1. Making Sense of the Social World 4th Edition
Chapter 2: The Process and Problems of Social Research

2. Outline: The Process and Problems
What is the Question?
What is the Strategy?
What is the Theory?
What is the Design?
Is it Ethical?
The text presents this information in a slightly different order.
The type of research question will determine the research strategy, deductive, inductive or descriptive, whether or not you will be testing a theory, and if your study is a cross-sectional or longitudinal design.
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

3. What Is the Question? Two research questions:
Does putting criminal offenders in jail reduce crime?
** Do mandatory arrest policies decrease domestic violence recidivism?
From Text:
Beginning in 1981, The Police Foundation and the Minneapolis Police Department began an experiment to find the answer. The Minneapolis experiment was first and foremost scientifically relevant: it built on a substantial body of contradictory theorizing about the impact of punishment on criminality (Sherman & Berk, 1984).
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

4. What Makes a Research Question “Good”?
1. Feasibility: Can you start and finish an investigation of your research question with the resources that you can obtain and in the time that is available?
2. Social Importance: Will an answer to your research question make a difference in the social world, even if only helps people understand a problem they consider important (as opposed to solving a problem)?
3. Scientific Relevance: Does your research question help to resolve some contradictory research findings or a puzzling issue in social theory?
(King, Keohane, & Verba, 1994)
From Text:
Many social scientists evaluate their research questions in terms of three criteria: feasibility given the time and resources available, social importance, and scientific relevance (King, Keohane, & Verba, 1994):
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

5. Deductive, Inductive, or Descriptive?
What is the Strategy?
The Circle of Science includes the following components:
Theory A logically interrelated set of propositions about empirical reality.
Hypothesis A tentative statement about empirical reality, involving a relationship between two or more variables.
Variable A characteristic or property that can vary (take on different values or attributes).
Independent variable A variable that is hypothesized to cause, or lead to, variation in another variable.
Dependent variable A variable that is hypothesized to vary depending on or under the influence of another variable.
Data include the systematically gathered evidence. Science requires evidence to be obtained empirically—through the senses. In the social sciences this usually means through “hearing” respondents’ answers to survey or interview questions or through “observing” behavior or artifacts.
Empirical generalizations are the organized patterns we observe in the data. We formulate these generalizations through analyses, qualitative or quantitative.
Deductive, Inductive, or Descriptive?
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

6. Strategy #1: Deductive Research
Deductive research starts with a theoretical premise and deduces a specific expectation.
From text:
deductive research starts with a theoretical premise and deduces a specific expectation.
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

7. What Is the Theory?
A social theory is a logically interrelated set of propositions about empirical reality (i.e., the social world as it actually exists).
Ask student to explain what a theory is. Then present this information.
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

8. Deterrence Theory or Labeling Theory
What Is the Theory?
Deterrence Theory or Labeling Theory
nFrom Text
Deterrence theory expects punishment to deter crime in two ways. General deterrence occurs when people see that crime results in undesirable punishments, that “crime doesn’t pay.” The persons who are punished serve as examples of what awaits those who engage in proscribed acts. Specific deterrence occurs when persons who are punished decide not to commit another offense so they can avoid further punishment (Lempert & Sanders, 1986:86-87). Deterrence theory leads to the prediction that arresting spouse abusers will lessen their likelihood of reoffending.
n Labeling theory distinguishes between primary deviance, the acts of individuals that lead to public sanction, and secondary deviance--the deviance that occurs in response to public sanction (Hagan, 1994:33). Arrest or some other public sanction for misdeeds labels the offender as deviant in the eyes of others. Once the offender is labeled, others will treat the offender as a deviant, and he or she is then more likely to act in a way that is consistent with the deviant label. Ironically, the act of punishment stimulates more of the very behavior that it was intended to eliminate. This theory suggests that persons arrested for domestic assault are more likely to reoffend than those who are not punished, which is the reverse of the deterrence theory prediction.
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

