Chapter 1: Research Foundations

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science.

— Albert Einstein^[1]

INTRODUCTION

Many students enroll in an introduction to social research course only because the course is required for their program of study. Some dread the thought of having to read about and carry out academic research, and others worry about how they will perform in what they perceive is going to be a highly laborious and boring course. We know this because students routinely admit these reservations, and they also ask why they need to take such a course and what value the course will have for them in their everyday lives. Our response is this: Though you may be skeptical now, what you will learn about in this research methods book and in a methods course is interesting, and it has practical and relevant implications for you—for understanding people and events around you, for earning a living, and especially for making informed choices. After taking a research methods course, one of the students wrote in the course evaluation, “This class should be the last one that anyone completing an undergraduate degree takes … the skills learned and the knowledge acquired directly translate into the real world.”

Research informs practice. Regardless of the career path you take, research has already played and continues to play an integral role in the proficiency of the skill set practiced within that occupation. For example, healthcare professionals such as family physicians, nurse care practitioners, and dentists rely upon best practices as identified by researchers in the discipline. Similarly, teachers base lesson plans on an established curriculum that is continually monitored and evaluated, peace officers interview eyewitnesses based on methods that are designed to maximize recall and minimize errors, social workers employ proven crisis-intervention strategies to assist families and individuals in need, and lawyers argue points based on their prior research into similar cases with specific outcomes. Moreover, successful businesses frequently invest in research to learn about existing customers, satisfaction with current products and services, and the potential for market growth (e.g., this is how Apple comes up with ideas for its newest iPhones).

In addition to describing people and processes, applied research also helps us evaluate whether the course of action we take is the most appropriate in a given circumstance, and it provides direction for how we might make improvements in the future. Summing up, research methodology can be best viewed as a practical means for acquiring relevant knowledge that is used to make informed decisions. As implied by Einstein’s opening quote, anybody who is curious about people or events around them can be considered a potential social researcher. This book is specifically designed to help these individuals to use the most appropriate methods in their quest to find answers.

Research on the Net

Statistics Canada
One of the leading sources for information on Canada and Canadians is Statistics Canada. Statistics Canada, originally called the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, was established in 1918 as a federal government department that is mandated under the Statistics Act (1985) to “collect, compile, analyze, abstract and publish statistical information relating to the commercial, industrial, financial, social, economic and general activities and conditions of the people” (s 3). Here, various economists, mathematical statisticians, programmers, demographers, sociologists, senior methodologists, and others are employed in a realm of social research describing Canada and its people. For example, you can learn about the population and characteristics of Indigenous people; the health and well-being of children and youth; the economic viability of Canada’s economy; the average annual income of families; trends in labour; energy supply and demand; and commuting patterns.

One of the most important functions of Statistics Canada is to generate research to help inform policy that is developed at the provincial and federal levels of government. The information collected about Canadian citizens, businesses, departments, and programs helps decision making involving the prioritization of issues, the allocation of funding, and the development of rules and strategies. This occurs through the analysis of economic performance, the shaping of trade negotiations, the monitoring of the effectiveness of the justice system, the assessment of program funding, the maintenance of education and healthcare policies, and other regulatory systems involving the government. For more information on Statistics Canada and its research-based career opportunities, visit Careers at Statistics Canada.

 

WAYS OF KNOWING AND THEIR LIMITATIONS AS SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE

Each one of us has accumulated knowledge based on ideas and events we have heard about, read about, witnessed, and/or experienced that we use at different times to make choices. As you will discover, many of these ways of knowing have limitations that detract from our ability to make sound and informed choices.

