getting started

38 Pages·2006·0.26 MB·English

by  Carol Magee

CHAPTER 2
GETTING STARTED
The fact that you’re reading this book suggests that will influence your research design, (c) discuss the
you have some interest in the social sciences. You importance of connecting with the literature, and
may even have articulated more specific interests for (d) give a first glimpse at some of the options you
yourself, for example, studying juvenile delinquency, have for operationalizing variables of interest to you.
organizational dynamics, the socialization process, or
prejudice and racism. Still, as you’ll learn in this SOURCES OF RESEARCH IDEAS
text, that’s only the beginning. Doing research
involves translating those general interests into spe-
cific researchable questions and then designing con- Three Models of Science
crete research procedures that address those
questions so that you can ultimately go out and con- In logic, a distinction has traditionally been made
duct research of your own. Indeed, one of the first between two different processes of reasoning: deduc-
truisms you learn about research is that it is not an tive and inductive processes. Deductive logic
activity you can do in the abstract—“doing research” involves reasoning from the general to the particular;
ultimately involves gathering very specific informa- that is, one begins with broad theoretical generaliza-
tion from specific samples of people or files or other tions and tests their ability to deal with specific
objects in particular places at a particular time. instances of phenomena. This approach involves (1)
Unless you are an experienced researcher who developing theories about a phenomenon, (2)
already has a research program underway, in most expressing hypotheses (predictions) based on these
cases putting together a proposal will involve aniter- theories, (3) creating or observing instances of the
ativeprocess in which you start with a broader and phenomenon to see whether things happen as the
more amorphous topic and set of interests, which theory predicts they should, and then (4) looking for
you then take through successive iterations of getting new situations in which to test or expand the theory
more and more specific until you reach a final pro- if it succeeds, or revising the theory or even aban-
posal that constitutes your departure point for actu- doning it entirely if its predictions are not supported.
ally undertaking the research. Our objective in this As you know from Chapter 1, the deductive model
and the next three chapters is to take you from the of science has been preferred by quantitative
point of having a vague idea of a topic on which you researchers.
might like to do research, to the point of being able In contrast, inductive reasoning begins with
to outline a general proposal for a plan of action to specifics and uses these to generate general princi-
start addressing the even more specific design and ples. You start by observing, in other words, and
procedural issues that we discuss in the chapters fol- then move from observation to theory rather than
lowing that. In the current chapter, we will (a) out- the other way around. This tends to be the approach
line where research ideas come from, (b) consider of choice for qualitative researchers, who believe that
how the different research objectives you might have theory should not be imposed from above but,
31 NEL
32 CHAPTER 2 – GETTING STARTED
rather, should emerge from or be grounded in the is actually quite trivial; deciding where to “start
context of everyday life (e.g., see Glaser & Strauss counting” in an ongoing process is relatively arbi-
1967; Strauss & Corbin 1997). trary. Can we ever start with “pure theory,” com-
Although at one time there was scathing debate pletely devoid of any informal knowledge gained
between practitioners of the respective approaches from our earlier observation and experience? Prob-
(e.g., see McKinlay & Potter 1987) as to which was ably not. Can we ever start with “pure data,” com-
“right” or truly worthy of the title “science,” more pletely devoid of any prior theoretical organization
recently there has been recognition of their inherent related to our own naive or “commonsensical” beliefs
complementarity. One of the first to make that point (as human beings) about how the world works?
was Wallace (1971), who asserted that inductive and Probably not.
deductive approaches are not in either/or opposi-
tion, but rather are better seen as opposite sides of Deductive and Inductive Sources of
the same coin. Wallace’s Wheel(see Figure 2.1) shows Research Ideas
an essentially circular (or iterative), and hence infi-
nite, process that encompasses both deductive and Returning now to the question of where research
inductive methods. ideas come from, the deductive–inductive distinc-
Wallace’s (1971) “wheel of science” offers an tion suggests a number of alternatives.
