Public Policy and Management Research - Centre for Financial ...

Public Policy and Management Research: Principles & Practice Course Introduction and Overview

Contents 1

Course Objectives

3

2

The Author

3

3

Course Structure

3

4

Learning Objectives

5

5

Study Materials and Resources

5

6

Course Assessment

6

Public Policy and Management Research: Principles & Practice

2

University of London

Course Introduction and Overview

1

Course Objectives Research plays an essential role in public policy and management. Increasingly, organisations undertake small-scale research projects, to find out about matters relating to the concerns of our organisation or to critically evaluate existing policies. Both commercial firms and government institutions rely upon research to inform their decisions, to test the effectiveness of existing policies, to predict the effects of intended future policies, to understand management processes and decisions and to gain insights into public preferences and opinions about public services. Whether you are studying this course in order to carry out research in your professional role, to commission and project-manage research conducted by others or to complete a dissertation for your MSc qualification, your ability to appropriately and rigorously design, execute report, and evaluate research is essential. The range of research issues and research methods available for researchers to use is vast – too vast to be covered in one introductory course. Therefore, this course concentrates on helping you develop a rigorous understanding of the key principles and practice of research that are needed to get a research project up and running. With this as our main concern, the aims of this introductory course are three-fold. • First, the course is designed to help you develop a thorough understanding of the fundamental theoretical ideas and logic of research. These fundamental ideas underpin our approach to research, the vast range of research methods available and the researcher's choice of methods. • Secondly, the course aims to help you develop a thorough understanding of the issues involved in planning, designing, executing, evaluating and reporting research. • Finally, the course aims to introduce you to many of the technical aspects of ‘how to do’ empirical research using some of the main data collection and analysis techniques used by researchers working in public policy and management contexts. The overarching aim, though, is to enable you to carry out your own research, confidently using techniques appropriate to your research question and reaching relevant and confirmable conclusions.

2

The Author Sheena Murdoch has a BA (Hons) degree in Contemporary Studies, a MSc degree in Technology and Industrial Organisation and a Postgraduate Diploma in Research Methods in the Social Sciences. Her PhD thesis focused on managerial representations and transmission of corporate culture in organisations undergoing cultural change. She has taught research methods at several UK universities and has acted as advisor on research methodology and methods on public and private sector research projects based in both the UK and Europe. Her current research is concerned with socialisation in organisations and with developing more interactionally sensitive methodological and theoretical frameworks for organisational analysis.

3

Course Structure The field of public policy and management relies heavily on research – to test whether current policies are effective, to evaluate management processes and outcomes and to understand public opinion and preferences about public services.

Centre for Financial and Management Studies

3


This course is designed to provide a good grounding in research methods to enable you to design, conduct and evaluate research in a public policy and management context, whether in your professional capacity or to submit an academic dissertation. The course units cover the following topics.

Unit 1 The Nature of Research 1.1 What is Research – Pure and Practical? 1.2 The Relationship between Theory, Research and Data 1.3 Ontological Issues – the Nature of Social Reality 1.4 Epistemological Issues – the Nature of Knowledge 1.5 Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods 1.6 Some Final Comments Glossary of terms

Unit 2 Planning and Designing Research 2.1 Planning and Managing Time and Resources 2.2 Formulating and Focusing the Research Question 2.3 Choosing a Research Strategy and Design 2.4 Sampling and Selection 2.5 Ethical Considerations and Issues of Access

Unit 3 Reviewing the Literature 3.1 Introduction 3.2 The Purpose of Searching and Reviewing Literature 3.3 Planning your Search of the Literature 3.4 Recording the Literature 3.5 Writing a Critical Review 3.6 Some Common Faults in Literature Reviews

Unit 4 Survey Research: Using Questionnaires 4.1 What is a Questionnaire? 4.2 Types and Administration of Questionnaires 4.3 Constructing Questionnaires 4.4 Coding Questions 4.5 Pilot Testing Questionnaires 4.6 Ethics in Questionnaire Research 4.7 Data Analysis

Unit 5 Using Qualitative Interviews 5.1 What is an Interview? 5.2 Types of Research Interview 5.3 Administration of Interviews 5.4 When to Use Interviews 5.5 Designing Research Interviews 5.6 Conducting Interviews 5.7 Recording and Transcribing Interviews 5.8 How Do We Know the Informant is Telling the Truth? 5.9 Analysing Interview Data

Unit 6 Non-interventionist Fieldwork: Ethnography and Participant Observation 6.1 What is Ethnography? An Overview 6.2 The Emergent Nature of Research Design

4



6.3 Identifying the Research Topic and Conducting Fieldwork 6.4 Roles and Relationships in Field Observation 6.5 Note Taking and Types of Research Notes 6.6 Analysing Data and Writing Ethnographic Accounts

Unit 7 Interventionist Fieldwork: Participatory Action Research (PAR) and Participatory Evaluation 7.1 An Overview of Action Research 7.2 What is Participatory Action Research? 7.3 Conducting Participatory Evaluation 7.4 Data Analysis in Dissemination of Results

Unit 8 Writing and Presenting Research 8.1 Writing Research Proposals 8.2 Writing Research Reports 8.3 Ethics in Reporting Research 8.4 Evaluating Research Reports

4

Learning Objectives When you have completed this course, you should feel confident of your ability to conduct an effective research project – for an MSc dissertation, for your professional work or for personal interest. In particular, you will be able to • evaluate the relevance and application of the research methods introduced to answer different types of research question • define and discuss the basic epistemological and ontological concepts related to intellectual enquiry • analyse and critique the research of others • choose an appropriate method for investigating your own research question • carry out an effective and ethical research project – from the proposal initiation stage, through the literature search, data collection and analysis to the final writing-up and presentation of results.