9. Inductive Research starts with data.
Strategy #2: Inductive Research
Inductive Research starts with data.
From Text:
In contrast to deductive research, inductive research begins with specific data, which are then used to develop (“induce”) a theory to account for the data. One way to think of this process is in terms of the research circle: rather than starting at the top of the circle with a theory, the researcher starts at the bottom of the circle with data and then develops the theory.
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

10. Inductive Research
If a police precinct noticed (from their arrest data) that arrests of at least one person from the scene of a domestic violence case resulted in fewer subsequent calls to that same scene, the police officers might develop (induce) a theory that mandatory arrests decrease domestic violence recidivism.
Using the inductive research strategy to understand the effects of mandatory arrests would require us to start with data already collected on this phenomenon.
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

11. Strategy #3: Descriptive Research
Descriptive research starts with data and proceeds only to the stage of making empirical generalizations, not generating entire theories.
From Text:
Both deductive and inductive research connect theory with data. Descriptive research by itself does not, but is still part of the research circle. As this graphic indicates, descriptive research starts with data and proceeds only to the stage of making empirical generalizations, not generating entire theories.
Valid description is actually critical in all research. Much important research for the government and private organizations is primarily descriptive: How many poor people live in this community? Is the health of the elderly improving? How frequently do convicted criminals return to crime? Description of social phenomena can stimulate more ambitious deductive and inductive research. Simply put, good description of data is the cornerstone for the scientific research process and an essential component for understanding the social world.
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

12. Descriptive Research
How frequently do those arrested for domestic violence return to violence?
Description of social phenomena can stimulate more ambitious deductive and inductive research.
Good description of data is a starting point for research that can substantiate theories.
Here’s how a descriptive strategy might be applied with our example of mandatory arrests in domestic violence cases.
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

13. What Is the Design? Cross-sectional vs. Longitudinal Unit of analysis
In addition to the question strategy and theory, a researcher has to decide on the design. Will you study a cross-section, a snapshot of the phenomenon of interest? Or will you observe changes over time?
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

14. Cross-Sectional Design
In a cross-sectional design, all of the data are collected at one point in time. In effect, you take a “cross-section”—a slice that cuts across an entire population—and use that to see all the different parts, or sections, of that population.
Here’s how a cross-sectional design might apply to our example.
From Text:
This “slice” of the population, taken at a single point in time, would allow one to compare the difference between those cases in which an arrest was made and those in which an arrest was not made.
But cross-sectional studies, because they use data collected at only one time, suffer from a serious weakness: they don’t directly measure the impact of time.
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

15. Longitudinal Designs: The Panel Design
1. A sample (called a panel) is drawn from a population at time 1, and data are collected from the sample (for instance, 100 arrestees from domestic violence cases are selected and interviewed).
2. As time passes, some panel members become unavailable for follow-up, and the population changes (some arrestees move or refuse to continue participating).
3. At time 2, data are collected from the same people (the panel) as at time 1—except for those people who cannot be located (the remaining arrestees are re-interviewed).
Here’s a longitudinal design for our example. This is a specific type of longitudinal design, the Panel Design.
From Text:
In longitudinal research, by contrast, data are collected over time. By measuring the independent and dependent variables at each of these different times, the researcher can determine whether change in the independent variable precedes change in the dependent variable—that is, whether the hypothesized cause comes before the result, as a true cause would.
In some longitudinal designs, the same sample (or panel) is followed over time. A panel study uses one group of people who are questioned or studied at multiple points across time; the same people are asked questions, then, on multiple occasions, and how they change or develop as individuals is analyzed.
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

16. Weaknesses of Panel Designs
Expense and attrition
can be expensive to keep track of individuals for long periods of time
proportion of panel members who can be located for follow-up will decline over time.
Subject fatigue
Participants may grow weary of repeated interviews and drop out of the study
Others may become so used to answering the standard questions in the survey that they start giving stock answers
Expensive and attrition - Miller 1991: 170
Subject fatigue – Campbell 1992
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