important representation of the scientific process. It
acknowledges the different leanings of individual THEORY AS A SOURCE OF RESEARCH IDEAS
researchers, but also shows their commonalities. From the deductive orientation, we see the impor-
Whether they emphasize deduction or induction, all tant role that theorycan play in guiding and gener-
scientists are involved in an ongoing dialectic rela- ating research. A theory is essentially a set of concepts
tionship involving both theory and data, that is, and a delineation of their interrelationships that,
processes that involve the formulation of abstract taken together, purport to explain a phenomenon or
principles and the requirement that one’s specula- set of phenomena. One function of theory is to help
tions and theories be subjected to some form of make sense of the world or of a particular class of
empirical test or validation. phenomena. In doing so, theories also guide
The elegance of Wallace’s wheel is that it shows research, which makes them both powerful and con-
very simply how the question “Which comes first?” straining.
Perhaps an example will help here. Suppose we’re
Figure 2.1 interested in explaining why some people suddenly
Wallace’s “Wheel of Science” become “criminals.” An infinite number of variables
could potentially “explain” criminality—everything
theories
from people’s shoe sizes to their nutrition to their
family background, their hormonal levels, and/or
their social context.
A theorist takes a particular subset of these vari-
empirical
generalizations hypotheses ables and tries to offer a convincing explanation of
why and how they combine to generate “crimi-
nality.” These speculations, made public, give theo-
rists and others a research direction to pursue by
observations
offering propositions that can be tested. Lombroso
(1911), for example, theorized that some people are,
Source: W. Wallace (1971), The Logic of Science in Sociology
in essence, “born criminals” who differ in systematic
(Hawthorne, NY: Aldine Atherton). Reprinted with permis-
sion. physiological ways from non-criminals.1Once artic-
NEL
CHAPTER 2 – GETTING STARTED 33
ulated, Lombroso’s theory led him and others to test themselves to a course of action than before. Knox
the notions implied by the theory or its variants. and Inkster (1968) decided to test that theoretical
Once created, the theory itself helps direct research proposition at their local racetrack. They approached
(through its implications). Not surprisingly, in Lom- two groups of bettors—some who were in the lineup
broso’s case this involved taking all sorts of measure- waiting to place their bets, and others who had just
ments of the bodies of imprisoned criminals and finished placing their bets. Sure enough, those who
others in order to identify those physiological char- were asked afterthey had placed their bet how con-
acteristics that might distinguish the two. fident they felt about their wager expressed signifi-
But theories have a down side as well insofar as cantly greater certainty about whether their horse
they impose a virtual set of blinders on how you view would win than those who had not yet made it to
the world. Because Lombroso’s theory focused on the betting window, even though the difference
physiological differences between criminals and non- between the two situations was less than a minute.
criminals, he spent all his time measuring criminals
and completely ignored such phenomena as social EXTENDING OR LIMITING A THEORY’S COVERAGE
factors that might cause some behaviours to be called Another procedure for generating research ideas is to
“criminal” while others are not, or labelling processes try to extend the coverageof an existing theory. One
and environmental factors that other theorists have person might have posited a theory that explains a
seized upon to try to explain “criminality.” certain social dynamic within business organizations.
As this suggests, an important dimension on You’d be making a significant contribution by
which theories vary is in their prospective compre- showing that the same theoretical principles also
hensiveness. Lombroso’s theory was narrow, since it apply to family dynamics. Conversely, you’d also be
focused “only” on criminality and remained at a making a contribution if you were to point out lim-
physiological level of explanation. In contrast, itationsto the applicability of existing theories. The-
Eysenck’s (e.g., 1953) theory of personality is often ories of aggression, for example, have typically been
given as an example of a “broad” or “general” theory, developed to account for aggression toward minority
since it attempted to offer an integrated explanation groups and/or sources of frustration. But do these
of everything from physiological differences through theories also account for violent behaviour toward
individual and social behaviour to cultural differ- intimates, such as child abuse by parents or wife
ences. assault by husbands?
