1. Sociological Imagination and Investigation Lecture 1: From sociological imagination to sociological investigation

2. Organisational Information Web page for Term 2 is found at: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/sociology/undergrad/modules/sii/home/term2 Class essay (observation exercise) due 6 th March Assessed essay due 28 th April Classes: Same time and place as Term One. THERE ARE NO CLASSES THIS WEEK Reading Packs: Can be purchased from Jane Cooper Extracts are also available via the library web-page at http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/library/main/electronicresources/extracts/so/so109/ Lecture slides will be available on-line after the lecture Module convenor: I will be convenor of the module for Term 2 so please address any organisational questions to me. Questions related to the class or assessed work from Term 1, however, should be addressed to your seminar tutor or to Professor Archer.

3. Putting ‘imagination’ back into sociological investigation ‘I use the term methodolatry… to describe a preoccupation with selecting and defending methods to the exclusion of the actual substance of the story being told.’ (Janesick, V.J. 1994. ‘The dance of qualitative research design: metaphor, methodolatry, and meaning’ in N.K.Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, p.215 cited in K. Punch, Introduction to Social Research [key reading Week 11])

4. Aims and objectives of Term 2: To make the transition from ‘thinking sociologically’ to ‘practising sociology’ (but without stopping ‘thinking’). To learn about the variety of ways in which research questions are generated and about the processes by which they are connected to both ‘theory’ and ‘method’. To get a broad overview of what are broadly called ‘quantitative’ and ‘qualitative’ methods and develop skills in determining the most appropriate methods (or ‘mix’ of methods) for investigating a particular question.

5. The first steps: defining research questions Research questions are important because: They organise the project, give it direction; They define what lies within, and beyond, its scope; They keep the researcher ‘on track’ during the project; They guide the researcher to what data they will need, and thus, help decide what research methods are most appropriate; They provide a framework for writing up the project. (see Keith Punch, Introduction to Social Research, Chapter 3 ‘Research Questions’ [key reading for Week 11]). Cultural Capital and Social Exclusion Project, 2003-2006

6. Step 1: The sociological imagination A big idea + a reason for studying it But where do ideas come from? Experience? Theory? Observable phenomena? Is there still a relationship between taste and social class? What does it tell us about culture and class in contemporary Britain?

7. Step 2: Linking theory and research Inductive approach Starts with experience/observable events Pools a set of observations and existing data about the social world Generates a ‘research question’ or ‘theory’ from experiential data. Deductive approach Starts with a theoretical presupposition Applies that theory to a set of data [a particular case] Deduces an explanation for that data. Seeks not only corroboration of theory but also its falsification (Popper) In CCSE we started with Bourdieu ‘taste classifies and it classifies the classifier’

8. Attention: False binaries at large! In practice it is rare that any approach is purely inductive or deductive. In ‘Cultural Capital and Social Exclusion’, we applied elements of both inductive and deductive approaches. Use similar empirical material (class, culture), apply the principles of a theory (Bourdieu) – but allow for it to be developed or disproved. This is a practical example of what Thomas Kuhn [see ‘The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 1970) suggests is the process of ‘normal science’.

9. ‘Operationalising’ our research questions 1.Identify a research sample 2.What do people like, do & know about?  Qualitative research – gathering data about British tastes from focus groups and newspapers/magazines  Quantitative research about taste and participation in cultural activities (including Art, music, literature AND Film and TV) 3.What are the relationships between knowledge, taste and participation and social division?  Quantitative research about socio-economic variables (occupation, income, education level etc.)  Quantitative research about ethnicity and gender.  Qualitative research about housing, work and social position. 4.What do cultural tastes mean to people?  Qualitative research (interviews) on role of cultural tastes (‘high’ and ‘popular’)in identity, relationships of parenting and partnership  Qualitative research (observation) on home location and decoration

10. Findings More at www.open.ac.uk/socialsciences/cultural- capital-and-social-exclusion/project- summary.phpwww.open.ac.uk/socialsciences/cultural- capital-and-social-exclusion/project- summary.php Cultural taste is still shaped by class (income, education, occupation) Age, gender, ethnicity are all important to contemporary ‘cultural inequality’ But cultural hierarchies are shifting and fluid

11. Conclusion: Food for further thought Real-world (as opposed to text-book) research is complex and ‘messy’.  Research projects might be like Bismarck’s laws and sausages – ‘it is better not to see them being made’ This messiness is the product of…  The social world is fluid, changing, complex  not only the scientists (researchers) have opinions, but the ‘objects’ of our research also. This is what makes social science different from natural sciences