Social. Research. Methods. Alan Bryman. Fourth edition. 1 . 27 Mixed methods research: combining quantitative and qualitative research maroc-evasion.info Images/Framework_for_Research_Ethics_tcmpdf (accessed 5 July ) . Social Research Methods This page intentionally left blank Social Research Methods Alan Bryman Fourth edition 1 3 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP. This introduction to research methods provides students and researchers with unrivalled coverage of both quantitative and qualitative methods.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Indonesian|
|Genre:||Academic & Education|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration needed]|
Social research methods - Bryman, Alan, Book | Suggested for .. http:// maroc-evasion.info Seminar Task To. Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4 th edition. © Oxford University Press, All rights reserved. Glossary. Abduction. A form of reasoning with strong ties. Alan Bryman-Social Research Methods, 3rd maroc-evasion.info13 - Download as PDF File .pdf) or view presentation slides online. Alan Bryman- Social.
Background and Purpose: This exploratory study focused on the assessment of stroke patients for musculoskeletal rehabilitation in the United Kingdom National Health Service. It was the first phase of research on developing telerehabilitation for the assessment of patients who have had a stroke.
It is specified that each rehabilitation sector should select its own methodologies. This study had 2 parts, non-participant observation with 2 therapists and 3 patients, and 10 semi-structured interviews with 5 physiotherapists and 5 occupational therapists to identify current practice, problem areas, and what types of improvements could be made. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using thematic coding. Seven emergent themes were identified portraying how outcome measures are currently not being used in a standardized way within National Health Servicehospitals.
This means that the feedback provided to patients, therapists and healthcare commissioners is limited.
Therapists are currently performing more informal assessments each time a patient begins therapy and concerns are shown with these methods of assessment, including subjectivity, standardization issues and time. Interviewed therapists were clear that they believed that change is required within this field. This study raises concerns about the methodologies used for the assessment of stroke patients for rehabilitative purposes in the United Kingdom National Health Service.
Kuhn encourages people who have no idea why a stone falls to the ground to talk with assurance about scientific method. Feyerabend, , p. It implied that methodology is not an arid discipline replete solely with technical issues such as when to use a postal questionnaire, the structure of a Solomon FourGroup Design, or recognizing the dire effects of failure to control for suppressor variables.
It could entertain the consideration of bigger issues. For other writers, quantitative and qualitative research are simply denotations of different ways of conducting social investigations and which may be conceived of as being appropriate to different kinds of research question and even as capable of being integrated. When this second view is taken, they are more or less simply different approaches to data collection, so that preferences for one or the other or some hybrid approach are based on technical issues.
In this view, the prime consideration is that of dovetailing the appropriate technique to a particular research question. Many writers, as the later chapters will reveal, vacillate between these two levels of analysis. To a very large extent, these two research traditions be they indicative of epistemological or technical positions can be thought of as divergent genres, especially in regard to their modes of presenting research findings and programmatic statements.
Of course, they are more than merely literary devices; but it is difficult not to be struck by the different styles of exposition that practitioners of the two traditions espouse.
The employment of a scientistic rhetoric—experiment, variables, control, etc. In short, such linguistic devices act as signals which forewarn the reader about the material to come. By contrast, the self-conscious endorsement by many qualitative researchers of styles of presentation and literary devices which entail a rejection of a scientific rhetoric can be seen as a countervailing genre.
Through their rejection of a scientific idiom and their recourse to the style of qualitative research they signal their adoption of a different framework and expect their work to be read and judged within the confines of that framework. A Comparison of Two Studies Many of the points adumbrated thus far can be usefully illustrated by reference to two studies which exemplify the contrasting orientations which lie behind the quantitative and qualitative traditions in social research.
Of course, the choice of studies is bound to be arbitrary, in that many other examples of reported pieces of research could have been selected as alternatives. He used a social survey in order to achieve his aims. Great care was taken in the selection of the sample to ensure that it adequately represented the range of schools in the area, as well as the gender and race distribution of the children in the population. The bulk of the data was collected by a self-administered questionnaire which was completed by the students.
In addition to questions relating to social background, the questionnaire comprised a great many questions designed to tap the extent to which children were committed or attached to the school, to the family, and to conventional lines of action, in order to test the social control theory which had been formulated.
There is a clear concern to be able to demonstrate that the sample is representative of a wider population of school children, though the question of the representativeness of the region in which the research is located is given scant attention. But Hirschi is rarely content to leave his data analysis simply at the level of estimates of co-variation or correlation among the variables concerned.
Much of the time he is concerned to extricate the causal relationships among his variables. These causal paths are winkled out by multivariate analysis which allows the analyst to sort out the direct and indirect effects by controlling for intervening variables and the like.