In sum, “good” theories are useful devices because
they help coordinate research by providing a research OFFERING ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS
focus and by implying hypotheses that can be tested Yet another source of research ideas involves trying
empirically. Their weakness is that they may blind to formulate alternative explanationsfor a given phe-
you to other variables or other perspectives that are nomenon. Early criminological theories (e.g., Lom-
beyond the scope of the theory. broso 1911) saw those who went through the justice
system as “criminals” and tried to ascertain the ways
APPLYING THEORY TO SITUATIONS in which “criminals” differed from the rest of us. But
Many research ideas emerge from theory. If a theory later theorists (e.g., see Rubington & Weinberg
states that some set of events shouldgo together, you 1968) demonstrated that many, if not most, of us
can test the theory by thinking of a specific situation have indulged in “criminal” behaviour at various
in which the theory should be able to predict or points in our lives. This finding shifted the major
account for what occurs. For example, a once-pop- focus of interest from what we do to the process by
ular attitude theory known as dissonance theory (see which a person or action is labelled “criminal”; that
Festinger 1957) suggested that people will feel dif- is, what are the social processes by which deviant
ferently about things after they have committed labels are conferred, and what do such processes
NEL
34 CHAPTER 2 – GETTING STARTED
imply for future criminality? D. G. Wagner (1984) ences may bring special insights to their research
refers to this process of theory development as vari- because of having experienced a phenomenon from
ationand offers numerous other examples of theo- the “inside.”
rists building on one another’s work by offering Lofland and colleagues (2006), for example, sug-
competing explanatory mechanisms for similar phe- gest that one way to begin research is to “start from
nomena. where you are”; that is, to begin with your own life
All the above suggestions reaffirm the statement situation and the concerns and issues that arise there-
that one role of theory in science is to generate from. Dozens of examples could be cited of
research possibilities; if a theory doesn’t suggest researchers who did exactly that:
research possibilities, it’s not a very good theory. Per-
haps even more importantly, in order to be consid- For example, Gary Alan Fine’s Gifted Tongues
ered “scientific,” a theory must be capable of being (2001), a study of high school debate and adoles-
disproved. If there are no data that can possibly lead cent culture, was connected to his son Todd’s dis-
us to say, “Oh, I guess we were wrong,” then we are tinguished career as a high school debater. In a
not talking about theory or science, but about faith. similar vein, John Irwin’s interest in The Felon
Note also that theories are an integral starting (1970), in Prisons in Turmoil(1980), and in The
point for the deductive approach to science. But Jail (1985) was intimately related to his own
what about inductive approaches? How might felony conviction at the age of 21 and the five
research ideas be derived using them? Inductivists years he spent in a California state prison. And
place no less emphasis on theory than deductivists, Mary Romero’s study of domestic workers (Maid
but they disagree over whether theory should guide in the U.S.A.1992) may be said to have had its
or emerge fromthe research process. Recall that, for origins in the fact that as a teenager she had
deductivists, one beginswith theory, and then “good” worked as a domestic, as had her mother, sister,
theory suggests or implies what to research. In con- relatives, and neighbors. (10)
trast, inductivists argue that such theory is unlikely
to be profound and may represent little more than Several advantages accrue from starting from
a premature imposition of theoretical blinders that where you are. The assets you bring to such a project
says more about the theoretician than about the phe- include: (1) an interest in the research topic, because
nomenon under consideration. They suggest that of its meaningfulness to you, that will help sustain
ideas and theories should emerge from interacting you through the persistence of effort required to
with and observing the phenomenon itself. Listed actually complete a piece of research; (2) insights
below are some ways in which this might occur. into those aspects of the phenomenon with which
you are familiar; and probably (3) knowledge of at
STARTING FROM WHERE YOU ARE least some others who are in the same position as
From within qualitative perspectives, the inductive you, which may help provide access to needed
(grounded) approach to data gathering and theo- research sites and to an initial sample of people you
rizing is encouraged, and “intimate knowledge” of can approach regarding their experiences.
the phenomenon under consideration is not consid- At the same time, there are also some potential
ered a sin. Accordingly, while quantitative potholes in this road that need to be avoided.
