However, they are opposed by Interpretivists who say they impose the researcher’s framework of ideas on the respondents and they claim this may influence the respondents’ view on the question being asked. A reason as to why some sociologists choose not to use questionnaires when conducting research is because of a chance of a low response rate. This may be a result of people who receive questionnaires being not bothered to complete and return it. This can be a problem as the people who do not respond having a different opinion to those who do respond, this does not provide accurate representativeness. A higher response rate can be obtained if follow-up questionnaires are sent, but this can add to the cost and time.
Able to collect data from a large number of respondents. | Respondents may not feel encouraged to provide accurate, honest answers. If respondents choose not to answer to a question and some do cooperate it may affect the data collected, the survey could then be bias. Some people may not answer the survey/questions as they feel it may present them in a way they may feel uncomfortable with. | Questionnaires | It is practical.
by trying to second guess what the researcher wants them to do and acting accordingly, which would not give very valid data. An obvious solution to this would be observing people without their knowledge, however this causes a lot of ethical issues; a general rule of sociological research is that a person must give their informed consent to be studied. Informed consent can be difficult to find with certain groups, for example children, as this would also require their parent or guardian to give consent, making obtaining data even more difficult and time consuming. Misleading people to
It could be argued it doesn't really help the patient; it just makes their behavior more acceptable to others. As well patient’s behavior may just be superficial. They might only produce desirable behavior knowing they’re going to receive a token. Showing that token economy isn't
This can be confusing and can also have a profound effect on the opinion of those who depend on statistical data for evidence. By using potentially deceiving data it is possible for the writer to convince the reader to agree with their opinion. This will ultimately depend on what the writer’s initial motives are, and these motives will consist of a ‘for’ and ‘against’ strategy but can also have a diplomatic approach. There is a variety of explanations to suggest why migrants want to inhabit the UK. These reasons may be because of family or friend connections, a better standard of living, education, better job prospects or maybe they are unfortunately trying to escape poverty, trauma or even political dispute.
Another example could be differences in personality. Maybe one of them is outgoing and the other one is calm and quiet. For some couples this might be an issue that they can’t change but they could work around. They could take turns doing different things that both like doing instead of focusing on what one person likes. Another reason of lack of communication in a relationship is dishonesty.
Research Methods Participant Observation: Overview Participant Observation Some research methods (such as questionnaires) stress the importance of the researcher not becoming "personally involved" with the respondent, in the sense of the researcher maintaining both a personal and a social distance between themselves and the people they are researching. Participant observation, however, is sometimes called a form of subjective sociology, not because the researcher aims to impose their beliefs on the respondent (this would simply produce invalid data), but because the aim is to understand the social world from the subject's point-of-view. This method involves the researcher "getting to know" the people they're studying by entering their world and participating - either openly or secretly - in that world. This means you put yourself "in the shoes" of the people you're studying in an attempt to experience events in the way they experience them. Social Distance The technical term for this social distance is objectivity - the ability to remain detached, aloof or personally separate from the people you are researching.
Internal inconsistencies in the study reveal that the validity of some of the findings is questionable. The paper concludes by suggesting the necessity for combining - or sequentially chaining - different methods in research of this kind. Introduction Qualitative studies in psychology can be fascinating and insightful but they may leave readers with a quantitative disposition worrying about the generality of their findings. Quantitative studies, on the other hand, whilst providing data from larger and more representative samples, seem more mechanical and arid to qualitative researchers. But both methods have advantages and disadvantages (see e.g.,
As James Rachels said, “Cultural Relativism might be true, but it might lead to some consequences, such as no longer being able to say that the customs of other societies are morally inferior to ours, or we could decide whether actions are right or wrong just by consulting the standards of our society and even the idea of moral progress would be called into doubt.” Cultural Relativism has some good advantages; it helps us to keep an open mind about other people´s beliefs. On the other hand, Cultural Relativism is not a good system that should be followed by each culture separately because there are some universal rules that should be followed, for instance no murder. Laws should be created under morality, and they might not be perfect, but they are the best rules that we as humans have. Even though societies still have arguments about their beliefs because it is impossible to have complete peace because of our differences. For example, For the Greeks it was believed that it was wrong to eat the dead, whereas the Callatians believed it was right to eat the dead, or the Eskimos saw nothing wrong with infanticide, whereas Americans believed infanticide is immoral.
This in return can create barriers, or a misconception of individual behaviour that does not fall into that category defined as “normal.” Therefore in conclusion this could lead to wrong assumptions or even an incorrect diagnosis being made based solely on what “society” constitutes as normal behaviour. However on the other hand, there does need to be a framework that will measure or monitor individual behaviour, in order to identify and treat any behaviour which may be deemed as abnormal. For this reason it would assist those individuals that may be a risk to themselves, or even the wider community. Statistical Infrequent: Is defined as any behaviour and psychological functioning that is statistically infrequent, this is then viewed as abnormal. Behaviour such as removing personal clothing in a public place isn’t something most people would normally do.