In the end, Hirschi finds that none of the three theories of delinquency emerges totally unscathed from the empirical interrogation to which they were submitted. For example, the control theory seems to neglect the role of delinquent friends which his data suggest has considerable importance. Hindelgang, They soon made friends with a close neighbour Dave, a pseudonym , who, it transpired, was a drug dealer.
Although I did not deal, myself, I participated in many of their activities, partying with them, attending social gatherings, traveling with them, and watching them plan and execute their business activities… In addition to observing and conversing casually with these dealers and smugglers, I conducted in-depth, taped interviews, and crosschecked my observations and their accounts against further sources of data whenever possible. Adler, , pp. Rather, she suggests that they are motivated by a quest for the fun and pleasure which are the products of involvement in the world of upperlevel drug dealing.
Adler portrays the drug dealers she studied as hedonistic: the copious drugs and their associated pleasures, the ability to afford vast numbers of material possessions, the availability of many sexual partners, considerable freedom and status, and so on, constitute the sources of their motivation. The general orientation of the dealers to the present and their ability to fulfil numerous desires for both experiences and possessions more or less immediately deters many from leaving the world of drug dealing while attracting many newcomers to it.
When you have too much money you always have to have something to spend it on. Here then are two highly contrasting studies. They are both about deviance and purely by chance both were carried out in California and reflect sociological concerns.
But in style and approach to social research they are very different. Hirschi seeks to test the validity of theories; Adler seems to let her subjects form her focal concerns while retaining an awareness of the literature on deviance and drug use. The list of contrasts could go further, but these are some of the chief elements. But what is the status of these two studies, and more particularly of the comparison between them, in terms of the question of whether quantitative and qualitative research reflect different philosophical positions?
Alternatively, we may prefer to see these two researchers as being concerned with different facets of deviant activity—Hirschi with causes, Adler with life-style —and as having tailored their methods of data collection and approaches to data analysis accordingly.
According to the second view, the choice between quantitative and qualitative research is a technical decision. This contrast between epistemological and technical versions of the debate about quantitative and qualitative research will be a prominent theme in later chapters. Plan of the Book For the undergraduate and often the postgraduate too the terms of the debate about quantitative and qualitative research are often difficult to absorb.
In Chapters 2 and 3, I map out the main characteristics of quantitative and qualitative research respectively, as well as what are taken to be their philosophical underpinnings. I will not go into excessive detail about the philosophical issues, but will try to show how they are supposed to have implications for research practice within each of the two traditions. In Chapter 4, I explore some of the problems in implementing the qualitative approach.
This chapter allows the distinctiveness of the qualitative approach to be explored in greater detail. Chapter 5 outlines the contrast between quantitative and qualitative research and assesses the validity of some of the claims about the link between philosophical issues and research practice. Chapter 6 deals with the often encountered suggestion that we really ought to try to combine the relative strengths of the two approaches. In Chapter 7, I look at the problem of building up a total picture of research findings in fields in which both research traditions are pursued in conjunction.
As suggested in the previous chapter, this research tradition is usually depicted as exhibiting many of the hallmarks of a natural science approach. One of the main purposes of this chapter will be to examine the degree to which the characteristics of quantitative research are a product of a natural science approach. Quantitative research is associated with a number of different approaches to data collection.
In sociology in particular, the social survey is one of the main methods of data collection which embodies the features of quantitative research to be explored below. This means that data are collected on a cross-section of people at a single point in time in order to discover the ways and degrees to which variables relate to each other. The social survey approach contrasts with experimental designs, which constitute the main approach to data collection within the tradition of quantitative research in social psychology.
In an experiment, there are at least two groups to which subjects have been randomly allocated: an experimental and a control group. The logic of experimental design is that the former group is exposed to an experimental stimulus the independent variable but the control group is not.
Any observed differences between the two groups is deemed to be due to the independent variable alone, since the two groups are identical in all other aspects. Thus an investigator may be interested in whether autonomy or close control leads to more rapid task attainment.
In all other respects such as the nature of the task, the experimental setting, and so on the experiences of the two groups will be identical, so that if there are any differences in time taken to accomplish the task, it can be assumed that this is due to the experimental treatment.
Both groups are exposed to an experimental stimulus—either autonomy or close control. Surveys and experiments are probably the main vehicles of quantitative research but three others are worthy of a brief mention.
The analysis of previously collected data, like official statistics on crime, suicide, unemployment, health, and so on, can be subsumed within the tradition of quantitative research. Keat and Urry, Secondly, structured observation, whereby the researcher records observations in accordance with a predetermined schedule and quantifies the resulting data, displays many of the characteristics of quantitative research.
Finally, as Beardsworth has indicated, content analysis—the quantitative analysis of the communication content of media such as newspapers— shares many of the chief features of quantitative research.