researchers might be worried if you are “too close” Making part of your life a research site may,
to a phenomenon of interest because of the propen- depending on the nature of the research, be an over-
sity to “overidentify” and the concern that you might whelmingly emotional experience. A student in one
be unable to remain “appropriately” detached and of our classes, for example, started a project on incest
analytical, qualitative researchers recognize that survivors because of her own experiences in that
those who have undergone particular life experi- domain. Ultimately, it became clear that she hadn’t
NEL
CHAPTER 2 – GETTING STARTED 35
yet really come to grips with the experience herself, about our lives, in the social science sense, when we
and interviewing others brought back too much of are too wrapped up in experiencing them.
the pain she’d experienced in her own life. The
project was put on hold until the timing was right OBSERVATION AS A SOURCE OF IDEAS
for her. As one might expect, research ideas within the
Starting from where you are also can be problem- inductive framework emerge through observation
atic because of role conflicts that can emerge from coupled with the natural curiosity of the social sci-
making part of your life a research site. Suppose entist who inevitably asks Why? or How? You might
you’re employed as a nurse, for example, and want begin with a particular phenomenon that interests
to do a study regarding doctor–nurse relationships. you (e.g., unemployment, criminality, depression,
Information derived from interviews with doctors people buying membership in fitness centres, the
and nurses in the ward where you work might be surge of interest in “designer” dogs) and then try to
problematic when and if your role as a researcher is suggest and test out factors that might influence it.
pitted against your ongoing role as nurse. For Where does it come from? Who does it? Is there
example, as a researcher you may end up asking more of it in the summer than the winter? Are the
questions related to your research that you otherwise patterns the same or different in Canada and Aus-
might not ask of your colleagues, leading you to tralia?
hear about things you otherwise might not hear. It was observation of this sort coupled with
Some of this information may involve conflicting asking Why? that led Emile Durkheim to formulate
standards—for example, as a researcher you are nor- his classic work (1951) on suicide. He began by
mally expected to keep the source of everything you observing that countries differ in their predominant
hear confidential; as a nurse, there may be reporting religious affiliation, and that they also tend to differ
requirements associated with your role in which you in their suicide rates. This observed covariation ulti-
are supposed to report certain categories of behav- mately led him to formulate his ideas that suicide is
iour to your union, hospital officials, or supervisor. affected by both social regulation (norms) and social
Even if you areable to compartmentalize your role integration and group solidarity.
for the duration of the study—something you are Although more modest in aspiration, the first
ethically obliged to do to ensure your primary inter- piece of formal research Ted ever conducted was
ests are those of the research participants—once the generated via a similar process. He was walking
study is completed, you go back to your former role. down a street and saw a movie marquee advertising
But you now have information you might not oth- a somewhat racy (for the time) Swedish movie enti-
erwise have obtained about certain people, infor- tled I Am Curious Yellow. But instead of the usual
mation you can’t simply “forget.” notations one sees on marquees, in which some
A third potential problem can arise from being so obscure critic is quoted as saying that the film is
embedded in a situation that you are unable to rise “one of the year’s ten best,” this marquee said only
above it. The trick in starting from where you are is that the movie had been “banned in Alberta.” It
to use the insights to be gained from your own expe- made Ted wonder about movie classification and
rience, but then to activate the “sociological imagina- censorship, particularly whether the mere act of ban-
tion” (as C. W. Mills [1959] termed it) and be able ning a movie or classifying it might (ironically)
to see yourself as one instance of many, thereby enhance interest. Thanks to an encouraging pro-
helping to contextualize your own experience. This fessor, Bob Altemeyer, the result was a field experi-
is sometimes easier said than done: as Marshall ment (Palys 1971) in which he advertised a movie
McLuhan is reputed to have said, “The last person to called Prostitution in Denmarkin almost exactly the
ask how the water is is a fish” (see Hagan 1989: 157). same way to various groups of people. Each group
It’s sometimes very difficult to see what’s “interesting” was given the same general description of the film.
