Examine the reasons why some sociologists choose not to use experiments when conducting research: Experiments can take the form of lab experiments (conducted in a controlled environment), field experiments (conducted in a natural setting where the independent variable and dependant variable are still observed), and the comparative method (a ‘thought experiment’, carried out in the researcher’s mind). There are many disadvantages to using laboratory experiments. Representativeness is very hard to achieve using this method as it is usually only done using small study samples. Another issue is ethical objections to conducting experiments on human beings. Obtaining informed consent from participants who are children or have learning difficulties may be difficult.
The lab experiment can also be said to be unrepresentative because it is mostly a study on small scale. This does not represent everyone in the group therefore it is impossible to generalise. Also the participants know they are being studied leading to the Hawthorne effect as they may change their behaviour. A practical problem of laboratory experiments is that it is impossible to control all the variables. This is because society is very complex making it hard to
Had the subjects been informed of the study’s purpose, the question of ethics would be less ambiguous. Some would argue that the special conditions needed for this study required the lack of informed consent. Males in the study would perhaps behave differently had they known what the goal of the study was, or that they were even partaking in a study. Although this is a valid point, debriefing and the request of consent after the experiment were attainable and would have put together a more ethical and less questionable study. Various approaches could have been used to compensate for the lack of personal privacy and informed consent but were not.
6. People are too different from the subjects of natural scientific research. So many of the advantages of the scientific method are not applicable to the traditional scientific approach - for example, replication and control. Conclusion Generally, the methods of traditional science have either been radically adapted by sociologists so that they can still be used - the comparative method, structured questionnaires, or totally rejected - interpretive Sociology. Scientific research has been important in generating debate in Sociology as to how
Sociologist tend not to use lab experiments because of many issues. One being a practical issue, it would not be easy to find an experiment and then to also find a control group to participate where as on the field, there would be no control of the experiment where you could in a lab however lab experiments also cost time and money which the sociologist might not have. One important one might be ethical issues, questions asked in lab is that is it right to experiment on people and it might bring in long-term effect on the people, like it did with Milgram. With lab experiment, reliability is a good point, because normally with lab experiment, you would be able to repeat where on the field you might not be able to as researchers don’t know what they are going to get when in a lab, you more or less know what the outcome should be. When in a lab, validity can be effect because then people know they are being watched, they try and act differently because they know they are being watched which can be same as Demand Characteriscs and where on the field, they might not let the people know which might be seen as a ethical issue.
They criticise naturalistic field experiments for reducing control over variables. Interpretivists reject lab experiments because it fails to achieve their main goal of validity. It’s an artificial situation producing unnatural behaviour, and they favour more naturalistic field experiments. Field experiments have two features with make them different from lab experiments, which are it takes place in the subject’s natural surroundings for example a school, and the people who are involved generally aren’t aware that they’re the subjects of an experiment. A practical strength of field
It is difficult for the researcher to observe everyone. Decisions have to be made about who to observe and when to observe them; significant evidence may be missed, leading to invalid interpretations of the group's behavior. Involvement with a group may be too superficial, given that one of th epuposes of participant observation is to experience the world from the viewpoint of the people being studied. If th eresearcher does not become sufficiently involved with the group then this type of data might not be collected. An example might be observation of a group involved in criminal activities.
For example, with postal questionnaires the researcher cannot be sure whether the respondent has actually received the questionnaire. In other words, it can be unsure whether a respondent or a family member or friend of the respondent has answered the questionnaire. This can affect the validity and reliability of the research as the views would have come from someone else who may not be part of the population that the researcher is studying. Sociologists may also choose not to use questionnaires when conducting research as they can be because the respondents may not always give full or truthful answers. The respondents could be embarrassed or shy and may provide socially desirable answers.
Society’s reasons are also often scientific. Loneliness is dangerous, is the generally agreed idea. Time spent alone is also time where she cannot control the patients, where there could think and maybe come to question her system. She clearly does not want that! McMurphy is delighted to ridicule her.
They are having difficulty in receiving research grants because agencies, such as the Department of Health and Human Services, are setting strict guidelines to follow. The investigations alone gives the universities a bad reputation and can lead to worse situations if the problems are not corrected immediately. It would call for immediate attention rather than letting the investigation run for a long period of