5

Study Materials and Resources Your study materials for this course are the unit text, the course textbook and course reader, and a CD with a collection of published research papers demonstrating different research approaches.

The course textbook is Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner Researchers, by Colin Robson. Whether you are conducting research in the public or private sector and whether you are undertaking research as a practitioner, as a professional or for academic purposes, there are many methods of enquiry that you can use. This book covers the main research methods used, particularly for small-scale, applied research work. The extent to which the course textbook is used varies from unit to unit and the unit text directs you to read relevant sections and chapters. However, you should also read the rest of the book when you have time and use it as a resource to refer to whenever you carry out or read research. The course reader is a collection of journal articles and book extracts that are of particular relevance and interest to the topics covered in the course. The unit text


5


provides guidance on how to use the course reader and, again, please use the materials in the course reader as resources to which you can refer whenever you need to. The research papers are provided as examples of the various research techniques taught in the course, and you will be directed to look at them when relevant in the unit text. They are:

6

1

‘Decentralization and Local Government in Bolivia: an Overview from the Bottom Up’ (2003) Jean-Paul Faguet.

2

‘Uncertainty and Co-ordination in Global Software Projects: A UK/Indiacentred Case Study’ (2003) Su-Ying Lai, Richard Heeks and Brian Nicholson.

3

‘Decentralisation and Democratic Instability: the Case of Costa Rica’ (2004) Jeffrey J. Ryan.

4

‘Control and Deterrence: Discourses of Detention of Asylum-seekers’ (2004) Mari Malmberg.

5

‘Privileged or Exploited Council Tenants? The Discursive Change in Conservative Housing Policy from 1972 to 1980’ (2003) Keith Jacobs, Jim Kemeny and Tony Manzi.

6

‘Policy Learning and Public Sector Information Technology: Contractual and E-Gov’t Changes in the UK, Australia and New Zealand’ (2002) Patrick Dunleavy, Helen Margetts, Simon Baston, Jane Tinkler and Hola Yared.

7

‘The Effects of Change Programs and Employees’ Emotions’ (2003) Carin B. Eriksson.

8

‘Motivation and Performance Related Pay in the Public Sector: a Case Study of the Internal Revenue’ (1992) David Marsden and Ray Richardson.

9

‘The Search for Meaning in Government Service’ (2004) Alex N Pattakas.

10

‘Trust within Organisations’ (2004) Tom R. Tyler.

11

‘Does Policy Matter? On Governments’ Attempts to Control Unwanted Migration’ (2003) Eiko R. Thielemann.

12

‘A Fair Deal for Care in Older Age? Public Attitude to the Funding of Longterm Care’ (2003) Chris Deeming and Justin Kean.

13

‘Factors Affecting Singaporeans’ Acceptance of International Postings’ (2002) David Wan, Tak Kee Hui and Linda Tiang.

14

‘Welfare-to-Work and the new Deal’ (2001) Richard Layard.

Course Assessment This course is assessed by two assignments and one examination. The first assignment requires you to critically appraise a piece of published research. You will be provided with the published research article that you are required to critique. The second assignment requires you to develop a research proposal for a topic of your choice. If you are planning to write a dissertation as part of your degree, this assignment will constitute your dissertation research proposal. If you are not planning to write a dissertation as part of your degree, the proposal can be for a piece of research that you plan to conduct as part of your work or it can be a proposal for a hypothetical piece of research.

6



The first assignment is due for submission after you have completed Unit 4 (week 4) of the course. The second assignment is due for submission after you have completed Unit 8 (week 8) of the course. It is essential that you check your course calendar for the exact submission dates for your assignments. Unless you have obtained prior permission for an extension, the submission dates on your course calendar are the last day that submission of an assignment can be sent by courier or mailed to London and you should ensure that your assignments carry the carrier’s date stamp to confirm this. The final examination for this course is an unseen, three-hour, written examination. You will be required to answer three questions from a choice of eight. Each question carries an equal weighting of marks. To assist you with your preparation and revision for the examination, a specimen examination paper is provided with the documentation for this course.


7


8


Public Policy and Management Research: Principles & Practice Unit 1 The Nature of Research

Contents Unit Objectives

2

1.1 What is Research – Pure and Practical?

3

1.2 The Relationship between Theory, Research and Data

5

1.3 Ontological Issues – the Nature of Social Reality

7

1.4 Epistemological Issues – the Nature of Knowledge

8

1.5 Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods in Social Research

11

1.6 Objectivity and Reflexivity

12

Glossary of terms

14

References

15


Unit Objectives The main focus of this unit is on what is meant by policy and management research. This is argued to be a form of social research – about the relationships between people and the social world. In studying this you will explore the importance of theory in research and look at some vital questions that underpin the practice of social research: what is social reality, what is acceptable knowledge about social reality and how should we conduct research on social reality? These are philosophical questions of ontology, epistemology and methodology, and you will learn what these terms mean and why it is important for researchers to understand the debates associated with each.