NEL
36 CHAPTER 2 – GETTING STARTED
The only difference between the groups came near own sake, situations may arise where the replication
the end of the advertisement, when some of them provides interesting information. For example, many
were told that the film had been rated “G” (General, older studies that looked at sex differences might be
i.e., persons of any age admitted) by the Provincial interesting to replicate now that sex roles in our
Film Classification Board, but told others that it society have supposedly undergone a major transi-
had been rated “Adult” (i.e., one must be an adult or tion over the last few decades. Similarly, American
accompanied by one) or “Restricted Adult” (i.e., or European studies might be replicated by a Cana-
only those over 18 admitted).2 dian if one had reason to posit that a comparison
with the Canadian social context might yield dif-
INTENSIVE CASE STUDIES AND EXPERIENCE ferent results.
SURVEYS
Systematic observation in the context of intensive WHEN NEW TECHNOLOGIES OPEN DOORS
casestudiesis another useful source of research ideas, A special occasion arises when new technologies
still within the inductive framework. Many of Jean open doors that previously were closed and thereby
Piaget’s theories on child development emerged from provide new opportunities for replicating earlier
observing his own children, for example, while many research with newly accessible samples, or moving
of Sigmund Freud’s came from his discussions with into areas that were previously inaccessible. The
clients. Similarly, if you’re new to an area of research, Internet and the wide array of computer technolo-
an oral historyor broader experience surveymay sug- gies that surround it is an example of exactly that as
gest research ideas. If you want to study prejudice these technologies have brought together communi-
and discrimination toward minority groups, for ties of persons, particularly through blogs, podcasts,
example, you could talk to a Japanese person who newsgroups, instant messaging and chat groups,
lived in the internment camps in British Columbia who otherwise would be very difficult to locate in
or California during World War II, a Jew who lived any significant numbers. Chris does research
in Germany at the same time, to Muslim women in involving the sex trades, for example; in this field
North America who choose to wear the hijab, or a much research has been done on sex trade workers,
Maori in New Zealand. Be careful, though, not to but very little had been done regarding their clients
let this process steer you away from a review of the because of difficulties in locating and contacting
relevant literature. Also don’t assume that the first them. With the opportunities afforded by the
person you talk to is necessarily representative of his Internet, however (e.g., see Atchison 1999; see also
or her group. When doing this sort of exploratory Chapter 6), Chris ended up conducting one of the
research, talk to and observe as diverse an array of first large-scale studies of sex-worker clients when
people and situations as possible. more than 500 clients responded to his solicitations
to participate in an anonymous Internet-based
OTHER RESEARCH AS A SOURCE OF IDEAS survey of persons who had paid for sex (see Atchison
A third general category of sources of research ideas 1998; Atchison, Lowman, and Fraser 1998). As new
is the actual process of doing and reading about technology develops and becomes more integrated
research. Researchers often conclude their papers into our daily lives there is no end to the new
with suggestions for further research. Why not take research possibilities that will arise for members of
them up on it? the social science community to pursue.
REPLICATION CHALLENGING PRIOR RESEARCH
Replicationof prior research also can serve a useful One might also generate new research by challenging
function. Although most professional journals aren’t prior research.Sherif (1935), for example, performed
interested in publishing a straight replication for its a number of studies that showed most people would
NEL
CHAPTER 2 – GETTING STARTED 37
conform to the judgments of others. Solomon Asch ANALOGY
(1958) didn’t dispute Sherif’s results, but speculated Research may also be generated on the basis of
that Sherif had overestimated the degree to which we analogyto other domains. William McGuire (1973),
conform to others because of his use of highly for example, took the immunization model from
ambiguous stimuli. Positing that less ambiguity biology and tried to apply it to the realm of attitude
would lead to less conformity, he went on to demon- change. In biology, organisms are immunized against
strate that this was indeed the case. various diseases by giving them vaccines that actu-
ally contain weak strains of the disease. McGuire
found that people who were first “immunized” by
CLARIFYING UNDERLYING PROCESSES
Clarifying underlying processes is another useful hearing samples of arguments that might be used
research contribution. Many treatment variables against their own position were much less likely to
or therapeutic interventions are actually packages change their attitudes than were those who had not
of variables, and you may want to determine which been “immunized” when both were exposed to argu-
aspects of the variable actually produced the effect. ments in opposition to their own opinion.
