Examine the reasons why some sociologists choose not to use experiments when conducting research.
d) Examine the reasons why some sociologists choose not to use experiments when conducting research. (20 marks)
The three different experiments that sociologists are able to use are laboratory experiments, field experiments and the comparative method.
Sociologists don't tend to use experiments as they include lots of practical, theoretical and ethical problems. In laboratory experiments, it is very difficult to control, as well as identify, all the possible variables that may have an influence on a particular scenario in the past. Positivists see it as possibly unethical to control all of the variables within laboratory experiments as most of the time, participants are unaware of the real reason they are involved in the experiment and do not agree with misleading or deceiving people. Another ethical problem is that some experiments may have an emotional or psychological effects on the subjects involved. So instead, positivists tend to use the comparative method.
The comparative method is a 'thought method' and is only carried out in the mind of the sociologist but on the other hand, this method gives the sociologist less control over the possible variables so we are less certain that this method definitely discovers the real cause of something. The comparative method has 3 advantages over laboratory experiments; it can be used to study events that happened in the past, it has no artificiality, and it includes no ethical issues as it doesn't mislead, deceive or harm any of the participants.
Also, laboratory experiments tend to study just a small sample of a group rather than a whole range of a group. This makes it challenging to investigate 'large-scale social phenomena'. Only using a small sample reduces the representativeness of the experiments. Interpretivists refuse to use laboratory experiments as it is an artificial situation observing unnatural behaviour and fails to achieve the main goal of validity. It is uncertain that the results of laboratory
The three different experiments that sociologists are able to use are laboratory experiments, field experiments and the comparative method.
Sociologists don't tend to use experiments as they include lots of practical, theoretical and ethical problems. In laboratory experiments, it is very difficult to control, as well as identify, all the possible variables that may have an influence on a particular scenario in the past. Positivists see it as possibly unethical to control all of the variables within laboratory experiments as most of the time, participants are unaware of the real reason they are involved in the experiment and do not agree with misleading or deceiving people. Another ethical problem is that some experiments may have an emotional or psychological effects on the subjects involved. So instead, positivists tend to use the comparative method.
The comparative method is a 'thought method' and is only carried out in the mind of the sociologist but on the other hand, this method gives the sociologist less control over the possible variables so we are less certain that this method definitely discovers the real cause of something. The comparative method has 3 advantages over laboratory experiments; it can be used to study events that happened in the past, it has no artificiality, and it includes no ethical issues as it doesn't mislead, deceive or harm any of the participants.
Also, laboratory experiments tend to study just a small sample of a group rather than a whole range of a group. This makes it challenging to investigate 'large-scale social phenomena'. Only using a small sample reduces the representativeness of the experiments. Interpretivists refuse to use laboratory experiments as it is an artificial situation observing unnatural behaviour and fails to achieve the main goal of validity. It is uncertain that the results of laboratory