Samenvatting

Summary - Introduction to Research Methodology

0 keer verkocht

Instelling
Tilburg University (UVT)

Boek
Social Research

Summary of the book for the course Introduction to Research Methodology in the first year of Global Management of Social Issues. With this summary, I got an 7 on the exam.

[Meer zien]

Voorbeeld 4 van de 44 pagina's

Bekijk voorbeeld

Heel boek samengevat? Ja
Geupload op 9 juli 2024
Aantal pagina's 44
Geschreven in 2023/2024
Type Samenvatting

Volgen

roosbreedveld Lid sinds 1 jaar 5 documenten verkocht

€5,99

In winkelwagen

Opslaan

100% tevredenheidsgarantie
Direct beschikbaar na je betaling
Lees online óf als PDF
Geen vaste maandelijkse kosten

Chapter 1 – Introduction

Social research consists of the process of formulating and seeking answers to questions about the
social world. To answer these, scientists have devised basic guidelines, principles and techniques.

You can be a consumer of research in several positions. However, much research evidence is itself in
error and misinterpreted. Not always causal relationship between 2 variables, sometimes merely
association. We cannot automatically assume that conclusions are credible due to biased sample. It’s
important to make judgments about the quality of the data and the limits of the conclusions that
might be drawn.

You can also be a gatherer and producer of research evidence. We manufacture evidence every time
we seek out others’ opinions, attempt to estimate an opinions, or draw conclusions based on our
own observations. ‘

Whether a topic or research question is a legitimate object of social research is based on 2 criteria:
the topic must concern social phenomena and as social research is scientific, it must be possible to
address the topic or answer the question by making appropriate observations.

4 principal research strategies for understanding the social world: experiments, surveys, field
research, and the use of available data. Each discipline tends to favour one particular strategy. Each
strategy has strengths and weaknesses, which make a researcher favour one or another in different
situations. It is best to study a given problem with a variety of methods so that the weaknesses of one
strategy may be cancelled out by the strengths of another.

Research questions derive from various sources: a researcher’s personal values and goals, intuition,
observation of dramatic events, and the current state of scientific knowledge. The process of
definition is one of the most important issues, which helps a literature review helps you with.
Conceptual clarification is crucial, through operationalization.

Experiments frequently offer the best approach for investigating the causes of phenomena.
Conducting multiple tests of hypotheses is common and enhances the generalizability of the findings.

Survey research involves the administration of questionnaires or interviews to relatively large groups
of people. It describes the frequency of certain characteristics among groups or populations.

Field research is a matter of immersing oneself in a naturally occurring set of events to gain firsthand
knowledge of the situation. The researchers seeks to understand the world as his or her subjects see
it and to collect information without unduly influencing its shape and content.

The use of available data makes use of data that have been generated for purposed other than those
for which a researcher is using them. Prominent among such data sources are written records, but it
also includes nonverbal physical evidence. A problem is simply finding appropriate available data. It is
also a problem how to codify the data in a systematic fashion and what to do when the information is
insufficient or not comparable from one case to another. Questions about the authenticity and
accuracy of available data often arise.

Chapter 2 – The Nature of Science

Epistemology is about what constitutes knowledge in the social sciences and how it is created.

The aim of science is to produce knowledge, to understand and explain some aspect of the world
around us. It is a matter of how and why knowledge is accepted by the scientific community. 2 sets of
criteria determine acceptance or rejection.

,  The product of science
 The methods and logic of inquiry that comprise the process through which scientific
knowledge is created, tested and refined

Industries manufacture material things, whereas science processes ideas.

Scientific disciplines differ in terms of their objects of study and therefore have developed its own
unique concepts, laws, and theories. All scientific knowledge shares certain defining characteristics.

Whether a question can be approached scientifically depends on whether it is possible to make
observations that can answer the question. Scientists can only assume that the world exists, that
empirically verifiable knowledge is possible, that we can know the world through our senses, and that
there is an order to the world. Based on these assumptions, scientists try to describe and explain the
order that they assume to exist.

Scientific questions must deal with how and why regular patterns of events occur, not with dealing
with what is desirable, because they can’t be answered with observations. The answers to scientific
questions must take a form that meets the requirements of description, explanation, prediction, and
understanding.

We must describe objects and events before we can understand and explain the relationship among
them. Therefore, each discipline develops its own special language or set of concepts. Concepts are
abstractions communicated by words or other signs that refer to common properties among
phenomena. Everyday language is vague and full of multiple meanings, which makes it necessary for
scientists to restrict or redefine the meaning of common words or to invent new terms (constructs).
There must be agreed-on ways of tying concepts to tangible objects and events. Concepts are judged
by their usefulness.

Explanations are attempts to satisfy curiosity. Curiosity may be satisfied in several ways: by labelling,
by defining or giving examples, by evoking empathy, by appealing authority, or by citing a general
empirical rule. Only citing by a general empirical rule can explain the past and present and can predict
the future.

The ‘empirical rules’ with which scientific explanations are built consist of abstract statements, or
propositions, that relate changes in one general class of events to changes in another class of events
under certain conditions.

Level of abstractness is important because the ideal in science is to develop the most general
understanding. Propositions may be called empirical generalizations when they are derived from
observations or hypotheses when they have been proposed but not tested. To the extent that the
propositions have been repeatedly verified and are widely accepted, they may become laws. The
terms contained within the concepts that describe the phenomena to be explained. Each proposition
explains and predicts by identifying the conditions under which particular events occur.

To explain empirical generalizations or laws there are theories. A scientific theory consists of a set of
interconnected propositions that have the same form as laws but are more general or abstract. They
may be stated in various ways. It is most critical not how the theory is presented, but that it is
logically consistent and empirically testable.

