Why have differing Why have differing research methods in research methods in

criminology?criminology?

These slides explain the philosophy behind These slides explain the philosophy behind the different research methods used by the different research methods used by sociologists.sociologists.

It doesn’t explain the practical reasons as It doesn’t explain the practical reasons as you studied this at AS and will be familiar you studied this at AS and will be familiar with all the reasoning, though we will touch with all the reasoning, though we will touch on it again during your lessonson it again during your lessons

Why have differing research Why have differing research methods in criminology?methods in criminology?

Durkheim’s tradition and its concern with the social Durkheim’s tradition and its concern with the social bases of crime became tied up with the use of bases of crime became tied up with the use of official statistics to measure the extent of crime official statistics to measure the extent of crime and other deviant actsand other deviant acts

Durkheim’s classic work on suicide is based on Durkheim’s classic work on suicide is based on the assumption that official statistics provide the the assumption that official statistics provide the best measure of crime levelsbest measure of crime levels

The justification in using statistical data arises The justification in using statistical data arises from the idea that most social problems are best from the idea that most social problems are best understood through the ‘positive application of understood through the ‘positive application of science’ – known as positivismscience’ – known as positivism

Merton’s work on anomie and crime starts from Merton’s work on anomie and crime starts from the assumption that official statistics provide the the assumption that official statistics provide the best form of measurementbest form of measurement

However since Durkheim and Merton’s ideas However since Durkheim and Merton’s ideas dominated there has been theoretical and dominated there has been theoretical and methodological disputes as to whether official methodological disputes as to whether official statistics were the best tool in measuring crimestatistics were the best tool in measuring crime

Yet the quantitative tradition remains strong for Yet the quantitative tradition remains strong for example it’s used in all criminological research example it’s used in all criminological research

Quantitative research is associated with Quantitative research is associated with research which seeks to explain crime in research which seeks to explain crime in causal terms – for example in seeking to causal terms – for example in seeking to relate changes in the crime rate to changes relate changes in the crime rate to changes in other features such as levels of in other features such as levels of unemploymentunemployment

Quantitative methods include questionnaire Quantitative methods include questionnaire surveys, secondary analysis of official surveys, secondary analysis of official statisticsstatistics

In contrast the qualitative tradition is typically In contrast the qualitative tradition is typically associates with ethnography, in other words the associates with ethnography, in other words the description (graphy) of cultures (ethno)description (graphy) of cultures (ethno)

Its methodological approach seeks to capture the Its methodological approach seeks to capture the ways in which individuals and categories of ways in which individuals and categories of individuals make sense of the world and how individuals make sense of the world and how subsequent actions arise from such interpretationssubsequent actions arise from such interpretations

So it’s based on a commitment to explanation-by-So it’s based on a commitment to explanation-by-understanding rather than explanation in causal understanding rather than explanation in causal terms and so the world is seen as socially terms and so the world is seen as socially constructedconstructed

This concept of ‘understanding’ comes from This concept of ‘understanding’ comes from the theories of first Weber which were the theories of first Weber which were further developed by Mead and his concept further developed by Mead and his concept of the ‘self’of the ‘self’

Blumer extended Meads concept of the ‘self’ Blumer extended Meads concept of the ‘self’ by coming up with the phrase ‘symbolic by coming up with the phrase ‘symbolic interactionism’ – the ‘meanings’ people give interactionism’ – the ‘meanings’ people give as to their conduct and interpretation of that as to their conduct and interpretation of that conduct or reasonsconduct or reasons

Labelling and interactionist approaches Labelling and interactionist approaches which emerged in the 1960s placed a lot of which emerged in the 1960s placed a lot of emphasis to social meanings, stereotyping emphasis to social meanings, stereotyping and their role in the labelling process and their role in the labelling process (Becker)(Becker)

Qualitative researchers methodologies Qualitative researchers methodologies include interviews, observations and the include interviews, observations and the interpretation of documents such as interpretation of documents such as personal diariespersonal diaries

Both quantitative and qualitative research methods Both quantitative and qualitative research methods rely on collecting empirical datarely on collecting empirical data

Empirical data is the physical of evidence by any Empirical data is the physical of evidence by any research methodresearch method

Feminist research methods tend be known as Feminist research methods tend be known as ‘critical methodologies’ because they tend to use ‘critical methodologies’ because they tend to use methods that examine power and discourses methods that examine power and discourses within the criminal justice system – think of within the criminal justice system – think of Heidensohn and how she researched female Heidensohn and how she researched female oppression by examining discourses constructing oppression by examining discourses constructing ‘social roles’ of femininity‘social roles’ of femininity