Tradition, Common Sense, and Authority

One of the earliest ways of knowing lies in tradition—the compilation of beliefs and practices passed down from one generation to the next that everyone knows about and often adheres to, though rarely questions. Without delving into anyone’s personal preferences or religious views about what marriage should or might entail, consider what our gendered tradition tells us about the main performers in wedding ceremonies in Western culture. We know, for example, that there is usually a bride and a groom who are part of a larger wedding party consisting of a maid of honour, a best man, bridesmaids, and groomsmen. Similarly, there are various well-established customs associated with weddings, including the groom asking the bride’s father for permission to marry his daughter, the bride wearing a white dress, a bridal veil, a garter belt, and other articles that represent something old, something new, something borrowed, and something blue. Other common features include the exchange of wedding vows and the placing of wedding bands, the first kiss as a newlywed couple, the bouquet toss, the cutting of a wedding cake, the first dance as a couple, and the departure for a honeymoon. While tradition as a form of knowledge might be important for teaching religious doctrine or helping maintain certain cultural practices, it is often passed on and adhered to without a consideration of what the practices mean historically or even in the present-day context. For instance, it is unlikely that a modern groom seen tossing the bride’s garter belt into a crowd on their wedding day would be trying to stave off a group intent on tearing at his bride’s clothing. Instead, the couple is highly likely to be mindlessly observing the norms of tradition.

Another source of information is common sense, which is a form of practical knowledge based on adaptive prior learning that can generalize to novel situations. Common sense is often relied upon to make sound judgments that will benefit us or that will help to keep us out of harm’s way, often through recognition of our physical, emotional, and/or cognitive limits. For example, one of the author’s common sense tells her to opt for intermediate (or blue) down-hill ski runs over expert (black diamond) trails given her current abilities at this stage in life. And, if she felt out of control while skiing down an intermediate run, as might be the case if she picked up too much speed or slid on an icy patch and was thrown off course, she could again rely upon common sense to help guide her back to safety by perhaps seeking out deeper-looking snow that might provide some traction or by looking for ways to traverse across the mountain. Common sense also plays a role in the establishment and maintenance of intimate relationships, where a person might end a relationship with too many “red flags” or obstacles to overcome. Of course, our common sense might also be misguided, such as when we believe that “opposites attract for a reason” and stay in an unfulfilling relationship. A limitation of common sense is that it doesn’t articulate when and under what specific circumstances our generalized beliefs hold true. Sometimes opposing traits foster attraction in a partner; however, research shows that people who are alike (e.g., in looks and with respect to values) fare much better in relationships (Berscheid & Reis, 1998). Common sense may even provide false hope as we cling to the belief that “absence makes the heart grow fonder,” while research indicates that long-distance relationships seldom work. Instead, proximity is the key antecedent in the establishment of relationships (Aronson et al., 2021).

We also learn new things through the teachings of authority figures or experts who share their knowledge and experience with us. Beginning with early socialization in our families of origin, we receive imparted wisdom from our parents and relatives, who teach us about the importance of eating well-balanced meals, of looking both ways before we cross the road, of respecting our teachers and peers, and of obeying the rule of law. Of course, the same authorities may pass on erroneous information and/or model less appropriate forms of conduct, such as poor eating habits and disregard for the law. Beyond the family, we also obtain information from various credentialed professionals, academics, institutions, and organizations (e.g., a dentist who indicates root canal therapy is necessary, a political science professor who predicts provincial budget cuts, and Health Canada’s food guidelines for healthy eating). Although many of the teachings offered by authority figures are helpful and even necessary to our well-being, we often fail to follow expert advice. For example, the World Health Organization (2023) informs us of the importance of eating vegetables and fruits to reduce the risk of cardiovascular diseases and some types of cancer, while Canadians tend to opt instead for ultra-processed foods that are low in nutrition and high in fat, salt, and sugar (Symbaluk & Bereska, 2022). In addition, some authority figures offer opinions on issues outside of their realm of expertise, as in the case of professional athletes who are paid to endorse viewpoints and products.

Finally, we tend to over-rely on the mass media as a source of authority without questioning the legitimacy of the messages provided. The mass media is an authority for informing us about local and international events in the form of communications we receive in newspapers, on television, and especially over the internet. However, the media is also a profit-based business with highly concentrated ownership. For example, Bell Media owns the CTV Network and its affiliates, including 35 local channels and 26 specialty channels (e.g., RDS and TSN) (Bell Media, 2024b), and it is Canada’s largest radio broadcaster, with 103 stations including Virgin Radio and Bounce Radio (Bell Media, 2024c). Quebecor Media is also a big contender, operating TVA Group consisting of Quebec’s largest television network and North America’s largest French-language TV broadcaster, book and magazine publishers, and film and sound recording interests (Quebecor, 2024). Media giants set the agenda, thereby determining what we are exposed to when we watch television, listen to music, or read the newspapers. Thus, it is important to critically assess the messages we are exposed to, as well as their originating sources.

