Taking Sides in Social Research: Essays on Partisanship and Bias

213 Pages·2000·3.023 MB·English

by  Martyn Hammersley

Taking sides in social research
In the past it was generally taken for granted that the goal of social research was the
production of objective knowledge, and that this required a commitment to value
neutrality. In more recent times, however, both these ideals have come to be challenged,
and it is often argued that all research is inevitably political in its assumptions and effects.
In a major contribution to the debate, Martyn Hammersley assesses recent versions of
this argument, and also those to be found in the classic and still influential works of
C.Wright Mills, Howard S.Becker and Alvin Gouldner. He concludes that the case for
partisanship is not convincing, and that an intelligent and sceptical commitment to the
principles of objectivity and value neutrality must remain an essential feature of social
research.
Martyn Hammersley is Professor in Educational and Social Research at the Open
University.

Taking sides in social research
Essays on partisanship and bias
Martyn Hammersley

London and New York
First published 2000
by Routledge
11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE
Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada
by Routledge
29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group.
This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005.

To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection
of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.
© 2000 Martyn Hammersley
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced
or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means,
now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording
or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publishers.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Hammersley, Martyn.
Taking sides in social research: essays in partisanship and bias/
Martyn Hammersley.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. Social sciences—Research. 2. Social sciences—Methodology.
3. Values. I. Title.
H62.H2338 1999
300′.7′ 2—dc21 99–31251
ISBN 0-203-97946-X Master e-book ISBN
ISBN 0-415-20286-8 (hbk)
ISBN 0-415-20287-6 (pbk)
This book is dedicated to
the memory of Peter Foster,
colleague and friend.

Contents

Acknowledgements ix

Introduction 1
1 Taking sides in research: an assessment of the rationales for partisanship 15
2 Between Marx and Weber: C.Wright Mills on the role of the social scientist 33
3 Which side was Becker on? Questioning political and epistemological 56

radicalism
4 Against Gouldner: on the fallacy of objective partisanship 84
5 Methodological purism: anatomy of a critique 116
6 Bias in social research 142

WITH ROGER GOMM

Bibliography 157
Index 175

Acknowledgements
My family have borne some of the costs of this book. My love and thanks go to them.
An earlier version of Chapter 1was given at the University of Plymouth in November
1995, and at the London Institute of Education in June 1996. This was published in
D.Scott (ed.) Values and Educational Research, Bedford Way Papers No. 9, London
Institute of Education, 1999. Chapter 6is based on a paper presented at the University of
Southampton in March 1996, and at the Fourth International Sociological Association
Conference on Social Science Methodology, University of Essex, July 1996. I am obliged
to those who participated in the discussions on these occasions for their questions and
comments. In addition, I am very grateful to Howie Becker for taking the time to
comment on Chapter 3, and to Barry Cooper and Max Travers for their responses to an
earlier version of Chapter 6. Permission to reprint the latter from Sociological Research
Online is also acknowledged.
A long-term debt is owed to Roger Gomm, not just for allowing me to include a jointly
written paper in this volume, but more importantly for discussions over many years of the
issues dealt with throughout the book. Peter Foster was the other participant in those
discussions, and he wrote detailed comments on most of the chapters. Indeed, my interest
in the whole topic stems from him. I wish he were still with us, not least so that we could
continue our discussions into the future—but most of all for his family.