Quantitative research is, then, a genre which uses a special language which appears to exhibit some similarity to the ways in which scientists talk about how they investigate the natural order—variables, control, measurement, experiment. This superficial imagery reflects the tendency for quantitative research to be under-pinned by a natural science model, which means that the logic and procedures of the natural sciences are taken to provide an epistemological yardstick against which empirical research in the social sciences must be appraised before it can be treated as valid knowledge.
The epistemology upon which quantitative research is erected comprises a litany of preconditions for what is warrantable knowledge, and the mere presence of numbers is unlikely to be sufficient. Nor is it the emphasis on accumulating quantitative data by those working within the tradition that the critics of quantitative research find unacceptable.
Indeed, many qualitative researchers—the main adversaries—recognize the potential benefits of some measurement e. Silverman, , The foregoing discussion, of course, begs the question: why should students of society copy the approach of natural scientists whose subject matter appears so different?
In part, the enormous success of the sciences this century in facilitating our understanding of the natural order has probably played a part. So too has the view of writers subscribing to the doctrine of positivism about which more will be said below that the natural sciences provide a standard against which knowledge should be gauged and that there is no logical reason why its procedures should not be equally applicable to the study of society.
In addition, as social scientists have been looked to increasingly by governments and other agencies to provide policy-relevant research or alternatively have sought to present themselves in this light , they have either been compelled to adopt a supposedly scientific approach or have sought to display an aura of scientific method in order to secure funding.
The reasons are undoubtedly legion and since this is a somewhat speculative topic it is not proposed to dwell any further on it. Rather, it is more fruitful to examine the precise nature of the scientific method that forms the bedrock of quantitative research. Walsh, Nowadays writers on positivism bemoan this exploitation of the term and seek to distance themselves from the tendency to treat it as a pejorative designation e.
Giddens, ; Cohen, ; Bryant, Thus in the eyes of many authors the term has become devalued as a description of a particular stance in relation to the pursuit of knowledge. A further difficulty is that even among more sophisticated treatments of positivism a wide range of meanings is likely to be discerned.
Different versions of positivism can be found; Halfpenny identifies twelve. Consequently, in the explication of positivism that follows can be found not a complete catalogue of the constituents which have been identified by various writers but an extraction of those which are most frequently cited.
Thus in following the widely held convention of regarding quantitative research as founded on positivism one is presumably subscribing to the view that the former reflects the aims and tenets of the latter.
What then is positivism supposed to comprise? This view involves a conviction that the fact that the objects of the social sciences—people—think, have feelings, communicate through language and otherwise, attribute meaning to their environment, and superficially appear to be uniquely different from one another in terms of their beliefs and personal characteristics— qualities not normally held to describe the objects of the natural scientist—is not an obstacle to the implementation of the scientific method.
This position is often referred to as the principle of methodological monism or methodological naturalism von Wright, ; Giedymin, Positivism entails a belief that only those phenomena which are observable, in the sense of being amenable to the senses, can validly be warranted as knowledge. This means that phenomena which cannot be observed either directly through experience and observation or indirectly with the aid of instruments have no place.
This aspect of positivism is often referred to as the doctrine of phenomenalism and sometimes as empiricism, although some writers would probably challenge the treatment of these two terms as synonyms. These facts feed into the theoretical edifice pertaining to a particular domain of knowledge. Thus theory expresses and reflects the accumulated findings of empirical research.
This implies that science is deductive, in that it seeks to extract specific propositions from general accounts of reality. The logic involved might entail seeking to construct a scientific theory to explain the laws pertaining to a particular field; a hypothesis or possibly more than one is derived in order to enable the scientist to test the theory; if the hypothesis is rejected when submitted to rigorous empirical examination the theory must be revised.
This notion can be discerned in explications of positivism in two senses. Notify me. Description Studying a social science degree? Need to know how to develop your research methods and write up your results more effectively?
In the fourth edition of this lively and engaging textbook, Alan Bryman presents students with an updated and all-encompassing guide to the principle techniques and methodology in the field of Social Research. Adopting a coherent and student-friendly format, the book offers an encyclopaedic introduction to social research methodology, and considers a broad range of qualitative and quantitative methods to help students identify and evaluate the best approach for their research needs.
Building on the success of the previous editions, this book is concerned with the ways that social researchers approach their craft. Bryman guides the reader through all aspects of the research process including formulating objectives, choosing research methods, securing research participants, as well as advice on how to effectively collect, analyse and interpret data and disseminate those findings to others.
This fourth edition features a new 'supervisor experience' feature, which offers helpful tips from the supervisor's perspective on successful research, as well as a new chapter which tackles the sampling issues faced by qualitative researchers in a more consolidated fashion than in previous editions.
Substantial updates have also been made to the existing material, particularly the internet research section, which has been fully revised to accommodate the extensive developments in this area. Review Text In the fourth edition of this lively and engaging textbook, Alan Bryman presents students with an This is already "required reading" in the field. The new edition is so good that it is now "required reading" on pain of death.