Experience

Lastly, much of what we believe we gain through first-hand experience. You probably understand more about the complexities of single parenthood or divorce if this is something you personally have experienced. Similarly, if you are considering whether divorce is becoming increasingly common in Western culture, you may rely upon your own personal knowledge of couples who have divorced. While you may be able to recall several recent instances of divorce among friends, family members, and work associates, does this really provide evidence for a claim that divorce is becoming more common? It could be that you are better able to remember recent cases of divorce than ones that occurred much earlier on. It could also be that your friends are not representative of the general population (e.g., they may possess shared characteristics by association that put them at greater risk for divorce, such as being of an age wherein they are more likely to have young children, having fewer financial resources, or holding an occupation that is less conducive to a stable marriage or family life).

COMMON ERRORS IN REASONING

First-hand experience, common sense, authority, and tradition are all important sources of knowledge that help to inform what we know about the social world. However, each has limitations that can lead to a narrow or even inaccurate understanding. As humans we are subject to errors in reasoning, since we pay more careful attention to certain people and events than to others. Some of the more common errors in reasoning that result from reliance on unscientific or everyday ways of knowing include imprecise observation, illogical reasoning, overgeneralization, selective observation, and premature closure.

Imprecise Observation

Although we do pay attention to the people and events going on around us, there is so much information that it is impossible to take in everything at once, let alone process that information accurately, store the details, and recall it at a later point in time. Imprecise observations are the inevitable result. As you will learn in later chapters, our ability to observe can be greatly improved when we use a careful, systematic process in which we look for things that are precisely defined ahead of time. In addition to our tendency to make errors while observing, humans are also prone to making errors in their consideration of what they have observed. For example, people over-rely on what can be recalled (i.e., what is available in memory) as an indication of the frequency for that event (Tversky & Kahneman, 1973).

Illogical Reasoning

Another one of the more common errors has to do with illogical reasoning, where people make decisions based on faulty logic. This underlies what is referred to as a “gambler’s fallacy,” where a gambler will place a bet believing that an outcome is due, such as a red number on a roulette table following a run of several black numbers. Odds of a red number coming up are based on the overall quantity of numbers (i.e., there are 18 red numbers, 18 black numbers, and two green numbers [i.e., a zero and a double zero] in most North American versions). The probability of a red (or black) number occurring is 47.4 percent every time, regardless of previous events. As another example, people avoid recently drawn lottery numbers even though each lottery is an independent event (Polin & Benisaac, 2023). Illogical reasoning results from a failure to consider the true odds or probability of an event occurring.

Overgeneralization

Overgeneralization refers to the tendency to assume the existence of a general pattern or trait based on a limited number of observations (Babbie & Edgerton, 2024). For example, during the global Occupy movement against economic and social inequality initiated by Canadian activist organization Adbusters Media Foundation in September of 2011, reporters highly sensationalized the fact that a few of the students in attendance at New York’s financial district protests were from highly privileged backgrounds as evidenced by their clothes and belongings, including expensive laptop computers and cellphones. This led to overgeneralizations about who the protestors were, reflected in headlines such as “The Rich Kids Occupy Wall Street” and stories depicting protestors as sharing “more in common with that top one percent than with the bottom one percent” (Flynn, 2011). This type of faulty logic is the basis for stereotypes, which involve overgeneralizations made about entire groups of people based on shared group characteristics such social class, race, or ethnicity.

Selective Observation

A related error is made when the search for a pattern is undertaken by specifically seeking out instances that confirm an existing belief. Selective observation refers to the tendency to assume a general pattern exists based on factors other than objective frequency. For example, suppose you recently purchased a new compact car. After deliberating for days, you decide to purchase one that is red. During the first couple of weeks, it may appear to you that most vehicles on the road are red! This is because your attention is drawn to that colour (i.e., it is now salient for you) and you are inadvertently seeking out red vehicles while ignoring the higher prevalence of other ones that are not red. Due to its high visibility, white is the most common colour for vehicles that display business signs. Moreover, white is also the most popular colour for various types of vehicles from compact cars to luxury cars, minivans, and pick-up trucks. Other top colours include black, grey, and silver (Valdes, 2023). Similarly, when seeking to support a viewpoint, observers may be biased (even unknowingly) toward certain observations in their quest to find confirming evidence. Confirmation biases are relatively harmless when it comes to the colour of vehicles, but they have also played a major role in the spread of social media misinformation during disasters, particularly in relation to politics and healthcare (Muhammed & Mathew, 2022).

