Interpretivist sociologists would choose to not use lab experiments because they lack ecological validity as they are conducted within an environment that is artificial to the participant. This means that the results don’t reflect true-life behaviour because of both the environment they conducted the task in, and the nature of the task wasn’t true to real life and can also be said to not be generalisable to a population because of their small sample sizes in which lab experiments are conducted. Furthermore, participants might have been aware that they were being studied and so might not act normally, which is called the Hawthorne effect. Another reason why interpretivist sociologists don’t choose to use lab experiments is that they say human behaviour cannot be measured or explained in terms of cause and effect, and instead humans act in terms of feeling, choices and also individual motives. Society doesn’t lend itself to be studied in a laboratory and this is because it is so complex and cannot be artificially created.
WHY--not natural settings, impractical , want to look at meanings in the context of social settings. Field experiments- these are observations in a natural setting, people are usually not aware that they are being studied. If people know they are being studied it may cause the Hawthorne effect. Comparative method- this is where events that have happened are compared by the sociologist. t identifies two groups that are similar and comparisons are made- it seeks to discover cause and effect, avoids artificiality, can be used to study past events, no ethical problems .
A higher response rate can be obtained if follow-up questionnaires are sent, but this can add to the cost and time. However, some sociologists may choose to use questionnaires as there is no need to recruit and train interviewees thus saving costs. Another reason as to why some sociologists choose not to use questionnaires when conducting research is because of the fact that questionnaires are snapshots of social reality of the time when the respondents answer the questionnaires. This means that they fail to produce valid pictures as they do not capture how people’s attitudes can change over time. On the other hand, questionnaires tend to be used by sociologists as they provide less ethical issues than other research methods.
In section 2, I will discuss why if our actions are casually determined, then we don’t have free will. 1: Vargas View First of all, in order to understand the whole reading, Vargas defines what free will is. It is the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate, which means that it is the power of an individual to decide or have his or her opinion on something. In the beginning of the reading, according to Vargas, many people including scientists have difficulties understanding free will. In fact, it is really hard for them to explain why “our current notion of free will is an
WRTG 391 Advanced Research Writing Literature Review 21 November 2013 What are social sciences? They are a misconception of science. Psychology, for example, shows how one person can have different views based on which perspective they are asked to extract from. If Psychology were really a science, then it should not matter which perspective one uses. It should be clear and obvious from one scientist to the next.
Another difference with the two is that sociology uses survey and correlational research mostly but social psychology understands the importance of experimental research as well (Myers, 2010). However, clinical psychology relies heavily on experimental research just like social psychology in order to verify hypotheses. Than general psychology or known as personality psychology is different than social psychology because they focus on the individual instead of the impact that people have on each other. In order to sum everything up sociology would be on the left for social psychology because of the focus on social interactions, clinical psychology would be to the right of social psychology because of their use of experimental research, and personality psychology would be in the main of social psychology because both want an understanding of people as
One thing to understand about the scientific method is that it can’t be used to answer every question or solve every problem a person may be having, but it can be used as a way to solve many problems such as how to get a car started or how to stop the roof from leaking when it rains. The objective of this paper is to define what the scientific method is and to explain what steps are used to problem solving. As defined by the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language the scientific method is “The principles and empirical processes of discovery and demonstration considered characteristic of or necessary for scientific investigation, generally involving the observation of phenomena, the formulation of a hypothesis concerning the phenomena, experimentation to demonstrate the truth or falseness of the hypothesis, and a conclusion that validates or modifies the hypothesis.” The number of steps of the scientific method isn't standard. Some texts and instructors break up the scientific method into more or fewer steps. Some people start listing steps with the hypothesis, but since a hypothesis is based on observations (even if they aren't formal), the hypothesis usually is considered to be the second step.
Theories and laws do not have the same meaning. Many people often get confused and mix up both of these words. Theories and scientific laws are not the same because laws are based on repeated experimental observations that come out successfully every time, like objects in motion tend to stay in motion, and the statement can not be changed. While a theory is an explanatory way that increases our way of understanding things that we can not conduct experiments on, like the Big Bang theory or the theory of human evolution, and can be modified. There is a big difference between theories and laws.
· Is the information presented purely for public knowledge, avoiding being connected with a new product that is for sale? · Does the information come from a third party that is not profiting from the results of the study? · Is this information supported by any other studies that have been conducted by other companies or agencies? Example 1 (5 points) A team of researchers are working
Strength / Weakness - research that is in the form of naturally occurring phenomena (Roberts and Lamb) has good ecological validity but is not scientific or replicable as variables were not highly controlled and because it is not artificial. It would also be unethical to test eye witness testimony when a real sensitive subject is being discussed. Strength / Weakness - the results could be due to a number of factors such as: young people may be more used to memory tests or older adults have poorer health leading to memory impairment. Weakness - the research findings are inconclusive. Weakness - the factors given by researchers, such as the ones stated, are only assumptions with no scientific evidence.