Social Research Methodology
Topic:
Course:
Date:
Professor/Speaker:
WEEK 1
LECTURE 1
Research Question: why is communication of information sometimes more
successful than at other times?
Hypothesis: how more structure and order the information contains, the more
one is able to remember.
Deduction vs Induction:
CH.2 Social research strategies: quantitative and qualitative approaches
PART 2: ONTOLOGY AND EPISTEMOLOGY
2. Philosophical assumption
Can we not simply consider all research methods as "scientific"? Is "true" knowledge
not just what is in line with "the facts"?
,Unfortunately, it's not that simple: this becomes evident from the fact that there is lot
of disagreement between social scientists about these issues.
ONTOLOGY ( "the study of being" )
What is the fundamental nature of reality? What characterizes the (social) world?
Does it actually exist? What are the characteristics of "being"?
Two constraining views:
"whether social entitles can and should be considered objective entitles that exist
separately to social actors (Objectivism)
or
"whether they can and should be considered social constructs built up from the
perception and actions of social actors (Constructivism)
EPISTEMOLOGY ("the study of knowledge")
What is the source and nature of knowledge? How can we (and should we) acquire
acceptable, justified knowledge about the world around us?
Thus: How to obtain knowledge?
"Objective knowledge. An evolutionary approach" (1972)
Popper's: standpoint is in the line with objectivism:
We are able to compare different theorists with each other. We can test them against
"the facts" and eliminate theorists that are wrong.
Realism: We can understand /gather knowledge about "the reality", a scientific theory
is (more or less) corresponding with reality.
Induction problem:
We can we actually learn from a confirmatory observation?
Induction problem--> Popper's solution: falsification as method.
We cannot learn from a confirmatory observation ("I saw a white swan again today")
but we can actually learn from a falsification ("I see a black swan now")
,"The structure of scientific revolution" (1962)
Kuhn's standpoint is in the line with constructivism:
One paradigm ("thought pattern") is not better than the others. They are
incommensurable ("incompatible", "incomparible). A paradigm- shift does not bring
us closer to "the truth".
"The competition between paradigms is not the sort of battle that can be resolved by
proofs" -Kuhn
Paradigm: What do you see? (algı)
EX: The Copernican revolution, Darwin's evolution theory , Theory of continental drift
Social sciences: pre-paradigmatic
Social science is in the "pre-paradigmatic" phase.
Scholars (still) disagree about fundamental assumptions:
There is no single, coherent view on how to obtain knowledge
(epistemology) and how research could and should be done (methodology)
Two approaches in social science
1. Interpretative approach: understanding (Verstehen) The interpretive
approach is formed of several closely related traditions:
Hermeneutics ('clarify'): the study of interpretation of (holy) texts.
Phenomenology: study of meaning- making of people
Verstehen: empathic understanding.
2. Positive approach: explaining (Erklaren)
The term positivism has often a negative connotation ("a negative term")
Positivism is "difficult to pin down". The approach is sometimes also
referred to as "natural science model".
"Interpretive understanding of social action in order to arrive at a casual explanation
of its course and effect."
POSITIVISM
What is the goal or nature of a theory or explanation?
Nomothetic explanations (nomos= law), covering law model:
, We are searching for universal, casual generalisations in order to uncover law-like
patterns in human behavior.
How do we acquire knowledge?
Formulate hypotheses (via deduction) and test then against "the observed facts". By
elimination of false theories we can step-by-step learn from our guesses and
refutations (via induction/ falsification).
Empiricism: we gain knowledge through experience and our senses.
What is the role or values and normative judgments?
Science can be and should be "value-free": objective knowledge is based on facts,
not on norms, opinions, beliefs.
There is a strict division between normative and scientific statements: results of
research should be independent from any value judgement. We cannot derive ethical
norms from observations about reality.
INTERPRETIVISM
What is the goal or nature of a theory or explanation?
Goal: "understanding of social action". We study the subjective meaning of human
behaiour.
Nature of explanation is idiographic (idios = private, one's own)
Description / clarification of a unique process, unique case.
How do we acquire knowledge?
Gain access to people's "common-sense thinking" and their point of view. Law bare
how members of a social group interpret the world around them.
Second (epistemological) meaning of constructivism researchers present their
specific version of reality: their accounts of the social world are also constructions.
It leads to "double interpretation": interpretations of interpretations.
What is the role of values and normative judgements?