Activity: Ways of Knowing and Common Errors

Premature Closure

Premature closure refers to a tendency to stop searching for necessary observations due to an erroneous belief that an answer has already been determined. This is like overgeneralization and selective observation because, in all three cases, a social perceiver fails to locate the most appropriate answer by short-cutting the process and limiting a search to a small number of observations. In an analysis of 100 medical cases of injuries and deaths involving diagnostic errors, the most common error made by internists was premature closure, or the failure to search for alternatives after making an initial (albeit incorrect) diagnosis (Graber et al., 2005). Premature closure can also foster what Chambliss and Schutt (2019) call “resistance to change,” where people are reluctant to modify their assumptions in the face of new information.

SCIENTIFIC REASONING

What sets scientific reasoning apart from the other ways of knowing with their corresponding limitations is the reliance on empirical methods. Empirical methods refer to data collection techniques carried out using systematic procedures that are widely recognized by other researchers and produce verifiable findings (Symbaluk & Bereska, 2022). Researchers in the social sciences use empirical methods to study individuals, groups, societies, and social processes in a manner that helps to overcome the limitations of other ways of knowing. Specifically,

• Social researchers seek to find answers through a careful examination of the social world. They do not assume that their initial beliefs or ideas are necessarily correct, and this reduces the likelihood of unquestioning faith in the teachings of tradition or authority. Similarly, while common sense and prior experience can aid scientific inquiry, these forms of knowledge do not substitute for observations that take place in the social world. The importance of theory and prior research for informing the development of new research is the topic of chapter 2.
• Social researchers also rely upon systematic procedures and processes that contribute to quality observations focused in areas of interest. These lessen the likelihood of imprecise observation, selective observation, and illogical reasoning since researchers are very clear about what it is they are studying and how they will go about collecting, analyzing, and making sense of their observations. The main components of a research design and the features of sound measurement are covered in detail in chapter 4.
• Social researchers limit the tendency to make overgeneralizations by ensuring they collect information from individuals or sources that appropriately represent the group or targeted area of interest (see chapter 5 on sampling). In addition, their findings are also open to scrutiny and verification by other researchers in their field of study.

Social Research

Both the social and natural sciences use empirical methods in their quest to understand and explain the world around us. The natural sciences focus on laws that govern nature (e.g., plants and animals) from within various branches, such as the biological sciences, physical sciences, and earth and planetary sciences. In contrast, the social sciences study human nature and society from within various disciplines, such as economics, education, criminology, sociology, psychology, political science, anthropology, and archaeology. Social research is “a process in which people combine a set of principles, outlooks, and ideas (i.e., methodology) with a collection of specific practices, techniques, and strategies (i.e., a method of inquiry) to produce knowledge” (Neuman & Robson, 2024, Why do social research?). The generation of new knowledge is often the result of primary research, or first-hand data collection and data analysis that is undertaken to answer an original research question. Primary research is the focus of much of this book and most courses on research methods. Primary research can be contrasted with secondary research, which is the summarizing or analysis of research already collected by others. An essay you write on a topic that summarizes what is already known about an issue or a published review of research findings in an area would be examples of secondary forms of research. Regardless of whether it is collected first-hand or examined second-hand, all research in the social sciences is conducted in a manner that attempts to reveal knowledge and increase our understanding, while minimizing the likelihood of errors. Generally, social research takes one of two broad forms, as described in the next section.

Applied and Basic Research

Applied research refers to scientific research that is conducted to specifically address a problem or issue. Applied research has a practical and often immediate intention, such as when it is initiated on behalf of an employer or business to learn how to improve services at a location or how to better advertise a specific product. Applied research may be carried out within post-secondary institutions to evaluate internal programs, policies, or services (e.g., How could we improve a registration process or service for students?). In addition, a government or social agency may sponsor applied research to evaluate a program, a policy, or a community service (e.g., Is this treatment program working or not working?). Finally, applied research is also carried out to find a solution to an issue of concern. For example, Genome Canada, a not-for-profit organization that manages applied research projects dealing with large-scale issues, has more than $41 million in funding to support research directed at challenges and opportunities including monitoring pathogens in water and developing climate-smart agriculture and food systems (Genome Canada, 2024).