Learning Outcomes When you have completed your study of this unit you will be able to • explain what research is generally, and in relation to policy and management more specifically • outline the difference between pure and applied research and the relationships between research and theory • identify and explain ontological concerns in relation to social research and the difference between objectivism and constructivism • identify and explain epistemological concerns in relation to social research and the differences between positivism and interpretivism • discuss the main differences and the relationship between ontological and epistemological concerns and how these relate to methodological issues • set out the main features of the debate about whether quantitative and qualitative research approaches are epistemological or technical matters.

Reading for Unit 1 Course Textbook Colin Robson, Real World Research, Chapters 1 and 2, and a brief section of Chapter 3.

Reader Article Alan Bryman, ‘The Debate about Quantitative and Qualitative Research’.

Research Papers (CD) Although they are not specifically discussed in this unit, you might like to browse through some of these research studies when you have finished the unit to see if you can identify the ‘epistemological’ and ‘ontological’ approaches taken by the authors.

2


Unit 1 The Nature of Research

1.1 What is Research – Pure and Practical? Research is about exploration, discovery and explanation. Howard and Sharp (1983) define research as ‘seeking through methodical processes to add to one’s own body of knowledge and, hopefully, to that of others, by the discovery of non-trivial facts and insights’. Research is most often classified or labelled by fields of study such as engineering, life sciences, physical sciences, the humanities and social sciences, and these fields of study consist of a number of disciplines. Research about policy and management largely falls into the category of social sciences, for when we study policy and management concerns, we are usually studying people and institutions and the relationships between them. Management research has developed into a series of specialisms, with over 700 periodicals publishing research results in the English language alone. The specialisms can usually be categorised as one of the following three types: • sector-based, including the public sector • discipline-based, including psychology, economics, mathematics • functionally-based, including finance, marketing, operations research, human resource management, manufacturing, supply-chain management. If there is a common theme it is the search for approaches and techniques that produce better results. Research on management in the public sector is a sub-set of management research. In some countries there is a division between ‘Public Administration’ research and public management research. If you have studied PPM 101, Public Policy and Management Perspectives and Issues, you will know that there was an attempt, mainly in the United States of America, to make a science of Public Administration from the end of the nineteenth century. Policy research ranges from policy analysis, or the study of the processes by which policies are made and implemented, to evaluative research measuring the effectiveness of particular policy interventions. While academics carry out policy analysis, much policy research is conducted for or by governments as part of their processes of policy monitoring and evaluation. Since the 1990s, audit bodies have undertaken evaluations of the effectiveness of policy that are very similar to policy research. In studying this course, you are probably either aiming to complete an academic dissertation for your MSc in Public Policy and Management, or to undertake some form of research in your professional role. Both types of research are covered in this course, and are discussed briefly below.

1.1.1 Academic research Research for academic reasons may be undertaken as part of a course of study such as an undergraduate or a postgraduate degree or a professional qualification, or as part of an academic job. Typically, academic research is a ‘fact-finding’ exercise to establish the current state of research on a topic, to review existing knowledge, or to advance theoretical knowledge about something by developing pure theory or testing existing theory. You will probably have studied the nature of theories in previous courses: they are sets of propositions, logically and systematically interrelated, aimed at describing and explaining relationships between things or events – typically, what causes what. To meet the requirements of academic degrees and academic careers, most academic research aims to expand the existing body of knowledge and understanding – concerned with developing theoretical explanations for why something is a problem Centre for Financial and Management Studies

3


rather than with exploring possible solutions to a problem. Academic research that is concerned with developing and testing theoretical propositions is often called ‘pure research’.