Scientific research often is directed toward testing such alternative theories, but ultimately one
theory is judged superior to other competing theories to the extent that it involves the fewest

,number of statements and assumptions, explains the broadest range of phenomena, and makes the
most accurate predictions.

Scientific laws and theories must provide a sense of understanding. This is gained by describing the
causal process that connects events. A law or hypothesis is thought to be scientifically meaningful
when it describes a causal relationship, a relationship in which a change in one event forces,
produces, or brings about a change in another.

Post hoc generalizations give us a false sense of understanding.

It is possible to predict an event on the basis of empirical generalizations without understanding the
connection between generalization and prediction. But have limited utility. Once we have an
adequate theory that describes the causal process connecting events, we get not only a better sense
of understanding but also more accurate and useful predictions.

Tentative nature of scientific knowledge, scientists never achieve complete understanding. Because
every answer leads to new questions. Every new fact, law, or theory presents new problems so no
matter the present state of scientific knowledge, there is always more to know. Also tentative
because science bases the truth of its statements on observable evidence, which is always open to
change.

Regularity does not guarantee certainty and therefore scientific propositions (based on regularity)
cannot be proven. Knowledge is understood to be the best understanding that we have been able to
produce thus far.

In science change is built into the process. Knowledge is never finished, but constantly remodelled to
fit the facts. Science has cyclical nature: theories generate predictions or hypotheses, hypotheses are
checked against data, the data produces generalizations, and the generalizations support, contradict,
or suggest modifications in the theory. Science is a process involving the continuous interaction of
theory and research.

What characterizes scientific inquiry is a commonly understood logic of justification and a set of
standards that all scientists follow in generating and assessing the evidence on which their theories
are based.

Scientists are expected to follow the principles of logical reasoning. Logic provides the criteria for
evaluating the correctness of reasoning. When people reason, they make inferences, drawing
conclusions based on information or evidence. Inductive and deductive reasoning differ in terms of
the strength or certainty with which the evidence supports the conclusion. In deductive reasoning,
the conclusion is absolutely certain if the evidence is true. In inductive reasoning, the conclusion is
uncertain even if the evidence is true because its content goes beyond the evidence. Induction moves
from specific instances to general principles, whereas deduction moves from the general to the
specific.

Each type of reasoning is evaluated according to different rules and criteria. Inductive inferences are
analysed in term of the degree to which the evidence supports the conclusion. Deductive inferences
are either valid or invalid.

Scientific inquiry is based on empiricism, a way of knowing or understanding the world that relies
directly or indirectly on what we experience through our senses. Often takes the form of indirect
observation.

, Objectivity (free from emotion, conjecture, or personal bias) is rarely or not possible. Our observation
of the world inevitably distorted to some extent by factors not under our conscious control.

Intersubjective testability, it must be possible for two or more independent observers working under
the same conditions to agree that they are observing the same thing or event. Therefore detailed
description of research by scientists. The determination of objectivity and the acceptance of scientific
knowledge ultimately depend on the judgment of the scientific community.

The use of control procedures that rule out biases is the principle way in which scientific inquiry
differs from causal observation. Always control and treatment group.

The idea of control is to employ procedures that effectively rule out all explanations except the one in
which the researcher is interested. Control procedures in social research include using several
independent observers, withholding information from subjects, and employing systematic
observational methods that eliminate errors.

Theoretical knowledge is not well developed in the social sciences, which leads to the fact that social
scientific theories tend to be stated less formally.

Theories do not have to make precisely accurate predictions to be judged as scientifically useful, as
there is always some degree of error. How much error depends on the level of development of both
theory and research technology. Theories are also evaluated with respect to their explanatory scope
and logical coherence.

The course of inquiry tens to be irregular and circuitous. Whereas the image of scientists projected by
the ideal view that of detached and dispassionate observers of the world, there is a pervasive
subjective element in science as scientists are active interpreters.

Qualitative research reports observations in the form of text and visual images, while quantitative
research transforms observations into numerical values. These data are generated by different
methods and require different analytic techniques

Qualitative research presumes that human action has distinctive qualities that make the social and
natural sciences fundamentally different. Also the assumption that what we observe or know about
the world is a social construction, social constructionism. Aim of qualitative research is to describe
each event or entity as a singular culture- and time-bound reality.

Nomothetic explanations identify common causes among classes of events. Idiographic explanations
describe the unique set of conditions that account for the actions of a single person or set of actors at
a particular time and place.

Summary

To know and understand the world around us, science addresses questions that can be answered by
identifying the conditions under which observable events take place. Answering scientific questions
requires concepts that describe the phenomena of interest and general laws and theories that
identify patterned relationships. Ideally, events to be explained can be logically deduced from laws
and theories so that it is possible both to explain the past and present and to predict the future.
Scientific theories satisfy our curiosity and render a sense of understanding by positing causal
processes that connect events. Because observed patterns are always subject to change or
reinterpretation, there are no ultimate explanations in science, and it follows that scientific theories
should not be judged as true or false, only useful.

Dit zijn jouw voordelen als je samenvattingen koopt bij Stuvia:

Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews

Studenten hebben al meer dan 850.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet jij zeker dat je de beste keuze maakt!

In een paar klikken geregeld

Geen gedoe — betaal gewoon eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of je Stuvia-tegoed en je bent klaar. Geen abonnement nodig.

Direct to-the-point

Studenten maken samenvattingen voor studenten. Dat betekent: actuele inhoud waar jij écht wat aan hebt. Geen overbodige details!

Veelgestelde vragen

Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?

Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.

Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?

Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.