Basic research, in contrast, is research that is conducted to advance knowledge for its own sake. Most of the research conducted in universities and published in academic journals is a form of basic research. Basic research usually stems from a researcher’s own curiosity, interest, and area of expertise, as opposed to the commercial interests of a business or the agenda of an organization-sponsored project. Basic research can span an infinite number of topics and issues. For example, researchers interested in home births assisted by midwives studied the views and birthing experiences of 559 Canadian women who chose this practice (Janssen et al., 2009); those interested in identity and appearance interviewed Canadian men about their experiences with cosmetic surgery (Ricciardelli & White, 2011); researchers wanting to learn more about how sexuality is constructed for older adults looked at portrayals of later-life online dating in Canadian newspapers and magazines (Wada et al., 2015); and researchers interested in patterns of illicit drug use following the cessation of injection drug use studied street-involved youth in Vancouver over time (Lake et al., 2018).

GOALS OF RESEARCH

Social research is usually conducted to accomplish one of the following four goals: to explore, to describe, to explain, or to critically evaluate a phenomenon of interest.

Exploration

Exploratory research is undertaken to learn about an area of interest that is relatively new or not well understood or to find out more about an existing area using a novel approach. An underlying question of interest in an exploratory study centres on the notion of “What is X?” (where X can be anything of interest, such as “What is forced marriage?”). Data collected from frontline workers revealed that there are several kinds of forced marriages in Canada. For example, a person may be forced into marriage in a country of origin and then come to live with a spouse in Canada, or a person may be born in Canada or live in Canada and be forced into marriage by family members to someone already established in Canada (Bendriss, 2013).

Even areas of interest that are well established can benefit from the fresh perspective afforded by exploratory research, which Stebbins (2001) claims is designed to examine an issue using “broad” and “unspecialized terms.” For example, Bansal and Eiselt (2004) conducted exploratory research to learn more about tourist motivation and planning in New Brunswick. Although previous research had already established various highly specialized reasons for travel, often linked to complex concepts such as “socioeconomic status,” the authors opted for an exploratory approach to reassess vacation motives using five broad categories: climate, relaxation, adventure, personal, and education. The researchers selected these categories because they were readily amenable to field research and they would be easily understood by an average tourist (Bansal & Eiselt, 2004). As it turned out, many of the tourists vacationing to New Brunswick claimed they were primarily seeking adventure—an area in which vacation/tour companies might benefit from further exploratory research. Listed below are additional examples of research questions that underlie exploratory forms of research:

• What is the experience of maternal attachment like for mothers in Canadian stepfamilies? (Gosselin & Gosselin, 2016)
• What is the relationship between perceived and actual water quality in Newfoundland? (Ochoo et al., 2017)
• What factors have contributed to dietary transitions experienced by Inuit in the Canadian Artic? (Little et al., 2020)
• What barriers to employment are experienced by international medical graduates in Canada? (Turin et al., 2023)

Description

While most research has a descriptive component, descriptive research is specifically undertaken to establish the main traits or characteristics of a population or phenomenon. Questions of interest within descriptive research include: What are the main features of X? and What are people’s views on X? For example, Canadians were surveyed about their views on harms related to cannabis use. The majority of respondents said they believed cannabis smoke can be harmful and that teenagers were at a greater risk of harm than adults (Government of Canada, 2021). Additional examples of research questions examined using descriptive research include the following:

• What are Canadian athletes’ experiences with and attitudes toward hazing behaviours? (Johnson et al., 2018)
• What are the characteristics of Canadians who have experienced unsheltered or hidden homelessness? (Uppal, 2022)
• What are some of the trends and correlates of cannabis use in Canada? (Lowry & Corsi, 2020)
• What are Canadian 2SLGBTQI+ youth’s experiences with gender-based violence? (Wright et al., 2023)

Explanation

Explanatory research is conducted to clarify the variation found between groups on some dimension of interest. The central question underlying explanatory research is “why?” or “how?” and the goal is to explain an outcome. For example, in trying to explain why some people are more likely than others to become compulsive gamblers, Callan et al. (2008) found support for a hypothesis that gambling served a justice-seeking function in certain people. That is, compulsive gamblers try to obtain rewards through gambling that they feel they deserve since they have not obtained success through more conventional means, such as earning a decent income and investing wisely over time.

