between variables. Researchers study how one variable changes another. Prior to conducting a study, researchers are careful to apply operational definitions to their terms and to establish dependent and independent variables.

Research Methods

Even a simple research design involves much work and planning. The scientific method provides a system of organization to help researchers plan and conduct a study. The scientific method ensured that data and results are reliable, valid, and objective. The many methods available to researchers—including experiments, surveys, field studies, and secondary data analysis—all have advantages and disadvantages. Depending on the topic, a study might use a single method or a combination of methods. The study design should provide a solid framework in which to analyze predicted and unpredicted data.

Ethical Concerns

Sociologists and sociology students must take ethical responsibility for their research.

They must first and foremost guarantee the safety of their participants.
Whenever possible, they must ensure that participants have been fully informed before consenting to be part of a study.

The Canadian Sociological Association (CSA) maintains ethical guidelines for research. The guidelines address conducting studies, properly using existing sources, accepting funding, and publishing results. Sociologists must try to maintain value neutrality. They must gather and analyze data objectively, setting aside their personal preferences, beliefs, and opinions. They must report findings accurately, even if they contradict personal convictions.

authoritative knowledge: Knowledge based on the accepted authority of the source.

case study: In-depth analysis of a single event, situation, or individual.

casual observation: Knowledge based on observations without any systematic process for observing or assessing the accuracy of observations.

code of ethics: A set of guidelines that the Canadian Sociological Association has established to foster ethical research and professionally responsible scholarship in sociology.

content analysis: A quantitative approach to textual research that selects an item of textual content that can be reliably and consistently observed and coded, and surveys the prevalence of that item in a sample of textual output.

contingency table: A statistical table that provides a frequency distribution of at least two variables.

control group: An experimental group that is not exposed to the independent variable.

correlation: When a change in one variable coincides with a change in another variable, but does not necessarily indicate causation.

dependent variable: Variable changed by another variable.

empirical evidence: Evidence corroborated by direct experience and/or observation.

ethnography: Observing a complete social setting and all that it entails.

experiment: The testing of a hypothesis under controlled conditions.

field research: Gathering data from a natural environment without doing a lab experiment or a survey.

Hawthorne effect: When study subjects behave in a certain manner due to their awareness of being observed by a researcher.

hypothesis: An educated guess with predicted outcomes about the relationship between two or more variables.

hypothetico-deductive methodologies: Methodologies based on deducing a prediction from a hypothesis and testing the validity of the hypothesis by whether it correctly predicts observations.

independent variable: Variable that causes change in a dependent variable.

inductive approach: Methodologies that derive a general statement from a series of empirical observations.

institutional ethnography: The study of the way everyday life is coordinated through institutional, textually mediated practices.

interpretive approach: A sociological research approach that seeks in-depth understanding of a topic or subject through observation or interaction.

intervening variable: An underlying variable that explains the correlation between two other variables.

interview: A one-on-one conversation between a researcher and a subject.

literature review: A scholarly research step that entails identifying and studying all existing studies on a topic to create a basis for new research.

nonreactive: Unobtrusive research that does not include direct contact with subjects and will not alter or influence people’s behaviours.

operational definitions: Specific explanations of abstract concepts that a researcher plans to study.

overgeneralization: Knowledge that draws general conclusions from limited observations.

participant observation: Immersion by a researcher in a group or social setting in order to make observations from an “insider” perspective.

population: A defined group serving as the subject of a study.

positivist approach: A research approach based on the natural science model of knowledge utilizing a hypothetico-deductive formulation of the research question and quantitative data.

primary data: Data collected directly from firsthand experience.

qualitative data: Information based on interpretations of meaning.

quantitative data: Information from research collected in numerical form that can be counted.

random sample: A study’s participants being randomly selected to serve as a representation of a larger population

reliability: a measure of a study’s consistency that considers how likely results are to be replicated if a study is reproduced

research design: a detailed, systematic method for conducting research and obtaining data.

