Sociological Imagination and Investigation

Lecture 1: From sociological imagination to sociological investigation

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 6th March Assessed essay due 28th April

Classes: Same time and place as Term One. THERE ARE NO CLASSES THIS WEEK

Reading Packs: Can be purchased from Jane CooperExtracts 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.

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])

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.

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

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?

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’

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’.

‘Operationalising’ our research questions1. Identify a research sample2. 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

Findings

More at www.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

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