In addition, explanatory research may be directed at better understanding the factors that influence or fail to influence some process, condition, or state of being. For example, Yang (2017) investigated the effects of a mandatory community service program on Ontario high school students’ subsequent helping. Results showed increased volunteering during high school while in the program but showed lower than anticipated volunteer efforts once they completed high school. Although the intent behind compulsory volunteering programs is to teach altruism, research shows that they, in fact, fail to positively impact long-term altruism. One explanation for this is a phenomenon known as “crowding out,” where the intrinsic motivation to carry out a task is undermined by external rewards (Frey, 1997). Volunteering, then, is completed largely for grades and course expectations, not for the betterment of the recipients. The following are other examples of research questions from explanatory research:

• How does fluoride cessation impact tooth decay in children living in Alberta? (McLaren et al., 2017)
• Why do Quebecers trust much less compared to other Canadians? (Wu & Dawson, 2022)
• Why do university students prefer certain types of assessments over others? (Jopp et al., 2023)
• How do front-of-package nutrition labels for foods high in saturated fat, sugar, and/or sodium influence food choices among Canadian consumers? (Lee et al., 2022)

Evaluation

Evaluation research seeks to assess whether a program or policy is effective in reaching its desired goals and objectives. Central questions for evaluation research include: Is this policy working? and/or What is the impact of this program? McDonald and colleagues (2009) evaluated a community-based group intervention strategy called Families and Schools Together (FAST), which was designed to help teenage mothers and their infants in 11 Canadian communities. Data collected from mothers and grandmothers before and after the intervention indicated an improvement on the original aims of the program, as a result of participation, including improved parent-child bonds, reduced stress and family conflict, and increased parental self-efficacy (McDonald et al., 2009). Evaluation research is sometimes more generally referred to as “critical research” when it is designed to assess an aspect of the social world rather than a program or policy. Examples of additional questions framed within evaluation research include the following:

• Is drug checking at a supervised injection facility in Vancouver a feasible intervention for reducing deaths caused by fentanyl overdoses? (Karamouzian et al., 2018)
• Does a health-promoting schools approach improve student well-being and health behaviours in elementary students in Nova Scotia? (McIsaac et al., 2017)
• Can a virtual community health simulation program improve student learning outcomes? (Chircop et al., 2023)
• What are the ongoing training needs of Special Olympics Canada program leaders and volunteers? (Temple & Field, 2023)

Activity: Goals of Social Research

QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS

Research methods are the specific tools or techniques used to carry out the research that obtains the information needed to answer questions of interest and achieve the goals discussed in the previous section. The information gathered through these techniques is collectively referred to as data. Chapters 6 through 10 each focus exclusively on specific data-gathering techniques used in the social sciences (e.g., experiments, surveys, unobtrusive methods, qualitative interviews, ethnography). At a broader level, consider for now that a quantitative research method is one that seeks to describe, explain, or evaluate some phenomenon using numerical data that is amenable to statistical analyses. In contrast, a qualitative research method is one that seeks to explore, interpret, explain, or evaluate a phenomenon of interest using non-numerical data, often in the form of words, patterns, and/or themes that are generally not amenable to statistical analyses. Let’s look at both types in more detail, beginning with quantitative methods.

Quantitative Methods

Quantitative methods are often used to obtain information or data that can be counted or “quantified” in some way. The findings from a quantitative study usually tell us the percentage of people who feel a certain way about a topic, the number of times a certain event occurred, or the amount of time it took the average person to complete a task under certain conditions. The most commonly used quantitative methods are experiments and surveys, followed by a few unobtrusive methods. Experiments are studies carried out in carefully designed environments that allow researchers to test cause–effect relationships where one variable of interest is believed to be the cause and the other is believed to be the effect or outcome (see chapter 6). Surveys are studies used to gather people’s views or opinions on a range of issues (see chapter 7). Unobtrusive methods are techniques that do not directly involve people as research participants in the data collection process (see chapter 8). For example, we can systematically observe people from a distance without asking them directly for information, we can conduct secondary data analysis on existing forms of primary data, and we can examine various social media such as television programs or song lyrics for the presence or absence of some phenomenon of interest (e.g., alcohol, violence, or gender stereotypes). Note that each of these methods will be discussed in detail in later chapters. For now, just try to associate these techniques with the quantitative realm of the research world.