sample: Small, manageable number of subjects that represent the population.

scientific method: A systematic research method that involves asking a question, researching existing sources, forming a hypothesis, designing and conducting a study, and drawing conclusions.

secondary data analysis: Using data collected by others but applying new interpretations.

selective observation: Knowledge based on observations that only confirm what the observer expects or wants to see.

surveys: Data collections from subjects who respond to a series of questions about behaviours and opinions, often in the form of a questionnaire.

textually mediated communication: Institutional forms of communication that rely on written documents, texts, and paperwork.

traditional knowledge: Knowledge based on received beliefs or the way things have always been done.

validity: The degree to which a sociological measure accurately reflects the topic of study.

value neutrality: A practice of remaining impartial, without bias or judgment, during the course of a study and in publishing results.

variable: A characteristic or measure of a social phenomenon that can take different values.

Chapter Quiz

sociological
quantitative
test subject
operational definition
the doughnuts
the duration of a week
the weight gained
children who eat unhealthy foods and spend too much time watching television and playing video games
a distressing trend that can lead to health issues including type 2 diabetes and heart disease
body weight at least 20 percent higher than a healthy weight for a child of that height
the tendency of children today to weigh more than children of earlier generations
photos and letters given to you by another person
books and articles written by other authors about their studies
information that you have gathered and included in your results
responses from participants whom you both surveyed and interviewed
content analysis
Participants do not know they are part of a study.
The researcher has no control over who is in the study.
It is larger than an ordinary sample.
Everyone has the same chance of being part of the study.
questionnaire
ethnography
secondary data analysis
It produces more reliable results than other methods because of its depth.
Its results are not generally applicable.
It relies solely on secondary data analysis.
All of the above.
a fast-food restaurant
a nonprofit health organization
a private hospital
a governmental agency like Health and Social Services

Short Answer

Write down the first three steps of the scientific method.

Think of a topic that would make a good sociological study—for example, ethnic diversity in a college, homecoming rituals, athletic scholarships, or teen driving.
Take that topic through the first steps of the process. For each step, write a few sentences or a paragraph:
Ask a question about the topic.
Do some research and write down the citations for articles or books you’d want to read about the topic.
Formulate a hypothesis.

2.2.Research Methods

What type of data do surveys gather? For what topics would surveys be the best research method? What drawbacks might you expect to encounter when using a survey?

Ask a research question and write a hypothesis.

Create a survey (six questions) for the topic. Provide a rationale for each question.
Define your population.
Create a plan for recruiting a random sample and administering the survey.

Imagine you are about to do field research in a specific place for a set time. Consider how you will have to prepare for the study. What personal, social, and physical sacrifices will you have to make? How will you manage your personal effects? What organizational equipment and systems will you need to collect the data?

Create a brief research design about a topic of interest. Write a letter to an organization requesting funding for your study. Describe your project in a convincing, realistic and objective way. Explain how the results of your study will contribute to sociology.

Why do you think the CSA created such a detailed set of ethical principles? For reference, see the Canadian Sociological Association’s Statement of Professional Ethics (2012) [PDF] at https://www.csa-cs.ca/files/www/csa/documents/codeofethics/2012Ethics.pdf.

What type of study could put participants at risk? Think of some examples of studies that might be harmful. Do you think that, in the name of sociology, some researchers might be tempted to cross boundaries that threaten human rights? Why?

Would you willingly participate in a sociological study that could put your health and safety at risk if the study also had the potential to help thousands of people? For example, would you participate in a study of a new drug that could cure diabetes or cancer, even if it meant great inconvenience, physical discomfort or possible permanent damage?

Further Research

Information on current real-world sociology experiments : https://revisesociology.com/2016/08/12/field-experiments-examples/

Brym, R., Roberts, L., Lie, J., & Rytina, S. (2013). Sociology: Your compass for a new world (4th Canadian ed.). Toronto, ON: Nelson.

