Social Sciences Research: Methods and Paradigms
Item 1: Methods in Social Science Research
In the epistemological realm of the Social Sciences, there is no single rigorous, detailed, universal, and manual-like scientific method. The purpose of investigating the Social Sciences is complex, changing, and subjective, encompassing both society and the individual. There are multiple and different scientific methods to seek an approach to social reality to be measured. The methods of sociology are not interchangeable and random but are appropriate in each case to the appearance of the social object you want to know. Several methods exist to approach the study of social reality.
Historical Method
The historical method analyzes social phenomena over time. It looks for causal factors, all causes surrounding a phenomenon, and the relationships between them and the historical fact. It seeks a generalization, an abstraction of the facts, unlike history as a mere collection of facts. (We do sociology in terms of what happened).
Comparative Method
The comparative method is similar to the experimental method, but the sociologist cannot directly control or manipulate variables. It involves the systematic comparison of different types of phenomena and spatial environments to get a richer understanding of a social phenomenon. It is interested in developing and testing theories applicable beyond the borders of a single company and is interested in both differences and similarities (Ethnocentrism – Naturalism).
Rational-Critical Method
The rational-critical method advocates for the consideration of values and social goals as a study of the Social Sciences. (Social value: Object socially accepted).
Two Historical Trends
- Rationalism: Uses deduction (from theory to data)
- Empiricism: Uses induction (from data to theory)
Hypothetical-Deductive Method
The hypothetical-deductive method shows whether a theory is true. It gives validity. Scientific research is considered when possible, using this method, to present the facts in utterances. Through theories of hypothesis tests performed and deduce the consequences, the degree of consolidation allows us to reject or accept them (the statements).
Wallace: We start with a theory, by inference we draw the assumptions, these assumptions have to be operationalized (achieving measurable), measured through observation and data collection. After analyzing the data, we have to see if we can generalize, that is, if the data corroborate the theory-based induction.
Theory: Propositions logically connected to those that can get explanations of phenomena (Cea D’Ancona, p.71)
Hypothesis: Are taken through the theories. Predictions deduced from the theories. Affirm them or not the relationship between two variables in a given period.
Empirical generalization: By induction, we get the theories that we started with.
Methodological Pluralism
Basically, there is a dichotomy between:
- Humanistic qualitative methodology: The emphasis is on language and on the micro aspects of social life (face to face).
- Quantitative scientific perspective: The emphasis is on explanation, in the empirical and objective measurement of social phenomena.
A paradigm represents a fundamental model, a basic image of the object of a science. It defines what must be considered, questions that need answering, how they should ask, and what rules need to continue to interpret the responses. Differences:
Quantitative Paradigm
- Epistemological Base: Positivism, functionalism.
- Emphasis: Objective measurement (of social facts, opinions, and individual attitudes), demonstration of causality, and generalization of research results.
- Collection of information: Structured and systematic.
- Analysis: Statistical, to quantify the social, causal relationships, and their intensity.
- Scope of the results: Nomothetic: Quantitative general search behavior.
Qualitative Paradigm
- Base epistemological historicism, phenomenology, symbolic interactionism.
- Emphasis: The individual actor: description and interpretive understanding of human behavior, in their own frame of reference of the individual or social group that acts.
- Collection of information: Flexible: an interactive process marked by the continuous development of research.
- Analysis: Interpretational, socio-linguistic, and semiotic discourses, actions, and deep structures.
- Achieving results: Ideographic: qualitative research of meanings of human action.
Triangulation
Triangulation has roots in topography. In Social Sciences, it involves using different methodologies in the analysis of the same social reality. Four types of triangulation:
Data triangulation: Using multiple sources of information on the same object of knowledge.
Triangulation of researchers: Multidisciplinary Team.
Theoretical triangulation: Consider all scenarios that can be drawn from the same research problem.
Methodological Triangulation: What can be Intramethod or Between methods.
The multi-method triangulation would be the combination of the four types. To be effective it should be: What methods and how to use depends on the information required to clarify the problem. Many studies have mixed objectives; you can generate a theory with one and check another. Some variables may be accessible to a method and not another. We need to design data collection methods that allow the interaction between methods. All methods should measure the same theoretical concepts if we want the results (obtained using different procedures) to be comparable. For the application of a method does not affect the results achieved by another method should be followed: o collecting data in stages, or divide the sample into subsamples or draw several samples and each apply a different technique for collecting information. It is not intended to subordinate a methodology to another but it is combined in the most efficient.
Advantages of triangulation
- Covering more dimensions of social reality, we reach a more profound and diversified understanding.
- The study’s results take on a greater degree of validity (if they reach the same findings with different methods).
- The theory is further strengthened if they are confirmed. If not, it provides a greater basis for modification.
- Facilitates the comparability of data by different methods.
- Demonstrates that both methodologies (quantitative and qualitative) can and should be used complementarily.
Drawbacks of triangulation
- Can lead to additional cost and time compared to implementing a single method.
- Difficulty finding a common observation unit to which to apply different methods.
- Difficulty finding a team of researchers well-trained in both methods (quantitative and qualitative).
- More difficult to repeat the study.
- Using a variety of information techniques can affect subsequent observations made by other techniques.
- Comparability problems because obtaining different response rates (in each of the data collection techniques used), or by having different sources of error in each method, and not detected.
- Ability to prioritize, without justification, one method over another.
- Existence of epistemological incompatibility between some methods.