Pre-Release In Sociology

Sociology Pre-release 2012
Using the pre-release material and your wider sociological knowledge, explain and evaluate the use of qualitative methods (ethnography/ semi-structured interviews/ observation) to research the values of young working class males.
Within Nayak’s study he used ethnographic methods such as observation and semi-structured interviews. The aim of ethnographic research is to get close to the people being studied so that the researcher can experience the social world in the same ways. If this is successful then verstehen can be achieved. One method used is observation. There is non-participant observation and participant observation. Non- participant observation is where the sociologist simply observes the group but does
not seek to join in their activities. Participant observation is where the sociologist joins a group of people and studies their behaviour. Nayak used participant observation for his research into values of young working class males. He observed his target population around the run around estate near one of the schools, and also observed some during nights out in the city centre. The other method Nayak used was semi-structured interviews. These contain some pre-set standardised questions as well as the opportunity for additional questions to be asked when necessary. The questions are mostly open and are a lot more structured than unstructured interviews. Nayak used semi-structured interviews in both schools to try and gain a better understanding. They took place in the school setting, with small groups of boys. These interviews helped gain qualitative data.
This piece of research that Nayak produced can be seen as high in validity.
Validity is the extent to which the research provides a true picture of the social reality of those being studied. So in Nayak’s study the validity is based on whether he provided a full picture of the lives of the ‘Charvers’ and ‘Real Geordies’. Naka’s study is high in validity as the students who were interviewed would be comfortable in opening up as they are in an environment that they are used to. Also the observation that took place provides strong validity as the working class males would act natural. Although there is the downfall that some of the participants may try to show off which will weaken the validity of the
study.
The reliability of this study is therefore weak.
Research maybe said to be high in reliability if the method used to collect the data is a standardised one. Questionnaires and structured interviews are both standardised measuring methods which make the research easier to repeat and able to get the similar results as the original study. As there were no standardised procedures in Nayak’s study, it is weak with reliability. Although there is some reliability with his study as he did tape record his interviews that he held with the small groups. Positivists would use standardised procedure as they believe that they are consistent and that if the results vary it will not be because the research is unscientific. Within the semi-structured interviews that Nayak led he allowed the participants’ own interests to guide the interview. This may increase the validity, but it also decreases the reliability. Although semi-structured interviews are unreliable, they are higher in reliability than unstructured interviews, as there are some open questions asked to everyone which could be
repeated.
The representativeness of the study is low as Nayak only interview two schools in the Newcastle area. If he was trying to get a full image of the young working class male’s attitudes then a varied range of locations and places is necessary. Representativeness is concerned with whether the group or individuals being studied are a fair reflection of the target population and whether they are typical of it in terms of characteristics such as age, gender, ethnicity, and/or social class.
Nayak used a purposive sample as his sampling technique. This is where you choose a particular source to gain your sample to find the people you are looking for. Nayak’s sample was young working class males and was gained through targeting two schools in Newcastle with a high population of white, working class youngsters. With only using two schools in his study, Nayak has limited the representativeness as this doesn’t reflect the characteristics of all the white working class boys in the area. Also the fact that the head teacher being the gatekeeper may affect the representativeness as he will select boys from the school that will reflect more favourably on the school and this won’t give Nayak a true picture of the young working class males in the area. The amount of young males that he sampled is unknown but is probably a small amount as there were only two schools used in the study. This may affect generalisability.
Generalisability is a concept concerned with the extent to which it is possible to apply the findings from the research sample to the wider target population. If the sample is large enough and is an accurate image of the target population then the research findings could be applied in that way. Although some small studies can be seen to be high in generalisability, Nayak’s study is not one of these. His interpretivist approach to his study meant that he mainly collected qualitative data, which isn’t seen to be high in generalisability. It is usually positivists that like to obtain data like this that allows them to make generalisations.
The target population that Nayak’s study was about was young working class males. His study only focuses on males of a school age. This makes his study low in representativeness. Also the area that he studied need to be taken into account. If he was trying to find out the attitudes of young working class males of the UK then the area studies is too small to make any generalisations and rely on any of the conclusions that he came up with during the study.