Methods of Social Research

Methods of fond ResearchMethods of ResearchThe correct excerption of enquiry regularitys to use in say tec stigmatise questions investigating a topic is mavin of the most crucial and vital elements to the advantageful conduct of a research exercise, (McNeill, 2005). While much attention brook be paid to theory within the methodology employed by the researcher it is also critical to consider the actual research tools which back up the theoretical decisions made and provide the raw data against which the hypotheses of the research lowlife betested. For much research the research tools will be a decisive gene in thesuccess or failure of the project. In mevery instances the choice of research tool is not assessed correctly with the result macrocosm data is generated which is of little or no use to the researcher, (Ruane, 2005). This occurs some(prenominal) due to the research method not suiting the particular require of the researcher and the improper administering of the research method itself.For many,choice of research tool is influenced however not by the objective needs of the research but by the ability and capabilities of the researcher in terms of time, bell or other connect factors such as familiarity with the processes and techniques inquired within specific sets of research tools. In this essay, we examine three research methods, show how they seat be constructed in a holistic expressive style toachieve triangulation in relation to a research question and illustrate ethical concerns and the manner in which they can be resolved in the successful deployment of these research methods, (Somekh and Lewin, 2005).We discuss these methods as a process and thus relate our discussion to the manner in which theycan be integrated and successfully deployed. In this sense then we examine how taper groups can provide insights into theoretical observations, how theseobservations can be look ford within semi-structured discourses with a selectedsamp le and how these observations from interviews can be developed intogeneralised into hypotheses tested against larger samples through the use of questionnaires. further it should be noted that a critical element in deciding on whichmethodologies should be utilize in a research project and the relative strengthsand asthenicnesses of using those methodologies will depend to a large extent onthe specific circumstances involved in conducting the research, (Bryman, 2004).By this it ismeant that weaknesses for example within the conduct of questionnaire may infact be a positive element for certain projects and negative for othersdepending on the contextual basis for the research. We explore this and other feature films of research methods subsequently.Focus GroupsFocus groups be atype of qualitative based research method based loosely on the generalprinciples which hire to interviews. thus far while interviews are generallyone-to-one situations involving a interviewer and interviewe e relationshipfocus groups employ a one to many dichotomy, (Holloway and Jefferson, 2000). Indeedfocus groups resemble semi or unstructured interviews to a greater extent particularly thanstructured interviews as one of the primary objectives of the researcher withinfocus group interviews is as a facilitator or moderator of group discussionbased on sets of general themes identified as being related to the research objectivesfor which the focus groups are being used to generate data, (Bloor et al, 2001).In particular focus groups are a very useful method to consider in theexploratory stages of research to help form ideas related to theoreticalobservations upon which later research can be based.While notoriginally a tool familiar to the social sciences focus group methodologieshave been long deployed and successful elements within affair andspecifically marketing research. From these origins however their utility for socialscientific research has come to be recognised within many sec tions for specificinstances for which they are useful, (Fern, 2001).Focus groups havea number of advantages and disadvantages when applied towards collecting datain answering sets of research questions. Let us discuss the advantages of usingthis methodology to begin with. Perhaps a fundamental strength of focus groups istheir interactive nature when designed and employ properly. In this mannerthe researcher can set general themes and topics and also ask specificquestions of the group related to the research topic by facilitatingintra-group discussion arising out of the topics mentioned by the moderator.Subsequentlyrecording and monitoring the discussions and interactions which occur withinthe group as the issues raised by the researcher are thrashed out can provide immenselyvaluable qualitative data and also critically have the possibility of offeringtheoretical insights or considerations missed by the researcher. In terms of aspecifically action research or ethnographic research o utlook focus groups areeven more element as the interactive nature of focus groups allows the groupand its participants to actively engage with the research and even when plannedfor adequately by the researcher allow them to shape the outcomes and processesof the research itself, .