1.1.2 Practical research In contrast, research can be undertaken for practical reasons – to find a practical solution to a specific problem or to develop a practical understanding of a particular situation. This type of research is called ‘applied research’ and is characterised by the likelihood that the results of the investigation will be used as the basis for some kind of action, such as policy formulation or developing managerial strategies. A great deal of policy and management research is applied research, and there is a growing number of institutes whose primary concern is to undertake policy-related or applied research in relation to general social problems. Many of these specialist applied research institutes can be found in the university sector; many others are independent organisations, and they frequently undertake work on behalf of research foundations, public-sector organisations and government departments. The major aim of this applied research is to investigate why a problem is seen as a problem in the first place and then to find practical solutions to it. To do this, applied social policy research aims to locate the research question or problem in its broader social context and then, through empirical investigation (observation of the problem to see how what is actually happening) and evidence, to seek answers and solutions that may enable the problem to be solved. The notion of ‘empirical’ investigation and evidence is derived from the philosophical doctrine of ‘empiricism’, which argues that the only acceptable form of knowledge is knowledge that has been gained through experience, observation and the senses, and that has been rigorously tested and scrutinised. Applied research is often undertaken inside organisations, usually by managers, other staff or by external consultants at the request of managers. Typically, the research aim is to seek solutions to problems and to recommend workable strategies for solving the problem or to improve what the managers regard as organisational efficiency and effectiveness. Defining the scope and nature of the problem or question requires it to be located and understood in the wider organisational context in which it is embedded and, as in pure research, here too theory often plays a vital role in explaining underlying causes of problems in organisations. So, pure and applied research can represent the extreme points of a continuum. However, they do not have to be mutually exclusive. Although there are distinct differences between the two and research is often solely concerned with one or the other, there is much research undertaken for academic reasons that is also concerned with seeking practical solutions or understandings and contributes to knowledge in both theoretical and practical ways. And, of course, there is a great deal of applied research that contributes to the development and testing of theory as well as attempting to provide a workable solution to a problem. In fact, recent debate within the British Academy of Management has highlighted in particular the desire that management research on practice should inform theory that, in turn, informs practice (Saunders et al, 2000). By now you will have noticed that when we talk about research, we also talk about theory. This is because theory occupies an important role in research, and understanding the relationship between research, theory and data is essential for all serious researchers. We will discuss this relationship in the following section.

4



Reading For an introduction to the kinds of research issues discussed in this unit, you should turn now to your textbook, Real World Research, and quickly read Chapter 1. As its title suggests, the focus here is mainly on practical research, but it does give useful insights into the relationship between pure and practical forms of enquiry, and should get you beginning to think about ‘methodology’, which will be the main concern of much of this course.

Colin Robson, Real World Research, Chapter 1 ‘Real World Enquiry’.

Take note, particularly, of the points cited in Robson’s Box 1.2, about different approaches to problem solving.

1.2 The Relationship between Theory, Research and Data The role of theory in social research is crucial. The endeavour of social research is to connect empirical evidence (data) about the social world and theory, because theory provides explanations and understandings about the social world, its constituent parts and the relationships between them. Exploring existing social theory makes us more aware of and sensitive to the extent and limitations of our knowledge about the social world and to the possibilities and needs for further social investigation. In turn, this helps us to formulate our research topics, to devise more insightful and penetrating research questions and to design better research. Social research can involve testing theory, developing theory, applying existing theory to new areas and phenomena to try to explain and understand them, or using theory to make predictions about social behaviours or situations. The relationship between theory and data is two-way: • theory can be used to guide and inform the formulation of research questions and the collection and analysis of data, and this use of theory is known as deductive research • theory can evolve and develop from the data either after the completion of data collection and analysis or while data collection and analysis is still in progress, and that use of theory is known as inductive research.

1.2.1 Deductive research The process of deductive research is often associated with quantitative1 research and involves starting out with a theory. The theory is used to set up a hypothesis – that is, a specific expectation or implication deduced from the theory about the type of data that should be found. A hypothesis is a tentative and speculative statement, informed by theory, about the possible relationship between two or more variables. You have met variables before in your studies, and will know that a variable is a characteristic or property or attribute or phenomenon. Variations in one variable (called the independent variable) are taken as predictors, influences or causes of variations in the other variable (called the dependent variable). A typical way to phrase a hypothesis is by using an if-then format • if the independent variable does ‘x’, then the dependent variable will do ‘y’. But a hypothesis does not have to be as explicitly formatted as this. For example, our hypothesis might be, ‘increased unemployment leads to increased crime’ or ‘the higher the rate of unemployment in a community, the higher the percentage of

1

Quantitative research typically emphasises counting and measurement. Quantitative methods are designed to standardise data for quantification and measurement, and employ the use of statistics. Centre for Financial and Management Studies

5


community residents who commit crimes’. In other words, we are hypothesising that if unemployment increases, then the incidence rate of crime will increase. The independent variable is the increased unemployment and the dependent variable is the percentage of community residents who commit crimes. After one or more hypotheses have been formulated, the researcher can then collect data with which to test them. It is the hypotheses that are tested by the researchers, not the entire theory. The collected data may support or not support the hypotheses. The point is to subject the hypotheses to rigorous testing, which requires the researcher to collect empirical evidence about the social world and then to make analytical statements about what the data indicate and what this means for the theory that is being used.

1.2.2 Inductive research In inductive research, theory is initially used to inform the development of the central research question(s), but the idea is not to ‘test’ theory in the way it is set up and tested in deductive research. Rather, the intention is to collect data about the central research concerns and to develop theoretical ideas from the data. Whereas deductive research is characterised by theory and hypothesis driving the collection of data, inductive research is characterised by data driving theory development. Inductive research is generally associated with qualitative research, which typically emphasises words rather than quantification and measurement. Qualitative research methods are geared to social context and designed to capture social life and meanings as experienced by participants. This type of research begins with observations and findings that are then used to develop (induce) a general explanation, or theory, that accounts for the data. Theory is the outcome of inductive research and emerges out of the data. In inductive research, questions or problems are less likely to take the form of an ifthen hypothesis, and research questions may even be as open as, ‘what is it like to be a homeless person?’ The point in inductive research is to analyse the data by seeking recurring patterns, themes or topics in the data and to identify generalisable, typical features and properties of the data. Once this is done the researcher can begin to develop theory to explain these findings. Following this, he or she may repeatedly collect more data to ‘ground’ the developing theory. This means collecting more data to establish whether and to what extent the developing theory is accurate and applicable in different circumstances, and is known as a process of iteration. Iteration is a step-by-step process of analysis, painstakingly applying a set of data to different related questions or repeating the questions with different data.