17. Longitudinal Designs: Repeated Cross-Sectional Design (Trend Study)
1. A sample of domestic violence cases is drawn from a population of cases at time 1, and data are collected from the sample.
2. As time passes, some people leave the population and others enter it.
3. At time 2 a different sample of cases is drawn from this population.
Here’s another longitudinal design.
From Text:
In other designs, sample members are rotated or completely replaced. The population from which the sample is selected may be defined broadly, as when a longitudinal survey of the general population is conducted (this is called a trend, or repeated cross-sectional design).
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

18. Longitudinal Designs: A Cohort Study
Cases in Cases in
In a cohort study, the follow-up samples (at one or more times) are selected from the same cohort—people who all have experienced a similar event or a common starting point.
Finally, another design, the cohort study. A cohort
From Text:
Or the population may be defined narrowly, as when members of a specific age group are sampled at multiple points in time (a cohort study). The frequency of follow-up measurement can vary, ranging from a before-and-after design with just one ­follow-up to studies in which various indicators are measured every month for many years.
Cohort:: Individuals or groups with a common starting point. Examples include college class of 1997, people who graduated from high school in the 1980s, General Motors employees who started work between 1990 and the year 2000, and people who were born in the late 1940s or the 1950s (the “baby boom generation”).
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

19. Cases = individual arrests
Units of Analysis and the Domestic Violence Example
Cases = individual arrests
Cases =precincts
Precinct #1
Precinct #2
Precinct #3
From Text:
There is one final concept you need to understand in planning the overall design of your project: “the unit of analysis.” Most sociological and psychological studies gather data from, and formulate conclusions about, individuals—so individuals are called the units of analysis. The researcher may collect survey data from individuals, analyze the data, and then report on, say, how many individuals felt socially isolated and whether drug abuse by individuals was related to their feelings of social isolation. Both data and conclusions would be about individuals, not groups. One could also then generalize about individuals; for example, perhaps you find that women are less likely to be isolated than men. The finding talks about many people (women vs. men), but still points to a phenomenon occurring within individuals—that is, that individual women are less likely to be isolated then individual men. Individuals remain the unit of analysis.
But some research gathers data about groups of some sort, such as families, schools, work organizations, towns, states, or countries. In this case, groups are the units of analysis. One may find, for instance, that smaller high schools have lower levels of student violence than large schools. In this case, the finding is not about students, but about certain kinds of schools. Here, the organization, not the individual, is the unit of analysis. It’s important to recognize your units of analysis, in order to avoid logical errors in your analysis. In Chapter 5, we’ll discuss the logical errors that can result when we use aggregate data
Individuals as Unit of Analysis
Groups as Unit of Analysis
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

20. Errors in Reasoning
Ecological Fallacy—An error in reasoning in which incorrect conclusions about individuals are drawn from group-level data
(example: The group is happy so everyone within the group must be happy)
Reductionist Fallacy (reductionism)—an error in reasoning that occurs when incorrect conclusions about group-level processes are based on individual-level data
(example: Every individual in the group is happy so the group, as a whole, must be happy)
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

21. Conclusion: The Process of Researching the Effects of Mandatory Arrests
From Text:
The Sherman and Berk study of domestic violence is a good example of how the research circle works. Sherman and Berk’s study was designed to test a hypothesis based on deterrence theory: “Arrest for spouse abuse reduces the risk of repeat offenses.” In this hypothesis, arrest or release is the independent variable, and variation in the risk of repeat offenses is the dependent variable (it is hypothesized to depend on arrest).
Sherman and Berk tested their hypothesis by setting up an experiment in which the police responded to complaints of spouse abuse in one of three ways, one of which was to arrest the offender. When the researchers examined their data (police records for the persons in their experiment), they found that of those arrested for assaulting their spouse, only 13% repeated the offense, compared to a 26% recidivism rate for those who were separated from their spouse by the police without any arrest. This pattern in the data, or empirical generalization, was consistent with the hypothesis that the researchers deduced from deterrence theory. The theory thus received support from the experiment.
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications

22. Start planning! For Your Own Research…
Contemplate the question, the strategy, the theory, the design, and...
Start planning!
Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition
© 2012 SAGE Publications