Chapter 5 Doing Sociology : Research Methods

I Introdudction

Sociology is considered a social science, distinguishing it from everyday understanding despite dealing with familiar subjects like social groups, institutions, norms, and relationships.

While everyone lives in society and has personal experience with its elements, the sociological approach differs in how knowledge is acquired.

The key difference lies in the use of method – the systematic procedures through which sociological knowledge is gathered.

Sociologists are distinct from lay persons not because of *what* they know about society, but *how* they acquire that knowledge.

Method is particularly important in sociology because it is deeply interested in the lived experience of people.

Sociologists want to understand social phenomena not just from an outsider's perspective (what is observable), but also from the insider's point of view (people's opinions, feelings, interpretations).

Examples include understanding what friendship means in different cultures, a religious person's interpretation of a ritual, or the dynamic of bargaining between a shopkeeper and customer.

The need to integrate both the outsider's and insider's perspectives makes rigorous methodology crucial in sociological research.

Ii Some Methodological Issues

While 'method' refers to specific procedures, methodology is the study of method, addressing general philosophical problems in knowledge-gathering across sciences.

A key methodological issue in sociology is the question of objectivity and subjectivity.

Objectivity And Subjectivity

In science, objectivity means being unbiased, neutral, and solely based on facts, avoiding personal feelings or attitudes. Social sciences face unique challenges in achieving traditional objectivity compared to natural sciences.

Unlike geologists studying rocks or botanists studying plants (who are not part of the world they study), social scientists study the human social world in which they live. This creates problems for objectivity:

• Researcher Bias: Sociologists are members of society with personal likes, dislikes, values, and prejudices shaped by their own social background. These can potentially influence their research, even unconsciously.
• Multiple Realities: The social world often has competing interpretations or "versions of truth" depending on individuals' perspectives (e.g., different ideas of a "good price" for a buyer vs. seller). Sociology is interested in these different interpretations rather than judging one as definitively "true."
• Multiple Paradigms: Sociology itself is "multi-paradigmatic," meaning different, sometimes conflicting, schools of thought and theoretical perspectives coexist within the discipline.

These challenges make achieving traditional objectivity difficult and lead many social scientists to view the old notion of a purely objective, disinterested social science as unattainable and potentially misleading.

Multiple Methods

Despite the challenges to traditional objectivity, sociology still strives for reliable and valid knowledge. Objectivity is seen as an ongoing process rather than a static end result.

Sociologists use specific techniques to mitigate bias:

• Self-Reflexivity (Reflexivity): Rigorously and continuously examining one's own ideas, feelings, and potential biases regarding the research subject. The sociologist tries to view their own work through the eyes of others, especially the subjects of research.
• Careful Documentation: Meticulously recording all procedures, data, and sources of evidence. This allows others to follow the research process and verify conclusions, and also helps the researcher check their own steps.
• Explicit Mention of Background: Researchers often disclose relevant aspects of their social background that might be potential sources of bias, alerting readers to consider this.

Given the presence of multiple "truths" and perspectives in sociology, there is no single method suitable for all research questions. Different methods have strengths and weaknesses and are better suited for different types of questions (e.g., a survey for population trends, interviews for in-depth perspectives).

Methods are often classified as:

• Quantitative vs. Qualitative: Quantitative methods use numerical data (countable, measurable); Qualitative methods explore non-measurable phenomena (attitudes, meanings).
• Observable Behaviour vs. Non-observable Meanings: Methods focusing on outward actions versus those exploring internal interpretations and values.
• Secondary vs. Primary Data: Using existing data (documents, archives) vs. generating new data (interviews, observation).
• Micro vs. Macro: Studying small-scale settings/interactions vs. studying large-scale social systems/phenomena.

The choice of method depends on the research question, researcher's preferences, and practical constraints (time, resources). A common approach is triangulation, using multiple methods to study the same problem from different angles, aiming for a more comprehensive understanding.

Iii Field Work In Social Anthropology

Participant observation, often referred to as fieldwork, is a distinctive method widely used in social anthropology and sociology. It involves the researcher immersing themselves for an extended period within the community or group being studied.

Unlike short visits or interviews, fieldwork requires prolonged interaction, typically months or over a year, with the researcher living among the people as "one of them."

The aim is to learn about the community's entire way of life from an insider's perspective, acquiring both explicit and implicit cultural knowledge and skills.

The model for the researcher is likened to that of a child, learning everything about the adoptive community holistically.

Fieldwork played a crucial role in establishing social anthropology as a rigorous science. Early anthropologists were often "armchair scholars" relying on second-hand accounts from travellers or colonial officials.

Towards the late 19th/early 20th century, systematic first-hand observation and fieldwork became the standard, seen as more scholarly and producing better results (e.g., Malinowski's work in the Trobriand Islands).

Since the 1920s, fieldwork has been a mandatory part of anthropological training.

Typical techniques used during anthropological fieldwork:

• Census: Creating a detailed list of community members with demographic information.
• Mapping: Documenting the physical layout of the settlement and significant sites.
• Genealogy: Constructing detailed family trees across generations to understand kinship systems and relationships within the community.
• Language Learning: Becoming fluent in the local language to interact directly.
• Observation and Detailed Note-Taking: Constantly observing daily life, rituals, work, family relations, etc., and recording detailed field notes, often supplemented by a personal diary.
• Working with Informants: Relying on one or more key individuals ("informants") who act as teachers and guides for understanding the culture.

