Compare And Contrast Bigelow And La Gaipa

1580 Words7 Pages
Compare and contrast the approach to studying children’s friendships taken in the Bigelow and LA Gaipa (1975) study with that taken by William Corsaro. [pic] In early infancy, children’s most important relationships are those with their primary guardians and other family members. Initially, relationships with other children are far less important than those with family members. However the importance of children’s peer relationships develop throughout childhood and by the teenage years most young people tend to use friends as their main bases of social and emotional support. Childhood friendships serve as a training ground for future relationships in which social skills, such as persuasion and resolving conflict, can be developed.…show more content…
In an attempt to explore a fairly under researched subject, researchers Bigelow and La Gaipa looked at the differences in children’s understanding of friendship at various stages of development. They created a unique means of investigating the gradual changes in the understanding of friendship as children grow older. In doing so they helped to shed new light on the important role that friends play in children’s lives. In addition another researcher was also interested in this subject: William Corsaro. However, Corsaro was interested in how children talk to each other and believed that research on children’s friendships should focus on children’s individual understanding of the word ‘friend’. Who and what was researched? The similarities of Bigelow and La Gaipa and that of Corsaro is that their focus was on children’s friendship, however there research methods were very different. In order to investigate children understanding of friendship, Bigelow and La Gaipa asked children to think about their best friends of the same sex and write an essay about what they expected of their best friend and how this might be different from their expectations of other friends and acquaintances. They assembled a large sample of 480 essays written by children aged between 6 and 14 years, mix of 30 girls and 30 boys from 8 different schools that came from upper working class and lower middle class homes…show more content…
He made detailed notes of children’s activities and their interactions with others and also took video evidence. There are various arguments in favour and against this method considering the informative and detailed data that can be produced. On one hand it could be viewed as contrived and uncomfortable for Corsaro to blend in within these friendship groups, considering adults are physically larger than children and are perceived by children as being in charge and the adult may bring a new dimension to the group. To avoid this, Corsaro recommends an approach such as observing the children from a distance first and waiting to be invited into the children’s social world. On the other hand, rather than asking the child to express their thoughts and feelings on the topic of friendship in the more formal written approach employed by Bigelow and La Gaipa, this arguably less formal approach helps Corsaro observe a first-hand account of the child’s experiences. The different methods for studying friendships outlined above mirror different levels of analysis. Bigelow and la Gaipa first took qualitative data and turned it into quantitative data helping them take large samples over a short time, whereas the qualitative data, as seen in Corsaro work let him take large amounts of data from small samples-often capturing a longer period of time. What did they
Open Document