One researcher might find, for example, that a par-
ticular group-therapy program led to some positive SURPRISES: ANOMALY AND SERENDIPITY
social outcome for the participants. But what The terms anomalyand serendipity refer to research
specifically about the program led to that success? that begins or is redirected because an unexpected
Was it the individualized attention? The opportu- and surprising state of affairs arises. Anomaliesare
nity to practise new skills? A change in self-con- situations that should not exist according to the
cept? The presence of social support? An overall theory that’s guiding the research. An anomaly is “a
finding that a new therapy is effective could be fol- fact that doesn’t fit” and hence requires explanation
lowed by research that attempts to analyze the for the deviation.
processes involved in an ongoing process of pro- Kuhn (1970) argues that anomaly is a significant
gram development. contributor to scientific discovery, although a state
of affairs must first be recognized as an anomaly
RESOLVING CONFLICTING RESULTS before the real process of discovery begins. He pro-
Occasionally the literature contains conflicting vides several examples of anomaly in the natural sci-
results, and you may want to do research that ences, but also notes a number of instances where
attempts to resolve the conflict. In the early years of the same state of affairs clearly existed prior to
racial desegregation following World War II, for someone’s “discovery” of the anomaly. Yet the anom-
example, researchers and policy-makers in the alous situation had been ignored, rationalized away,
United States began wondering whether extensive or otherwise not appreciated by the earlier
contact between races would lead members of those researchers.
races (Blacks and whites, in this instance) to have Similar to anomaly is serendipity.While anomaly
more positive, or more negative, attitudes about refers to unearthing disconfirming evidence in the
each other. Some studies found that attitudes process of an ongoing inquiry, serendipity refers to
became more positive with greater interracial con- unexpected findings that are virtually stumbled upon
tact, while others found that they became more while looking for something else (e.g., the prospector
negative. A famous set of studies by Deutsch and who digs for gold and strikes oil). Once again, Kuhn
Collins (1951) tried to resolve these conflicting (1970) notes that recognition of the event precedes
findings by investigating and delineating the condi- “discovery” and that the history of science is replete
tions under which attitudes would become more with examples of individuals who ignored outcomes
positive and those under which they would become or considered them a mistake instead of taking the
more negative. inferential leap required for discovery. The theme is
NEL
38 CHAPTER 2 – GETTING STARTED
reaffirmed in Barber and Fox’s (1958) “case of the analysis that addressed all these issues (see Palys, Boy-
floppy-eared rabbits,” where the authors compare anowsky, & Dutton 1983, 1984).
two researchers who witnessed the same serendipi-
tous phenomenon: one realizes the event’s signifi- CULTURAL FOLKLORE, THE COMMON WISDOM,
cance, while the other does not. AND “COMMON SENSE”
In sum, new research directions occasionally Much of what we feel we “know” is based on tradi-
emerge in the process of doing research when puz- tional, speculative, or polemical belief that has never
zling anomalies and surprising outcomes occur. It been verified empirically. A valuable role of research
helps to be in the right place when they occur and is to help refute or confirm our beliefs about social
to be open enough to recognize their significance. A “facts,” assuming we believe that truth is a priority
comprehensive understanding of the relevant litera- and that important social decisions should be based
ture makes both more likely. But there are still other on evidence rather than on speculation or stereo-
sources of research ideas as well. typing.
One study on pornography was of this type.
THE SUPPLIED PROBLEM Social debate and discussion in Canada regarding
Many studies come about because someone gives pornography reached an apex during the period in
you a problem. Such is particularly the case in which the federally appointed Special (Fraser) Com-
applied settings, where myriad questions require sys- mittee on Pornography and Prostitution was
tematic, empirical answers: Is our program effec- preparing its report (1985). Reports in the media, as
tive? How can we better meet our objectives? What well as many of those submitted and/or presented to
will happen if we change our intake criteria? How the committee, affirmed lobbyists’ belief in the per-
can we decide who has the best chance to benefit vasiveness and easy availability of horrific video
from our program? material that glorifies sexual violence and encourages
For example, some years ago, Ted was approached misogynist attitudes. The committee wondered, Is it
by the federal Department of Communications really so? The resulting study (Palys 1984, 1986)
about doing a behavioural and attitudinal evaluation not only provided systematic evidence bearing on
of the computer terminals that had been installed in this question but also helped to address important
some city police patrol vehicles. The state-of-the-art theoretical and methodological issues (e.g., see W. A.