The amendment of theory While these descriptions of deductive and inductive research are of pure forms of each research approach, in practice the distinction between them and the steps in conducting each approach are often not so clear-cut. There are elements of induction in the deductive approach and elements of deduction in the inductive approach. As Bryman (2001) points out, although the sequential steps in deductive research do occur, it may be the case that after analysing the data the researcher’s view of the theory changes; or it is not until after the data have been analysed that the relevance of a set of data for a theory becomes obvious; or perhaps the researcher will need to re-evaluate their theoretical views as a result of the publication of new theoretical ideas prior to the researcher producing their own findings. Then, if it is necessary to amend the theory as a result of the findings from testing hypotheses, the researcher feeds back their findings into the stock of existing knowledge to revise the theory: this is an inductive process. In induction, the

6



iterative process of grounding theory in data to establish its accuracy under different conditions is similar to testing hypotheses in the deductive approach – reflections are made about the data and tentative theoretical statements are made about what the data indicate, then more data are collected in order to test out these theoretical ideas.

Reading You will find a useful section about ‘The Place of Theory’ on pages 61–63 of your course text. Read this section now. You will recognise the distinction between ‘theory verification’ and ‘theory generation’ as the inductive and deductive approaches discussed above. Don’t worry about the reference to ‘positivist methodology’ – you will meet that again later in this unit. Do look at Robson’s Box 3.4 on page 56, which he cites in this extract, for a view on the bases of successful and unsuccessful research.

Colin Robson, Real World Research, Chapter 3 ‘Developing your Ideas’, section on the place of theory.

Asking the research question Before the researcher can decide whether to use an inductive or deductive approach and consider whether the research will be pure, applied or somewhere along the pure–applied continuum, the specific research question must be clearly identified and the research aims must be defined. Until this is done, the researcher cannot begin to make decisions about how to carry out the research – such as choosing appropriate research strategies and methods of data collection. The principal aim of this course is to enable you to choose a research strategy appropriate to your research question, and this is why you will be studying a wide range of strategies and their theoretical bases. Thus, formulating a research question and deciding which strategies and methods to use are not simply matters of choosing a question of importance or interest and learning about research strategies and methods and how to implement them. The formulation of research questions and the ways in which social research is conducted are related to different philosophical perspectives on what social reality is, what is regarded as acceptable knowledge in the social sciences, and how social reality should be studied. These are questions of ontology and epistemology and we will now turn to what these questions mean for us as social researchers.

1.3 Ontological Issues – the Nature of Social Reality The ways in which research questions are formulated and the ways in which social research is conducted are tied to particular ontological assumptions. These are assumptions about the nature of social reality. They are concerned with whether social phenomena and their meanings can and should be considered as ‘objective’ entities that have a reality independent of and separate from human beings, or whether social phenomena and their meanings can and should be considered as social constructions that arise from the perceptions, interpretations and actions of human beings (Bryman, 2001). In other words, is social reality an objective reality that exists externally to human beings, or is social reality socially constructed by human beings? The first of these two ontological positions is frequently referred to as objectivism; the second is referred to as constructionism2

2

You will see that Robson calls this ‘constructivism’ – the terms are interchangeable.


7


1.3.1 Objectivism An objectivist ontological position would regard an organisation and organisational rules as pre-given, pre-existing entities that exist independently of organisational members. They would also be seen as constraining and inhibiting forces that act on organisational members by exerting pressure on them to learn the rules, to conform to the rules and to apply the rules in ways that the organisation deems acceptable. From an objectivist position, the organisation and its rules are seen as things that are external to and imposed upon organisational members and that the actions of those members are dictated and constrained by the organisation and its rules.

1.3.2 Constructionism A constructionist ontological position would not regard an organisation and organisational rules as pre-given, pre-existing, abstract entities that exist external to organisational members and dictate their actions. Rather, a constructionist would regard an organisation and its rules as phenomena that are accomplished through the interactions, interpretations, shared understandings and negotiations of organisational members. This is not to say that this position would deny the objective reality or pre-existence of an organisation and its rules, but rather, the stress the continuous, active, interpretive role of human beings in constructing (or accomplishing) an organisation and its rules.

Ontological assumptions and research The ontological assumptions of the researcher (that is, the researcher’s view of what social reality is) influence the ways in which he or she formulates research questions and the ways in which the research is designed and carried out. For example, let’s say that our research question is to explore the impact of new technology on the working lives of a group of people. If we were committed to the assumptions of constructionism we would formulate a question in a way that captures the active human involvement in shaping the reality of new technology in their working lives. This question would require research strategies and methods of data collection that enable the researcher to capture the patterns and details of how human beings interpret and make sense of things. If we were committed to the assumptions of objectivism we would formulate the question in a way that suggests new technology exists externally to the individual and acts on the individual, dictating their actions, and we would choose a research strategy and design that enables us to gather appropriate data. Questions of ontology are not the only philosophical issues that we need to consider. Decisions about how to conduct social research are also connected to epistemological assumptions about what is considered to be valid knowledge about the social world. In the next section we shall examine some fundamental epistemological matters.