Qualitative Methods

In contrast, qualitative methods are particularly useful for learning more about the nature or “quality” of some phenomenon of interest. Qualitative techniques underlie a desire to better understand how people are experiencing events and why people feel the way they do or why they do the things they do. The form of the data collected tends to be words as opposed to amounts or counts. Commonly used techniques include qualitative interviewing and ethnography as well as unobtrusive methods. Qualitative interviewing is used to gather in-depth information from the perspective of the participant to reveal meaning (e.g., what is it like to be a single parent of a child with special needs?) (see chapter 9). Ethnography is a multi-method approach that combines techniques such as participant observation and qualitative interviewing to learn about a group in its natural setting (e.g., what can be learned about interactions among group members by joining a religious cult?) (see chapter 10). Finally, qualitative methods also include unobtrusive methods such as content analysis, where the purpose is often exploratory and involves looking for patterns and themes; archival analysis, which involves looking at existing information including written documents (e.g., letters, records); historical analysis, which involves an examination of historical documents; and/or secondary analysis of other phenomena that can be considered a data source, including traces left behind by people (e.g., garbage and graffiti). Refer to table 1.1 for a comparison and overview of the two main methods.

Qualitative versus Quantitative: An Unnecessary Divide

We do not wish to leave you with the impression that all research is qualitative or quantitative and that researchers necessarily should be of one type or the other. Research interests may be amenable to both quantitative and qualitative techniques, and some researchers may use both approaches within the same study. For example, Drs. Andrew Howell and Diane Symbaluk surveyed faculty and students at a Canadian university to determine views toward published student ratings of instruction. Using a primarily quantitative approach, they asked faculty and students to rate their level of agreement on items on a questionnaire to describe views (e.g., whether instructor ratings should be published and whether different forms of published ratings jeopardize instructor privacy). To provide answers, respondents mainly checked off boxes that corresponded to their level of agreement with each statement (e.g., strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, or strongly agree). Most of the data collected was coded into numbers and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results indicated widespread support for disclosure of all forms of evaluation by students and widespread opposition from instructors (Howell & Symbaluk, 2001).

However, the survey also included open-ended items where respondents were asked to list advantages and disadvantages of published ratings. Faculty and student comments in their own words constituted qualitative data. Patterns and themes in the data highlighted the nature of potential benefits for students who, for example, were interested in learning more about an instructor’s teaching style. Qualitative data also identified the main concerns of instructors, who, for example, worried that an instructor’s reputation could be tarnished by a posted negative evaluation that might persist over time even if an instructor changed (Howell & Symbaluk, 2001).

Qualitative methods are not better or worse than quantitative ones. There is an ongoing and even sometimes highly contentious debate concerning the relative merit of quantitative versus qualitative methods, where some quantitative researchers dismiss qualitative approaches as being less scientific and qualitative researchers accuse quantitative approaches of being unable to tell us about the true nature of things. We, along with several other authors of textbooks on research methods, find this dichotomy to be unwarranted and unnecessary (e.g., see also Carland et al., 2019; Palys & Atchison, 2021). While it is common practice to determine in advance whether you are using a more qualitative or quantitative approach, it is the nature of the research issue itself (e.g., an interest in understanding the experiences of a group versus a desire to quantify the prevalent views of a group on an issue) as well as many other aspects of any given study (e.g., the availability of resources, time restraints, and the willingness of the participants) that determine the exact method(s) used. Refer to chapter 11 for a comprehensive overview of the use of mixed methods and multiple methods within a single study.