Topic:
Course:
Date:
Professor/Speaker:
WEEK 1
LECTURE 1
Research Question: why is communication of information sometimes more
successful than at other times?
Hypothesis: how more structure and order the information contains, the more
one is able to remember.
Deduction vs Induction:
CH.2 Social research strategies: quantitative and qualitative approaches
PART 2: ONTOLOGY AND EPISTEMOLOGY
2. Philosophical assumption
Can we not simply consider all research methods as "scientific"? Is "true" knowledge
not just what is in line with "the facts"?
,Unfortunately, it's not that simple: this becomes evident from the fact that there is lot
of disagreement between social scientists about these issues.
ONTOLOGY ( "the study of being" )
What is the fundamental nature of reality? What characterizes the (social) world?
Does it actually exist? What are the characteristics of "being"?
Two constraining views:
"whether social entitles can and should be considered objective entitles that exist
separately to social actors (Objectivism)
or
"whether they can and should be considered social constructs built up from the
perception and actions of social actors (Constructivism)
EPISTEMOLOGY ("the study of knowledge")
What is the source and nature of knowledge? How can we (and should we) acquire
acceptable, justified knowledge about the world around us?
Thus: How to obtain knowledge?
"Objective knowledge. An evolutionary approach" (1972)
Popper's: standpoint is in the line with objectivism:
We are able to compare different theorists with each other. We can test them against
"the facts" and eliminate theorists that are wrong.
Realism: We can understand /gather knowledge about "the reality", a scientific theory
is (more or less) corresponding with reality.
Induction problem:
We can we actually learn from a confirmatory observation?
Induction problem--> Popper's solution: falsification as method.
We cannot learn from a confirmatory observation ("I saw a white swan again today")
but we can actually learn from a falsification ("I see a black swan now")
,"The structure of scientific revolution" (1962)
Kuhn's standpoint is in the line with constructivism:
One paradigm ("thought pattern") is not better than the others. They are
incommensurable ("incompatible", "incomparible). A paradigm- shift does not bring
us closer to "the truth".
"The competition between paradigms is not the sort of battle that can be resolved by
proofs" -Kuhn
Paradigm: What do you see? (algı)
EX: The Copernican revolution, Darwin's evolution theory , Theory of continental drift
Social sciences: pre-paradigmatic
Social science is in the "pre-paradigmatic" phase.
Scholars (still) disagree about fundamental assumptions:
There is no single, coherent view on how to obtain knowledge
(epistemology) and how research could and should be done (methodology)
Two approaches in social science
1. Interpretative approach: understanding (Verstehen) The interpretive
approach is formed of several closely related traditions:
Hermeneutics ('clarify'): the study of interpretation of (holy) texts.
Phenomenology: study of meaning- making of people
Verstehen: empathic understanding.
2. Positive approach: explaining (Erklaren)
The term positivism has often a negative connotation ("a negative term")
Positivism is "difficult to pin down". The approach is sometimes also
referred to as "natural science model".
"Interpretive understanding of social action in order to arrive at a casual explanation
of its course and effect."
POSITIVISM
What is the goal or nature of a theory or explanation?
Nomothetic explanations (nomos= law), covering law model:
, We are searching for universal, casual generalisations in order to uncover law-like
patterns in human behavior.
How do we acquire knowledge?
Formulate hypotheses (via deduction) and test then against "the observed facts". By
elimination of false theories we can step-by-step learn from our guesses and
refutations (via induction/ falsification).
Empiricism: we gain knowledge through experience and our senses.
What is the role or values and normative judgments?
Science can be and should be "value-free": objective knowledge is based on facts,
not on norms, opinions, beliefs.
There is a strict division between normative and scientific statements: results of
research should be independent from any value judgement. We cannot derive ethical
norms from observations about reality.
INTERPRETIVISM
What is the goal or nature of a theory or explanation?
Goal: "understanding of social action". We study the subjective meaning of human
behaiour.
Nature of explanation is idiographic (idios = private, one's own)
Description / clarification of a unique process, unique case.
How do we acquire knowledge?
Gain access to people's "common-sense thinking" and their point of view. Law bare
how members of a social group interpret the world around them.
Second (epistemological) meaning of constructivism researchers present their
specific version of reality: their accounts of the social world are also constructions.
It leads to "double interpretation": interpretations of interpretations.
What is the role of values and normative judgements?