Merton, R. (1973). The normative structure of science. In The sociology of science theoretical and empirical investigation (pp. 267-278). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press (Original work published 1942).

Merton, R. (1968). Social theory and social structure . New York, NY: Free Press (Original work published 1949).

Mikkelson, B. (2005). Grandma’s cooking secret. Snopes.com. Rumor has it. Retrieved from http://www.snopes.com/weddings/newlywed/secret.asp.

Pape, R. (2005). Dying to win: The strategic logic of suicide terrorism . New York, NY: Random House.

Patel, F. (2011). Rethinking radicalization. Retrieved from https://www.brennancenter.org/publication/rethinking-radicalization.

Cotter, A. (2014). Firearms and violent crime in Canada, 2012. Juristat (Statistics Canada catalogue No. 85-002-X). Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2014001/article/11925-eng.htm.

Forget, E. (2011). The town with no poverty: Using health administration data to revisit outcomes of a Canadian guaranteed annual income field experiment. Canadian Public Policy, 37(3), 282-305.

Franke, R., & Kaul, J. (1978). The Hawthorne experiments: First statistical interpretation. American Sociological Review, 43 (5), 632–643.

Geertz, C. (1977). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays (pp. 3-30). New York, NY: Basic Books.

Gilens, M. (1996). Race and poverty in America: Public misperceptions and the American news media. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 60(4), 515–541.

Grice, E. (2006). Cry of an enfant sauvage. The Telegraph . Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/3653890/Cry-of-an-enfant-sauvage.html.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Stategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

Haney, C., Banks, W. C., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology and Penology, 1 , 69–97.

Hartnagel, T. (2004). Correlates of criminal behaviour. In Criminology: A Canadian perspective (5th ed.). Toronto, ON: Nelson.

Ivsins, A. K. (2010). “Got a pipe?” The social dimensions and functions of crack pipe sharing among crack users in Victoria, BC [PDF] (Master’s thesis, Department of Sociology, University of Victoria). Retrieved from http://dspace.library.uvic.ca:8080/bitstream/handle/1828/3044/Full%20thesis%20Ivsins_CPS.2010_FINAL.pdf?sequence=1.

Lowrey, A. (2013, November 12). Switzerland’s proposal to pay people for being alive. The New York Times Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/magazine/switzerlands-proposal-to-pay-people-for-being-alive.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2.

Lynd, R. S., & Lynd, H. M. (1959). Middletown: A study in modern American culture . San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Javanovich.

Lynd, S. (2005). Making Middleton. Indiana Magazine of History, 101 (3), 226–238.

Marshall, B. D. L., Milloy, M. J., Wood, E., Montaner, J. S. G., & Kerr, T. (2011). Reduction in overdose mortality after the opening of North America’s first medically supervised safer injecting facility: A retrospective population-based study. Lancet, 377 (9775), 1429–1437.

Office of the Correctional Investigator, Government of Canada. (2013). Backgrounder: Aboriginal offenders—a critical situation . Retrieved from http://www.oci-bec.gc.ca/cnt/rpt/oth-aut/oth-aut20121022info-eng.aspx.

Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. London: Routledge.

Rothman, R. (2000, November 27). My fake job. The New Yorker , 120.

Sennett, R. (2008). The craftsman . Retrieved from http://www.richardsennett.com/site/SENN/Templates/General.aspx?pageid=40.

Smith, D. (1990). Textually mediated social organization. In Texts, facts and femininity: Exploring the relations of ruling (pp. 209–234). London: Routledge.

Smith, D. (2005). Institutional ethnography: A sociology for people. Toronto, ON: Altamira Press.

Sonnenfeld, J. A. (1985). Shedding light on the Hawthorne studies. Journal of Occupational Behavior 6 , 125.