CHAPTER SUMMARY

1. Explain why it is important to learn about social research methods.
   Research methods are a practical means for acquiring knowledge and developing an informed opinion that is useful in a range of contexts, from everyday curiosity to skills that underlie most forms of employment.
2. Identify various “ways of knowing” and note their limitations.
   Four common ways of knowing include the use of tradition, common sense, authority, and personal experience. While highly informative and convenient, sources of knowledge are also fraught with errors as we learn accurate and inaccurate information as part of tradition; common sense fails to hold true under many circumstances; authority figures often speak well beyond their level of experience; and personal experience is restricted to our recollections of observations.
3. Recognize common errors in reasoning.
   Imprecise observation refers to the everyday errors we make as a function of our ability to take in, store, and later recall an overwhelming amount of information accurately. Illogical reasoning refers to decision making based on a failure to consider the most important sources of information. Overgeneralization is the tendency to assume a general pattern or trait exists based on a limited number of observations, while selective observation is the tendency to assume a general pattern exists based on factors other than objective frequency. Premature closure refers to a tendency to stop searching for necessary observations due to an erroneous belief that an answer has already been determined.
4. Define social research, distinguish between primary and secondary research, and differentiate between basic and applied research.
   Social research is a process where a set of principles, outlooks, and ideas are combined with a collection of specific practices, techniques, and strategies to produce knowledge. Primary research refers to first-hand data collection and data analysis that is undertaken to answer an original research question. Secondary research refers to the summarizing or analysis of research already collected by others. Applied research refers to scientific research that is conducted to specifically address a problem, while basic research is conducted to advance knowledge for its own sake.
5. Explain the goals of research.
   Social research is usually conducted to explore, to describe, to explain, or to critically evaluate a program or phenomenon of interest (i.e., evaluation or critical research). Exploratory research is carried out to learn more about an area of interest. Descriptive research is undertaken to establish the main traits of a population. Explanatory research is conducted to clarify the variation found between groups on some dimension of interest. Evaluation research assesses whether a program or policy is effective.
6. Differentiate between qualitative and quantitative research methods.
   Quantitative research methods are techniques that seek to describe, explain, or evaluate a phenomenon of interest, while qualitative research methods are tools that seek to explore, interpret, explain, or evaluate a phenomenon of interest. Quantitative methods produce numerical data amenable to statistical analyses, while qualitative methods produce non-numerical data, often in the form of words, patterns, or themes.

RESEARCH REFLECTION

1. Identify one traditional belief or idea that was passed on to you from a family member or close friend as a form of advice. Are there any obvious limitations to that information as a means of knowing about the world? Do any of the common errors in reasoning apply to this example? If you were going to examine this assumption using a scientific approach, what is one technique you could use to test it in the real world? Describe how you would carry out such a study.
2. Suppose you were interested in studying homelessness in a large city such as Toronto, Montreal, Calgary, Vancouver, or Ottawa. Develop one research question you could attempt to answer in this study. Which of the four goals of social research is most closely aligned with the question you created? Defend your answer.
3. Starting with the general topic area of health, develop a specific research question to highlight each of the four distinct goals of social research. Which of the following questions holds the most interest to you? Which research technique is best suited to gather data to answer your preferred question of interest?

LEARNING THROUGH PRACTICE

Objective: To familiarize students with social research

Directions:

1. Locate and print off a scholarly article of interest based on primary research in an academic journal from a social science database (e.g., Social Sciences Citation Index [part of Web of Science], PsychINFO, Academic Search Complete, SocINDEX, Sociological Abstracts, Criminal Justice Abstracts, or Anthropology Plus).
2. Describe the social issue that underlies the research interest of the article. How is the main research question framed?
3. Are the researchers conducting mainly qualitative, mainly quantitative, or both types of research? How do you know?
4. Which main goal of social research does the objective of this study best align with? Explain your answer.
5. Describe one of the techniques used by the researchers to obtain information on their question of interest.

RESEARCH RESOURCES

1. For an overview of qualitative research techniques, see van den Hoonaard, D. K., and van den Scott, L-J. (2022). Qualitative research in action: A Canadian primer (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
2. For an overview of quantitative research techniques, refer to Cozby, P. C., Mar, R. A., and Rawn, C. D. (2020). Methods in behavioural research (3rd Canadian ed.). McGraw-Hill.
3. To find scholarly research articles, refer to the database “Social Sciences Citation Index” (part of Web of Science). You can likely access this database for free through the library at the post-secondary institution where you are taking classes.
4. For the most comprehensive source of data on virtually all aspects of Canadian lives, refer to the Statistics Canada website.