(Czarniawska, 2004)Some of the keydisadvantages we can associate with the use of focus groups are internal groupdynamics, participant and interviewer bias and transcription related problemsin codifying and making the data generated concordant to analysis. However the primarydrawback to this method is related to the interactive nature discussed above inthat the researcher has much less control over the type and nature of datagenerated during the course of the research. Again as mentioned planning andgood moderating skills are essential in the use of this method, (Litosseliti, 2003).Internal groupdynamics can play a vital role in determining the success or failure of using focusgroups as a means of answerin g research questions. The specific disadvantagesbeing spoke of here include a common feature of socials groups wherebyindividual members of that group through personality and group dynamics come tolead and dominate discussions, (Vaughn, Shay, Sinagub, 1996).An interviewer needs to be aware of such situations and develop tactics andstrategies which are comprehensive in terms of encouraging all of the individualswithin a group to participate as equally as possible in the discussion as it isbeing held.With larger groupsand to some extent even smaller groups as well due to possibilities of manypeople answering at the same time, especially in more animated discussions thenecessity of useful recording allowing for accurate transcription isessential. Bias can occur some(prenominal) in terms of the moderator and participants inthat moderator may lead the discussion too much in their desire to gatherrelevant data or otherwise colour the responses of participants who in turn maydesire to satisfy what they perceive to be the wishes of the moderator duringthe course of the discussion. Such considerations are not spaced to focusgroups and should be a common concern for any research exercise, (Morgan, 1997).Ethically similarsafeguards that are used in other types of research methods need to be employedwithin focus groups with some specific concerns. As with other types ofresearch informed consent needs to be adequately collected from theparticipants and in particular with focus groups if the topic is delicate orcovers material of a private nature it must be remember that other people willbe present and thus the moderator must take further burster in considering theethical implications of this feature, (Gregory, 2003).Semi-structured interviewsIf a researcherhas used a focus group in dress to identity common themes and concerns associatedwith his or her choice of questions a useful embrace on from focus groups can bethe use of more in depth and detailed semi structu red interviews. Theinterviewees could perhaps be drawn from a case sample from which thefocus group was composed. Semi structured interviews are a popular form of qualitativeresearch much relied upon within social scientific as well as otherdisciplinary investigations. The general purpose of such interviews is toexplore in details specific topics relevant to the interviewees knowledge andalso relevant to the research questions and objectives forming the focus of theresearch project, (Silveman, 2004).The normalstructure for such an interview is a one to one situation with an interviewereither having a list of some pre find out questions which are then used to branchfurther questions outwards during the conduct of the interview or alternativelythe interviewer is equipped with a set of general topics from which questionsare generated during the course of the interview. While not as interactive asfocus groups good semi-structured interviews are however in some way reliant onparticipant finish for the tenor and tone of the conduct of theinterview. This can be a principal strength of using this method in that it canbe a highly fruitful manner of exploring topics with which participants arefamiliarThe advantages ofsemi structured interviews can be surmised under a number of headings. Thefirst of these is the opportunity it gives to both interviewer and intervieweeto explore in depth and detail the substantive issues for research within agiven project mentioned above. Not only though do semi-structured interviewsafford the opportunity to discuss themes in detail but the semi-structurednature also gives the interviewer freedom to dynamically adapt and serve tothe flow of the discussion as it occurs. In this sense the interviewer canexplore themes not suggested by the structure of the interview which wasoriginally planned this is an important difference from structured interviewswhich lack this interviewer tractableness and freedom. A semi-structuredinterview can th us be said to allow for frank discussion, is a flexible and adaptivemeans as the interviewer and interviewee can respond and explore topics as theyoccur during the interview and as such can be a useful source of data for anyresearch project.Disadvantages withsemi-structured interviews again like those common to focus groups are thosewhich need to be taken account of with the use of any research method. Some ofthe main disadvantages we can associate with the use of semi structuredinterviews include participant bias, interviewer bias and the reliability ofany data generated during the course of the interview. Like focus groups theinterviewer needs to be aware of their responses and comments to theinterviewee so as not to colour or bias the responses given. Similarly aninterviewer needs to display a manner which does not indicate to theinterviewee preference supposed or otherwise for a particular set of responses.Reliability is a concern with qualitative research in general and aninte rviewer needs to be cognisant of the type and form of data generated duringthe conduct of the interview. Ethically again similar principles which appliedto focus groups apply to semi-structured interviews in that the participants insuch interviews give full informed consent to the interview taking place andthat confidentiality is ensured on the part of the interviewer in terms of anydata generated from the participant.QuestionnairesPerhaps the mostfamiliar of research methods both to researchers and the general publicquestionnaires as part of a survey strategy have long held a dominant role inthe conduct of research projects, (Frazer Meredith, 2000). Questionnaires come in a variety of forms from postal, totelephone administered, to interviewer administered and so on but they are all characterisedon a reliance on a predetermined set of questions with predefined answers whichmake the data amenable to later statistical analysis either by hand or throughthe use of the many statistical computer programs which now exist. Questionnairesexcel at the testing of scheme concretely formed and outlined as well at conclave opinion based data from large samples, (McQueen, 2002).Questionnaires area form of quantitative research and thus