1.4 Epistemological Issues – the Nature of Knowledge Epistemology is a branch of philosophy that studies the nature and basis of knowledge – that is, what is knowledge, and how do we know what we claim to know? What is or should be considered acceptable, warrantable, legitimate and valid knowledge? A central epistemological debate in the social sciences is about whether it is appropriate for social scientists to study the social world using the same principles and procedures that are used by physical scientists to study the physical world. The epistemological position that advocates the use of physical science

8



techniques to study social issues is known as positivism. The epistemological position that rejects the use of the methods of physical science to study the social world is known as interpretivism. To understand these two epistemological positions in the social sciences and the differences between them, a discussion of the historical emergence of social research as it is known today is particularly useful.

1.4.1 Positivism Positivism is a set of philosophical principles for studying the social world that was advocated by Auguste Comte, a French philosopher working in the nineteenth century. Although the study of society has a very long history and can be traced back to the Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle and to Islamic and European philosophers, it was Comte who invented the term ‘sociology’ in 1824 (Abercrombie et al. 1994). Comte was concerned about how social reality ought to be studied and what should pass as warrantable, valid, legitimate knowledge about the social world. He rejected much existing social research, denouncing the methodology as speculative and descriptive, and he argued that society should be studied scientifically in order to produce ‘social facts’ and in order to establish general laws of causal relationships between social phenomena in the same way that Newtonian physics or Darwinian biology discovered general laws and principles about the physical world. Comte was pursuing a notion of objective, ‘scientific’ social research and aimed to establish a ‘social physics’ that used research procedures and produced research findings independent of and undistorted by the personal values and emotions of researchers. He argued that the way to achieve this was to emulate the procedures used by physical scientists to investigate the physical world: thus the only valid data and, therefore, knowledge about the social world was that which was available to the senses and could be observed, measured and quantified. To this end, Comte introduced the ‘positive method’, which followed the research procedures used in the physical sciences. This involved formulating hypotheses about social phenomena and testing these hypotheses by using standardised procedures and standardised data-gathering methods (such as experiments and social surveys), which enabled the collection of quantitative data in order to establish and measure causal relationships between variables. However, particularly in the 1960s, the application of this positivist or ‘scientific’ model to the study of the social world came under heavy attack from sociological theorists working in a number of other intellectual traditions. These traditions, although different from each other in several respects, all share an anti-positivist view that contributes to an alternative epistemological position to positivism that is known as interpretivism.

1.4.2 Interpretivism Interpretivism is based on the view that the fundamental difference between the physical sciences and the social sciences is the subject matter of their studies and the relationship of the subject matter to the world it inhabits. The social researcher Alfred Schutz (1962; in Bryman, 2001) argued that the physical world does not ‘mean’ anything to the molecules, atoms and electrons that are its objects, but the social world has specific meanings and relevance for the human beings that inhabit it. Human beings live, act and think in the social world. In other words, while the physical world has no meaning for molecules and so on,; human beings interpret


9


and attach meanings to all that can be indicated or referred to, and they act on the basis of these meanings. The interpretivist epistemological position argues that to study social reality, we need to see the world from the point of view of those we are studying and to do this, we need to gain access to and become involved in their life-worlds. However, to study the physical world, we do not need to know what it feels like to be an atom or an electron in order to understand its structure and its function. Therefore to study social reality, research strategies are required that recognise and respect this fundamental difference between the physical and the social world. We need research strategies and data collection methods that enable us to capture the points of view of others – to see and interpret the social world in the same way as it is seen and interpreted by the people who are being studied. This epistemological position argues that the researcher needs to use qualitative methods of data collection, such as participant observation and intensive interviewing, which are methods designed to bring the researcher closer to social reality and to experience social interaction as it is experienced by participants.

Interpretivism and positivism The interpretive epistemological position, therefore, criticises positivism for inadequately addressing the meaning of objectivity in investigating the social world. Since interpretivism argues the necessity of researchers entering into the life-worlds of those they are studying, the question of objectivity (that is, research procedures and findings that are independent of and undistorted by the personal perspectives, values and emotions of investigators) becomes a central concern.. On one hand the researcher’s role is to be involved with those being studied in order to capture their points of view; on the other hand the researcher aims to be a detached enquirer. So a central social research concern in interpretivism is how to keep the roles clearly and consistently apart. Interpretivism also regards the positivist description of objectivity in science as questionable. Many philosophers of science argue that the positivist version of science is an idealisation and refinement of what really goes on during scientific research. They argue that science is not value-free because decisions about what to study are influenced by an existing stock of knowledge that has been built up over generations of scientific work. Decisions about what to study are based on interpretations about what has already been done. Furthermore, decisions on what to study are also influenced by scientists’ own interests or career pursuits or community needs, and scientists often explore seemingly illogical hunches, guesswork and intuitions. Interpretivism argues that the positivist version of science is a philosophy for objective science rather than a philosophy of objective science – that the positivist version of science is what science would be if it could be stripped bare of the human element.

