Chapter 6 The Nature of Quantitative Research Bryman: Social Research Methods: 3e Authored by Susie...
-
Upload
anthony-allen -
Category
Documents
-
view
439 -
download
10
Transcript of Chapter 6 The Nature of Quantitative Research Bryman: Social Research Methods: 3e Authored by Susie...
Chapter 6
The Nature of Quantitative Research
Bryman: Social Research Methods: 3e
Authored by Susie Scott
The stages of quantitative research
• Theory/hypothesis• Research design• Devise measures of concepts• Select site and sample• Collect data• Code and analyse data• Write up
See pages 140-141
Concepts and their measurement
• concepts = “categories for the organisation of ideas and observations” (Bulmer, 1984: 43)
• may provide explanations of social phenomena
• may represent things we want to explain
• measurements – delineate fine differences between people/cases– consistent and reliable– more precise estimates of the degree of relatedness
between concepts
See page 143
Indicators of concepts
• produced by the operational definition of a concept
• less directly quantifiable than measures
• common sense understandings of the form a concept might take
• multiple-indicator measures– concept may have different dimensions
See page 144
Reliability
• Stability over time– test-retest method (correlation between measure on different
occasions)
• Internal reliability– split-half method (correlation between measures on two
halves of a scale)– Cronbach’s alpha
• Inter-observer consistency– agreement between different researchers
See pages 149-150
Validity
• Measurement validity:– Face validity
– Concurrent validity
– Predictive validity
– Construct validity
– Convergent validity
• Validity presupposes reliability
(but not vice versa)
See pages 151-155
The main preoccupations of quantitative researchers
• 1. Measurement– can a concept be quantified?– comparisons between measures– changes in a variable over time
• 2. Causality– explanations of social phenomena– causal relationships between independent and
dependent variables– inference only in cross-sectional designs
See pages 155-156
The main preoccupations of quantitative researchers
• 3. Generalization– can the results be applied to individuals beyond the sample?– aim to generalize to target population– requires representative sample (random, probability sample)
• 4. Replication– detailed description of procedures allows other researchers
to replicate study– low incidence of published replications
See pages 156-158
Criticisms of quantitative research
• failure to distinguish between objects in the natural world and social phenomena
• artificial and spurious sense of precision and accuracy– presumed connection between concepts and
measures
– Cicourel (1964) ‘measurement by fiat’
– respondents make different interpretations of questions and other research tools
See page 159
Criticisms of quantitative research
• lack of ecological validity– reliance on instruments and measurements– little relevance to participants’ everyday lives– variation in the meaning of concepts to each individual
• static view of social life– relationships between variables– ignores processes of human definition and
interpretation (Blumer, 1956)
See page 160
Is it always like this?
• quantitative research design is anideal-typical approach
• useful as a guide of good practice
• but discrepancy between ideal type and actual practice of social research
• pragmatic concerns mean that researchers may not adhere rigidly to these principles
See page 160
Reverse operationism
Bryman (1988)• quantitative research is usually deductive
(operational definition of concepts)• but measurements can sometimes lead to
inductive theorising• example: factor analysis
– groups of indicators cluster together and suggest a common factor
– e.g. personality trait research
See page 160
Reliability and validity testing
• published accounts of quantitative research rarely report evidence of reliability and validity (Podsakoff & Dalton, 1987)
• researchers are primarily interested in the substantive content and findings of their research
• running tests of reliability and validity may seem an unappealing alternative!
• but researchers remain committed to the principles of good practice
See pages 161-162