Wood, E., Tyndall, M. W., Montaner, J. S., & Kerr, T. (2006). Summary of findings from the evaluation of a pilot medically supervised safer injecting facility. Canadian Medical Association Journal 175 (11), 1399–1404.

Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. (2010). Tri-council policy statement: Ethical conduct for research involving humans [PDF] . Retrieved from http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/pdf/eng/tcps2/TCPS_2_FINAL_Web.pdf.

Canadian Sociological Association. (2012). Statement of professional ethics [PDF] . Retrieved from http://www.csa-scs.ca/files/www/csa/documents/codeofethics/2012Ethics.pdf.

Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Weber, M. (1949). Methodology of the social sciences (H. Shils & E. Finch, Trans.). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

Image Attributions

Figure 2.4. Didn’t they abolish the mandatory census? Then what’s this? by Khosrow Ebrahimpour (https://www.flickr.com/photos/xosrow/5685345306/) used under CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/)

Figure 2.5. Punk Band by Patrick (https://www.flickr.com/photos/lordkhan/181561343/in/photostream/) used under CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/)

Figure 2.8. Hawthorne Works factory of the Western Electric Company, 1925. By Western Electric Company (Western Electric Company Photograph Album, 1925.) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hawthorne,_Illinois_Works_of_the_Western_Electric_Company,_1925.jpg

Figure 2.9. Dauphin Canadian Northern Railway Station by Bobak Ha’Eri (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2009-0520-TrainStation-Dauphin.jpg) used under CC BY 3.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en)

Figure 2.10. Crack Cocaine Smokers in Vancouver Alleyway (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Crack_Cocaine_Smokers_in_Vancouver_Alleyway.jpg) is in the public domain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain)

Figure 2.15. Muncie, Indiana High School: 1917 by Don O’Brien (https://www.flickr.com/photos/dok1/3694125269/) used under CC BY 2.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/)

Long Descriptions

Figure 2.3: The Scientific Method has a series of steps which can form a repeating cycle.

Ask a question.
Research existing sources
Design and conduct a study
Draw conclusions.
Report results.

[Return to Figure 2.3]

Figure 2.7: Different Research Methods: Textual analysis uses qualitative data and is highly reliable. Participant observation uses qualitative data and is a unique observation. Experiments and survey research use quantitative data and are highly reliable. Journalism uses quantitative data and is a unique observation. [Return to Figure 2.7]

Figure 2._: A sociology for women would offer a knowledge of the social organization and determinations of the properties and events of our directly experienced world.

Solutions to Section Quiz

1 c, | 2 c, | 3 d, | 4 c, | 5 b, | 6 c, | 7 d, | 8 c, | 9 a, | 10 a [Return to Quiz]

IMAGES

Systematic review protocols and registration
Before you begin
How Can the Library Help with Your Systematic Review?
Systematic Sampling
Infographics
Types of studies