Review Questions What are the main differences between objectivism and constructionism? List the main differences between ontological issues and epistemological issues. What are the main differences between positivism and interpretivism? Now, reflecting on these discussions of ontological and epistemological debates, and also on our earlier discussion about deductive and inductive research approaches, we can see the emergence of two distinct orientations to social research and how to conduct it.

10



• First, there are connections between the ontological position of objectivism, the epistemological position of positivism, a deductive approach to theorising in research (testing theory) and the use of quantitative methods of data collection. • Secondly, there are connections between the ontological position of constructionism, the epistemological position of interpretivism, an inductive approach to theorising in research (generating theory) and the use of qualitative methods of data collection. It would seem reasonable to suppose, then, that the positions taken by researchers on what social reality is and what is acceptable knowledge about the social world, commits them to a particular methodology and types of methods for conducting research into the social world. However, this is not always the case. There is ambiguity and debate about the distinction between quantitative and qualitative research methods and this debate is the focus of the next section.

1.5 Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods in Social Research To begin this discussion, let us first be clear about what the terms methodology and methods mean. Methodology is the study of methods. It addresses the theoretical arguments and justifications for methods and is founded in the epistemological and ontological arguments about what social reality is and how we can gather data about it. Methods are located within these theoretical arguments and justifications. They are the techniques or tools for collecting data, and different types of methods collect different types of data. Similar to previous debates that we have discussed in this unit, a fundamental distinction about research occurs in the methodology and methods debate, too. Here, the basic distinction is about quantitative and qualitative research and what each entails.

1.5.1 The quantitative–qualitative debate As was suggested earlier, it would seem logical to suppose that if we followed a particular ontological and epistemological position we would also be committed to designing research in a particular way and to using either quantitative or qualitative data collection methods. So, when we choose to use different data collection methods, we must recognise their epistemological implications. Indeed, this fundamental contrast between qualitative and quantitative research, based on the differences between their epistemological foundations, is exactly the view of some researchers and writers on methodology. However, other researchers and writers on methodology regard this contrast between quantitative and qualitative research as misleading and even incorrect. They argue that the distinction between quantitative and qualitative methods is a technical matter and the choice of which methods to use should be determined by the research question or problem and how appropriate the method is to investigate it. For example, qualitative research is usually associated with induction and theory generation, but qualitative research is frequently undertaken in order to test theories rather than to generate them. Many thinkers now argue that the epistemological distinction between quantitative and qualitative research should be relaxed. There is growing interest in the combination of the two approaches and the argument that combined approaches will produce a more rounded picture.


11


Reading Now read the paper in your course reader by Alan Bryman, titled ‘The Debate about Quantitative and Qualitative Research’. In this reading, Bryman details the differences between quantitative and qualitative research and examines the extent to which the distinction between them is more a matter of epistemology or of technique. Bryman argues that it is little more than convention to associate particular methods of research with particular epistemological positions and that methods are more autonomous than this.

Alan Bryman, ‘The Debate about Quantitative and Qualitative Research’, reprinted in the Course Reader from Quantity and Quality in Social Research.

Activity After reading this extract, make a list of the main features of the argument that the quantitative–qualitative research distinction is a matter of epistemology. Then make a list of the main features of the argument that the quantitative–qualitative research distinction is a technical matter. What is your own view of the distinction between quantitative and qualitative research?

1.6 Objectivity and Reflexivity Some commentators argue that use of the term social ‘sciences’ to refer to the study of human behaviour in the social world is misleading. In part, this is due to its associations with the physical science model of research, which is, as we have seen in this unit, a highly contested model in terms of its suitability for researching social reality. Sometimes the term social ‘studies’ is used in preference to social science. However, Robson (see page 18 of your course textbook) proposes that it is important to have a ‘scientific attitude’ towards social research, no matter what definition of science is held. By this he means that research should be carried out in a systematic, sceptical and ethical manner in which all aspects of the research are explicitly identified and described, are available for scrutiny by others and are carried out in a way that ensures that the interests and concerns of research participants are safeguarded. Another researcher, K.F. Punch (1998) suggests a conception of the scientific method in which real-world data and the role of explanatory theory are central. He argues that it is scientific to collect empirical data and to build theories to explain that data and then to test these theories against further data. In this definition of science, it is irrelevant whether theory comes before data or data before theory. What is relevant is that both theory and data must be present for the work to be considered scientific. Nor is it a requirement of this definition of science that the data should be numerical or involve measurements. Empirical data can be nonnumerical. Of course, these ideas do appear to stem from traditional conceptions of objectivity in scientific work, and as we have discussed in this unit, criticism has been levelled at this traditional conception as an idealisation and refinement of what actually goes on in scientific research. Like scientific research, how social research is conducted is also, of course, influenced by the personal orientations of the researcher (Bryman, 2001). If the research is ‘researcher-originated’ – that is, designed by the researcher tomeet his or her own interests, ideas and skills – then the research can be influenced by the researcher’s personal values or beliefs at any point in the process of conducting the research. For example, personal beliefs and values influence the choices and decisions the researcher makes about the following: • area or topic to be researched • formulation of research questions and objectives • overall design of the research

12



• the methods used to collect data and how they will be implemented • how the data will be analysed and interpreted • how the research results, findings, conclusions and recommendations will be written up and presented. (Adapted from Bryman, 2001, p.22).