system gave patrol officers access to various data Fisher 1986; Palys & Lowman 1984) in research on
banks through a computer terminal affixed to their the relationship between exposure to erotic and sex-
car’s dashboard. Studies of the system to that point ually violent materials and aggression, particularly by
had been dominated by the engineers who had males toward females (see also Palys 1994).
designed it and had been limited to assessing its tech- Other examples appear regularly in the press.
nological attributes. But were patrol officers actually Immigration policies, for example, have often been
using the system as effectively as the system designers the subject of heated debate. Some politicians have
had hoped? How did officers feel about the system even pointed to isolated examples of immigrants
now that they had had a chance to use it? Had any getting in trouble, and wondered aloud whether
unanticipated issues arisen? Ted was interested in Canada can really “afford” as many immigrants as it
these questions and had others of his own about the takes, given all the social costs and problems
implications of computer technologies for decision allegedly associated with them (e.g., see M. Camp-
making, for police–community relations, and for cit- bell 1994: A1). A Statistics Canada study entitled
izens’ privacy issues, since the new system gave patrol Canada’s ChangingImmigrant Populationexamined
officers access to information without any need to census data, addressed that very issue, and concluded
justify their search. The result was an intensive that such fears were unfounded:
NEL
CHAPTER 2 – GETTING STARTED 39
Amid widespread fears that Canada’s immigration Denzin and Lincoln’s allusion to the “critical
system lets in criminals and layabouts, Statistics issues” of representationand legitimationrefers to
Canada has published a study showing immigrants the epistemologies, or ways of knowing, we discussed
are more hard-working, better educated, and more earlier—the philosophy of science we bring to our
stable than people born here. (Mitchell 1994b: A1) project. Their definition of research design subsumes
that offered by Selltiz and colleagues by reminding us
Clearly, therefore, research has a significant role about the challenge involved in preparing a strategy
to play in going beyond stereotype. Gathering data of inquiry that effectively and elegantly addresses the
and thereby providing systematic evidence about research question at hand but also effectively gives a
what “everyone knows” to be true—and often isn’t— voice to our research participants (representation,i.e.,
is an important role for research that attempts to how and by what authority we’ll represent our par-
facilitate the development of social policy and/or ticipants through our data and interpretations) and
simply sets out to better inform us about ourselves. the criteria by which we feel we can proclaim
authority for our data (legitimation).3
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES Both definitions—the first from a more quanti-
tative source, the second from a more qualitative
With a general topic in mind, a second issue to con- one—assert that research design involves stating a
sider that will influence your design is the objectives game plan through which one can gather informa-
you have in mind for your research. The relationship tion that addresses one’s research purpose in a
between research objectives and research design can simple, elegant, and systematic way. Like any game
be recognized easily by considering first what we plan, research designs embody and reflect everything
mean by “research design.” from very general considerations, such as your pri-
orities and objectives, to very specific decisions
“Research Design” Defined regarding who, what, when, where, and how.
One more quantitatively oriented text suggests that “a One Typology of Research Objectives
research design is the arrangement of conditions for
collection and analysis of data in a manner that aims
Any distinctions between research objectives are
to combine relevance to the research purpose with
bound to be arbitrary, and the divisions between
economy in procedure” (Selltiz, Wrightsman, &
them frequently ambiguous; not every textbook
Cook 1976: 90). From a more qualitative perspective,
draws the boundaries in exactly the same way. But
Denzin and Lincoln (1994; see also 2000) state that
one must begin somewhere, and we would cite five
that one often sees in the literature:
a research design describes a flexible set of guide-
lines that connects theoretical paradigms to 1. Exploratoryresearch (sometimes called formu-
strategies of inquiry and methods for collecting lativeresearch) aims to gain familiarity with or
empirical material. A research design situates to achieve new insights into a phenomenon,
researchers in the empirical world and connects often in order to formulate a more precise
them to specific sites, persons, groups, institu- research question or to develop hypotheses.
tions, and bodies of relevant interpretive material, 2. Descriptiveresearch aims to accurately portray
including documents and archives. A research the characteristics of a particular individual,
design also specifies how the investigator will situation, group, sample, or population,
address the two critical issues of representation and/or to describe processes that operate
and legitimation. (14) within a particular milieu.