COMMENTS

Systematic Research | Definition
Sep 20, 2024 · Systematic research in sociology is the structured process used to explore, analyze, and understand human social behavior and societal patterns. Unlike casual observation or anecdotal evidence, systematic research follows a well-defined methodology that allows sociologists to produce valid, consistent, and replicable findings.
What is Sociological Research? - Everyday Sociology Blog
Here’s what sociological research is: the systematic study of people, institutions, or social phenomena using measurement techniques such as surveys, interviews, focus groups, ethnography, or comprehensive analysis of texts. Sociological research may also include the analysis of data collected by government agencies or other sources.
Approaches to Sociological Research – Rothschild's ...
Using sociological methods and systematic research within the framework of the scientific method and a scholarly interpretive perspective, sociologists have discovered workplace patterns that have transformed industries, family patterns that have enlightened family members, and education patterns that have aided structural changes in classrooms.
Chapter 2. Sociological Research – Introduction to Sociology ...
They use research methods to design a study—perhaps a positivist, quantitative method for conducting research and obtaining data, or perhaps an ethnographic study utilizing an interpretive framework. Planning the research design is a key step in any sociological study. When entering a particular social environment, a researcher must be careful.
Approaches to Sociological Research - Saylor Academy
Sep 5, 2023 · As sociology made its way into American universities, scholars developed it into a science that relies on research to build a body of knowledge. Sociologists began collecting data (observations and documentation) and applying the scientific method or an interpretative framework to increase understanding of societies and social interactions.
The Scientific Method | Introduction to Sociology
Using sociological methods and systematic research within the framework of the scientific method and a scholarly interpretive perspective, sociologists have discovered workplace patterns that have transformed industries, family patterns that have led to legislative changes, and education patterns that have aided structural changes in classrooms.
2.1. Approaches to Sociological Research – Introduction to ...
The social scientific method is defined by its commitment to systematic observation of the social world, and it strives to be objective, critical, skeptical, and logical. It involves a series of established steps known as the research cycle. Figure 2.5 The research cycle passes through a series of steps. The conclusions and reporting typically ...
2.2: Approaches to Sociological Research - Social Sci LibreTexts
Feb 20, 2021 · Using sociological methods and systematic research within the framework of the scientific method and a scholarly interpretive perspective, sociologists have discovered workplace patterns that have transformed industries, family patterns that have enlightened family members, and education patterns that have aided structural changes in classrooms.
Approaches to Sociological Research – Introduction to ...
Using sociological methods and systematic research within the framework of the scientific method and a scholarly interpretive perspective, sociologists have discovered workplace patterns that have transformed industries, family patterns that have enlightened family members, and education patterns that have aided structural changes in classrooms.
Sociological Research – NSCC Introduction to Sociology
research design: a detailed, systematic method for conducting research and obtaining data. sample: Small, manageable number of subjects that represent the population. scientific method: A systematic research method that involves asking a question, researching existing sources, forming a hypothesis, designing and conducting a study, and drawing ...

Systematic Research | Definition

What is Systematic Research in Sociology?

Importance of Systematic Research in Sociology

Components of Systematic Research

1. Research Questions and Hypotheses

2. Literature Review

3. Research Design

4. Data Collection

5. Data Analysis

6. Interpretation of Results

7. Publication and Peer Review

Types of Systematic Research Methods in Sociology

1. Quantitative Research

2. Qualitative Research

3. Mixed-Methods Research

Challenges in Systematic Research

References and Further Reading

On This Site

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Approaches to Sociological Research

The Scientific Method

Ask a Question

Research Existing Sources: A Literature Review

Formulate a Hypothesis

Interpretive Framework

Section Quiz

Share This Book

Module 2: Sociological Research

Ask a Question

Research Existing Sources

Formulate a Hypothesis

Think It Over

Candela Citations

2.1. Approaches to Sociological Research

Science vs. Non-Science

The Scientific Method

Ask a Question

Research Existing Sources

Formulate a Hypothesis

Hypothesis Formation in Positivist Research

Hypothesis Formation in Qualitative Research

Making Connections: Classic Sociologists

Critical Research Strategies

Image Descriptions

Media Attributions

Share This Book

Margin Size

2.2: Approaches to Sociological Research

The Scientific Method

Ask a Question

Research Existing Sources

Formulate a Hypothesis

Interpretive Framework

Section Quiz

Short Answer

Further Research

7 Approaches to Sociological Research

The Scientific Method

Ask a Question

Research Existing Sources

Formulate a Hypothesis

Interpretive Framework

Section Quiz

Short Answer

Further Research

2 Sociological Research

Introduction to Sociological Research

Science vs. Non-Science

Ways of Knowing

The Scientific Method

Ask a Question

Research Existing Sources

Formulate a Hypothesis

Hypothesis Formation in Qualitative Research

2.2. Sociological Research Methods

1. Surveys and Interviews

2. Experiments

3. Field Research

Participant Observation

The Case Study