If the research is commissioned or ‘customer-originated’ research in which the research question or problem is identified by someone other than the researcher, who then pays the researcher to conduct the study, the personal beliefs and values of the researcher are still influential in the conduct and presentation of the research. Indeed, both the researcher and the commissioning agent may find it necessary to ‘negotiate’ the research design and content of presentation until both parties are satisfied. It is often the case that particular personal beliefs and feelings of the researcher develop during the course of the research. For example, at the outset of the research the researcher may have had little or no contact with the people being studied. But as the research progresses, researchers may develop an affection or an affinity or sympathy or even an aversion or repulsion towards the people being studied, which can then influence their perception of what they are seeing and how they see it. Further, it can often become difficult for the researcher to recognise and to disentangle from their personal feelings, biases and assumptions and to maintain an objective, impartial, value-neutral stance as a social scientist (Bryman, 2001). Indeed, the view that research can be objective, value-free and unbiased is increasingly challenged. Many research practitioners now emphasise the importance of reflexivity in research. This means that researchers should strive to be self-reflective and to recognise, acknowledge and be open about their personal biases and assumptions in the research in order to ensure that readers of the research are clearly aware of them and how they may have influenced the research. So what can we make of these final comments about science and objectivity in social research? The important point is that whether research is about social reality or the physical world there is no one position on doing the research that is unchallengeable. But if the enterprise of research is to produce enlightening, legitimate and trustworthy knowledge, then it requires the reflective, rigorous, systematic and ethical collection of data, data that is explained by building theories and testing theories against further data. The remaining units of this course will focus on the practical processes of research, and how they relate to the type of research undertaken.

Reading Finally, read Chapter 2 in your course textbook. This chapter contains some additional ideas that relate to and complement our discussions in this unit.

Make sure your notes on the chapter and this unit include definitions of the following terms:

Colin Robson, Real World Research, Chapter 2 ‘Approaches to Social Research’.

deductive inductive objectivism constructionism (constructivism) positivism interpretivism.


13


You now know that there are different types of research and different philosophies that inform the research process. You are ready to start thinking about planning and designing your research, which will be discussed in Unit 2.

Glossary of terms

14

Constructionism (or constructivism)

A philosophical position stressing the social construction of our ideas about the external world.

Data

Empirical evidence; information acquired.

Deduction

An approach that involves starting out with a theory – reasoning from a general idea to particulars; often associated with quantitative research.

Empiricism or empirical investigation

Investigation based on observation, experience or experiment rather than on theory.

Epistemology

The philosophical study of the nature and basis of knowledge – what is knowledge, and how do we know what we claim to know?

Hypothesis

A tentative and speculative statement, informed by theory, about the possible relationship between two or more variables.

Induction

An attempt to derive theory from data: mainly associated with qualitative research – that is, reasoning from particular ideas to a generalisation.

Interpretivism

An approach that seeks to know how people experience, interpret and attach meanings to things in order to understand how human beings and human groups function; it is associated with constructivism and induction.

Objectivism

A philosophical position that argues for the independence of worldly phenomena from the observer, and the need to examine the world from a value-free perspective.

Ontology

The philosophical study of ‘being’ or the nature of reality.

Positivism

The ‘scientific method’ of formulating hypotheses about phenomena and testing them with standardised procedures and data-gathering methods – usually quantitative data, associated with deduction and objectivism.

Qualitative research

The use of exploratory and often unstructured methods to examine social issues; associated with induction and interpretivism.

Quantitative research

The use of objectivist and deductive methods, relying on hard provable (usually mathematical or statistical) data, largely associated with the physical sciences.

Theory

An explanation of the relationship between constituent factors of a phenomenon; an account of what causes what or how something arises – the relationship between variables.

Variable

A characteristic or property or attribute or phenomenon. Variations in one variable (called the independent variable) are taken as predictors, influences or causes of variations in the other variable (called the dependent variable).



References Abercrombie, N, S Hill and BS Turner (eds) (1994) The Penguin Dictionary of Sociology, London: Penguin Books Ltd. Bryman, A (1988) ‘The Debate about Quantitative and Qualitative Research’, Chapter 5 in Quantity and Quality in Social Research, London: Unwin Hyman. Bryman, A (2001) Social Research Methods, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Howard, K and JA Sharp (1983) The Management of a Student Research Project, Hants: Gower Publishing Company Limited. Moore, N (2000) How to do Research, third edition, London: Library Association Publishing. Punch, KF (1998) Introduction to Social Research Methods, London: Sage Publications Ltd. Robson, Colin (2002) Real World Research, second edition, Oxford: Blackwell. Saunders, M, P Lewis and A Thornhill (eds) (2000) Research Methods for Business Students, second edition, Harlow Essex, England: Financial Times Prentice Hall, Pearson Education Limited.


15


16