NEL
40 CHAPTER 2 – GETTING STARTED
3. Relational research (sometimes called correla- or two until your trip is over, will you understand
tionalresearch) aims to determine how two or Montreal? You will certainly have a broader overview
more variables are related within a given of the city than those who chose to follow the tourist
sample or population. bureau’s guidance. You might now have a better
4. Explanatoryresearch aims to investigate causal understanding of what’s not in those tourist
relationships or other patterned conduct that brochures, allowing you to decide for yourself
is thought to characterize social processes. whether and in what sense the brochures represent
5. Transformativeresearch sets out to incorporate Montreal. But you will also have spent more time
research in an ongoing process of personal or pursuing dead ends and visiting places that weren’t
social development/change. Typically this particularly interesting; the payoff is that you may
research involves a more collaborative relation- also have found some experiential gems that are not
ship between researcher and participants in in the travel brochures and, through your interac-
which the two jointly define research priorities tions with Montrealers, may have developed more of
and longer term personal or group objectives. a sense of how they view their city. And over the
long term, at least it will be you (rather than the
Let’s briefly examine each of these.
authors of the travel brochures) who decides what is
or isn’t interesting to pursue in greater detail next
EXPLORATORY OR FORMULATIVE RESEARCH time around.
Suppose you’re going on a trip to Montreal, that You face similar choices as a social scientist. Recall
you’ve never been to Montreal before, and that you the dichotomy between deductive and inductive
want to somehow feel that you “know” Montreal by approaches. Like the traveller who prepares for a
the time your visit ends. This visit will inevitably trip by going to the tourist bureau and spends the
provide only a first glimpse of the city, but you want first night reading brochures, deductive researchers
to get at least a feel for what is important to know believe that the place to start is with a good map.
about the place and what you might do next time Why waste time going to places that aren’t particu-
you visit to get to know it better. larly interesting when someone else (the literature)
There are at least two ways to proceed. You might has already done a lot of the legwork, describing the
begin by visiting a Montreal tourist bureau and col- elements of the local geography and culture (the
lecting brochures. If you do, you’ll probably have an variables) that are of greatest interest in explaining
enjoyable visit and may come away with lots of slides (theorizing about) the phenomenon at hand? The
to show and stories to tell the folks at home. But do “good map” comes in the form of a theory, and the
you really know Montreal? You may have come to inventory of “where to go” (i.e., of variables to inves-
appreciate that part of Montreal that the tourist tigate) is defined by the theorist.
bureau defines as “of interest,” but you’ll never know Of course, this analogy is a generous one for
whether you “really” understand the place unless you deductive researchers, since tourist bureaus are gen-
also have some appreciation for what you missed.4 erally quite good at identifying a range of alternatives
You might decide instead that you want to dis- that appeal to most travellers. The more extreme
cover Montreal on your own. Perhaps you’d start by example would place us in some totally unfamiliar
hopping on a tour bus to look at some of the sights. situation where the knowledge was thin and the reli-
Then you might go for a walk through Old Mon- ability of maps was unknown. Yet the true deduc-
treal or Westmount, looking at the architecture and tivist would still argue for using a map, since it
talking to some of the people you meet in the parks would at least serve to systematize our inquiry. The
or brasseries. Or you might rent a car and drive until truth would ultimately reveal itself as we tested our
you get lost, and then try finding your way back to preliminary map by interaction with the new envi-
some central location again. If you do this for a week ronment. Gradually, we’d correct the map until it
NEL