These techniques are used to acquire an in-depth, holistic understanding of the community from the perspective of its members.

Iv Field Work In Sociology

Sociologists also use fieldwork techniques, but often in different contexts than social anthropologists. While sociologists may also live among a community, their fieldwork is not typically confined to remote tribal areas but can be done in various settings, including urban environments or specific organisations.

Sociological fieldwork may not always involve "living in" but requires spending significant time interacting with community members (e.g., William Foote Whyte's study of a street gang in an Italian-American slum).

Sociologists might also engage in fieldwork by becoming a participant in a specific work environment to understand it from the inside (e.g., Michael Burawoy working as a factory machinist).

In Indian sociology, village studies became a crucial area for applying fieldwork methods, particularly in the 1950s. Villages served as the equivalent of tribal communities for anthropologists, being relatively "bounded" and small enough for single-researcher study.

Village studies were also important for addressing questions about development in newly independent India and counteracting earlier colonial biases that focused excessively on the "primitive" aspects of Indian society.

They were relevant because most Indians lived in villages and many urban Indians retained links to rural areas. Famous Indian village studies (e.g., M.N. Srinivas's "The Remembered Village," S.C. Dube's "Indian Village") used fieldwork methods, sometimes within multidisciplinary projects aimed at both research and development.

Limitations Of Participant Observation

Participant observation provides rich, detailed, insider perspectives, allows for correction of initial biases over time, and enables studying changes in the subject of interest. However, it also has limitations:

• Limited Scope: Typically covers only a small community or setting, making it difficult to generalise findings to larger populations.
• Researcher Subjectivity: There's always a risk that the researcher's perspective or choices in recording/presenting data might influence the representation of the community, and it's hard to verify against other versions.
• One-Sided Relationship: Traditionally, the researcher asks questions and presents the findings, speaking *for* the people studied. This can be seen as unequal.

To address these limitations and make research more democratic, some scholars advocate for "dialogic" formats where research findings are shared with the studied community for their feedback and corrections, involving them more directly in the knowledge production process.

While this can make research more complex and potentially controversial, it can lead to more nuanced and valid sociological understanding by incorporating the voices of those being studied.

V Surveys

The survey is a well-known sociological method, widely used for academic and non-academic purposes (election prediction, market research, opinion polls).

A survey aims to provide a broad overview of a subject based on information from a carefully selected representative group of people (respondents).

Surveys are often conducted by large teams and involve asking questions orally (personal visits, telephone) or in writing (questionnaires via mail or email/internet).

Survey Method

The main advantage of the survey method is its ability to generalise results from a small sample to a large population, making it possible to study large populations efficiently in terms of time, effort, and cost.

This generalisability is achieved through scientific sample selection, relying on principles of sampling theory to ensure the sample is representative of the total population.

Sampling Principles

Selecting a representative sample typically involves two main principles:

1. Stratification: Identifying relevant sub-groups (strata) within the population (e.g., based on location, size, class, caste, gender, age, religion) and ensuring these strata are represented in the sample in proportion to their share in the population. This is a statistical concept of stratification.
2. Randomisation: Selecting the actual units (persons, households, villages) from within each stratum purely by chance. This is done using techniques like drawing lots, random number tables, or computer-generated random numbers. Being selected is like winning a lottery – based purely on chance. This avoids researcher bias in selection.

Survey sample designs can be complex, involving multiple stages and strata, but the goal remains to create a small, representative sample that can accurately reflect the characteristics of the larger population.

Small differences between the sample's characteristics and the population's characteristics are called sampling error, which is unavoidable but can be specified statistically. It's not due to researcher mistake but inherent in using a sample.

Survey Limitations

Despite its advantages, the survey method has weaknesses:

• Limited Depth: Provides a broad overview but often lacks the in-depth understanding possible with methods like participant observation, as time spent with each respondent is limited.
• Questionnaire Rigidity: Relies on tightly structured, inflexible questionnaires, which must be designed carefully to avoid errors introduced by investigators asking questions differently.
• Non-Sampling Errors: Errors not related to sampling but due to flaws in design, implementation, or interactions (e.g., misunderstandings, respondents giving socially desirable answers, sensitivity of questions).
• Dependence on Respondent Cooperation: Success relies heavily on the willingness and honesty of respondents, and the quality of interaction with investigators, especially with strangers.

Surveys are particularly useful for revealing aggregate statistics and social problems that are only visible at the population level (e.g., changes in sex ratio over time, which cannot be seen by looking at individual families).

Interview

An interview is essentially a structured conversation between the researcher and a respondent, designed to gather information.

It occupies a middle ground between the rigid structure of a survey questionnaire and the open-ended nature of participant observation.

The main advantage of the interview is its flexibility. The researcher can adjust questions, their wording, and the order of topics based on how the conversation is flowing. This allows for probing, exploring interesting points, and navigating sensitive subjects.

However, this flexibility can also be a disadvantage, making the interview less predictable and vulnerable to variations in the respondent's mood or the interviewer's skill and focus.

Interviews can vary in structure (loosely structured with topic checklists vs. highly structured with specific questions) and recording methods (audio/video recording, detailed note-taking during or after the interview). Recording can make respondents uncomfortable but captures more detail; relying on memory risks missing information.

Interviews are often used to supplement other methods, providing depth to survey findings or clarifying information gathered during participant observation by talking to key informants.

The effectiveness of an interview depends on the researcher's ability to establish rapport and mutual trust with the respondent.