they involve many statistical elementsin terms of carrying out research using them. Some of the fundamental concernswith using questionnaires include the need for sampling, ensuring effectiveresponses and a high response rate. In turn these three elements are related tothe principal advantages and disadvantages of using this method, (Oppenhiem,1992). Or in other words the success or failure and the degree to these for aparticular questionnaire is determined to a large extent by the successfulsampling of a target group and having a well-designed questionnaire with clearinstructions for participants in order to ensure correct responses and a highnumber of responses from the sample.The primary advantageof using a questionnaire lies in the amou nt of data which can be collectingallowing for varying degrees and sophistication in statistical analyses whichcan be performed on the data, (Gillham, 2000). The primary disadvantage ofusing questionnaires is the opposite of this strength in statistical termsrelated to the rigid and inflexible way in which data must be collected in thatthe researcher is unable to eudaimonia from any interactivity in the research andeven when the questionnaire is interviewer administered there is a rigidity tothe questionnaire format which must be adhered to, (Houtkoop-Steenstra, 2000). Questionnaires in terms of the triangulation discussed above couldusefully be deployed in order to test hypothesis generated from theexplorations and conclusions reached during the use of focus groups.ConclusionAs can be gatheredfrom our discussion then all of the research methods we have discussed are possessedof both positive and negative aspects in the case of their deployment in orderto answer research questions set by the researcher. It is argued that perhapsthe best means in which to consider the use of any of these research methods isto see them as part of a cyclical process related to the triangulation ofcertain research objectives, (yen, 1990).It can be arguedthat by using a combinative method then in the approach of constructing aresearch methodology has the benefit of playing various research methodsagainst each other, by this it is meant that certain methods will be strongothers weak and that a combinational approach will allow for the strongestpossible methodology to emerge and thus have the best chance of generatinguseful data for the research questions at hand, (Gorard and Taylor, 2004).However asmentioned in some of the limitations we discussed previously with regards tothe methods each of these particular methods require certain skills of the researcherfor them to be truly effective methods. Thus projects which would seek to useall of these methods as well as possible others would need to draw upon skilledresearchers in terms of their ability to conduct quantitative and qualitativeresearch in equal measure. Similarly using a combinational method increases therange of ethical considerations for the researcher with the possibility ofthere being a complex network of ethical issues that need to be resolvedcontinuously across the range of research methods used in the project (deMarrais Lapan 2004).Similarly for acombinational method to be effective as well as the use of any of these methodssolely also a strong methodology in terms of a plan for the research and itsconduct will need to be in place in order to generate truly relevant data forthe research questions which the researcher wishes to investigate, (Andrews,2003). In conclusion the organisation of research methods in terms of their deploymentis the most critical determinant of the success of the researcher in gathering datawhich will be of use in their subsequent and later analysis based on theresear ch questions they have tasked themselves with answering. Organisation it canthus be argued is one of the principal determinants of whether the alternative ofany research methods will be successful in collecting relevant and valuabledata for that project, (Ragin, 1994).ReferencesAndrews, R.J.(2003) Research Questions, Continuum, LondonBloor, M. et al (2001) Focus Group inSocial Research, SAGE Publications, London.Bryman, A. (2004) SocialResearch Methods, Oxford University Press, OxfordCzarniawska, B.(2004) Narratives in Social Science Research, Sage, LondondeMarrais,K. Lapan, S.D. (2004) Foundations for Research Methods of Inquiry inEducation and the Social Science, Mahwah, N.J. L. Erlbaum Associates.Fern,E.E. (2001) Advanced Focus Group Research, SAGE, US.Frazer,L. Meredith, L. (2000) Questionnaire Design Administration aPractical Guide, John Wiley, London.Gillham,B. (2000) Developing a Questionnaire, Continuum, London.Gorard, S. andTaylor, C. (2004) Combining Methods in Educa tional and Social Research,Open University Press, MaidenheadHollway,W. Jefferson, T.(2000) Doing Qualitative Research Differently FreeAssociation, Narrative and Interview, SAGE, London.Houtkoop-Steenstra,H. (2000) Interaction and the Standardized Survey Interview the LivingQuestionnaire, Cambridge University Press, UK.Litosseliti,L. (2003) Using Focus Groups in Research, Continuum, London.Gregory, I. (2003)Ethics in Research, Continuum, LondonMcNeill, P. (2005)Research Methods 3rd Edition, Routledge, LondonMcQueen, R. (2002)Research Methods for Social Science, Prentice Hall, HarlowMorgan,D. L. (1997) Focus Groups as Qualitative Research 2nd edition,Sage Publications, US.Oppenheim,A. N. (1992) Questionnaire Design, Interviewing, and Attitude Measurement,Pinter Publishers, New York.yen,E. (1990) Comparative Methodology theory and Practice in InternationalSocial Research, Newbury Park, London.Ragin,C.C. (1994) Constructing Social Research the Unity and Diversity of Method,Thousand Oa ks, Pine Forge Press, US.Ruane, J.M. (2005)Essentials of Research Methods, Blackwell Publications, Malden MASSSilveman,D. (2004) Qualitative Research Theory, Method and Practice, SAGE,London.Somekh, B. andLewin, C. (2005) Research Methods in the Social Sciences, Sage,LondonVaughn,S., Shay, J. Sinagub, S.J. (1996) Focus Group Interview in Educationand Psychology, SAGE, US.