Suchergebnisse

Accusations of bias are not uncommon in the social sciences. However, the term 'bias' is by no means straightforward in meaning. One problem is that it is ambiguous. Sometimes, it is used to refer to the adoption of a particular perspective from which some things become salient and others merge into the background. More commonly, 'bias' refers to systematic error: deviation from a true score, the latter referring to the valid measurement of some phenomenon or to accurate estimation of a population parameter. The term may also be used in a more specific sense, to denote one particular source of systematic error: that deriving from a conscious or unconscious tendency on the part of a researcher to produce data, and/or to interpret them, in a way that inclines towards erroneous conclusions which are in line with his or her commitments. In either form, the use of 'bias' to refer to systematic error is problematic. It depends on other concepts, such as 'truth' and 'objectivity', whose justification and role have been questioned. In particular, it seems to rely on foundationalist epistemological assumptions that have been discredited. And the various radical epistemological positions that some social scientists have adopted as an alternative either deny the validity of this concept of bias, explicitly or implicitly, or transform it entirely. We will argue, however, that while it is true that abandonment of a foundationalist conception of science has important implications for the meaning of 'bias' and its associated concepts, they are defensible; indeed, they form an essential framework for research as a social practice. In this context, we shall examine error as a matter of collegial accountability, and define 'bias' as one of several potential forms of error. We conclude by pointing to what we see as the growing threat of bias in the present state of social research.

The African World: a survey of social research, is in my estimation one of the most important and unique attempts in African studies to interrelate the social sciences and the humanities; it has been edited for the African Studies Association by Robert A. Lystad (New York, Praeger, 1965). The contributors, mainly American and British, are well-known scholars. Together they have brought out a volume on methodology that is unparalleled in multi-disciplinary comprehensiveness in African studies. This is a tribute not only to the authors but also to the development of scholarship on Africa, for the past two decades of accomplishments are richly represented here. The distinction of The African World is that it identifies new problems, raises new questions and deals with a wide variety of methodologies. It should be mandatory reading for students of African affairs. And it can be usefully employed by nonAfricanists dealing with multi-disciplinary and interdisciplinary aspects of area research.

The scientific method -- Designing the research project -- The conceptual framework -- The research process -- Collecting the data -- Collecting the data: utilizing the survey -- Collecting the data: making scientific observations -- Collecting the data: doing an experiment -- Collecting the data: some special designs -- Analyzing the data: some important questions -- Analyzing the data: some important tools -- Concluding the study -- Appendixes

"We wrote this book for undergraduate students taking a research methods course, most often in sociology departments but also in other social science disciplines, such as health studies, social work, and education. We cover a wide range of methods and approaches to study design, data collection, and analysis. Research methods are not tied to any particular nation, and the principles underlying them transcend national boundaries. The same is true of this book. Alan Bryman wrote the original text on which ours is based with the needs of British postsecondary students in mind, but instructors across Europe and Canada adopted it as well. Edward Bell later adapted Bryman's textbook for Canadian instructors and students. He preserved the qualities that contributed to the book's initial success-its clarity, comprehensiveness, and presentation of social research methods in an international context-while expanding the discussion of Canadian and, more broadly, North American examples, sources, and research studies. We, Jen Reck and Jessica Fields, adapted Bryman and Bell's Canadian text for a U.S. audience. We were initially drawn to the text as a foundation for ours not only because of its clarity and comprehensiveness but also for its attention to qualitative and quantitative methods. The text took differences between qualitative and quantitative research seriously, but did not assume that those differences are either inevitable or insurmountable. We've tried to preserve these qualities in this adaptation while bringing concerns and commitments of special importance to American readers. We emphasize research methods as a tool to understand and address social problems, divisions, and inequities with which the United States and other countries struggle. We approach research as a collection of decisions to be made thoughtfully: having considered one's options and with implications and consequences in sight. And we highlight the work of scholars from historically marginalized communities in an effort to broaden and deepen the available picture of sociological research. Our hope is that this book, first, elevates the work already underway to address historical inequities and, second, welcomes a new generation of scholars into the sociological project of seeking understanding as way to promote justice"--