Primary data collection

Quick revise
After studying this section you should be able to:

 describe different types of primary research methods and distinguish between quantitative and
qualitative types of research
 identify the strengths and limitations of different sources of primary data and methods of research

What is primary data?

Quick revise
Primary data is that which is collected by sociologists themselves during their own research
using research tools such as experiments, survey questionnaires, interviews and observation.
Primary data can take a quantitative or statistical form, e.g. charts, graphs, diagrams and tables.
It is essential to interpret and evaluate this type of data with care. In particular, look at how the
data is organised in terms of scale. Is it organised into percentages, hundreds, thousands, etc.?
Is it a snapshot of a particular year or is it focusing on trends across a number of years?
Primary data can also be qualitative, e.g. extracts from the conversations of those being studied.
Some researchers present their arguments virtually entirely in the words of their subject matter.
Consequently the data speaks for itself and readers are encouraged to make their own
judgements.
The social survey
Quick revise
This is the method most favoured by positivist sociologists. It normally involves the random
selection of a sample which is representative of the population the sociologist is interested in
studying. This sample may be sent standardised questionnaires through the post and/or may be
asked to take part in structured interviews.
The social survey normally results in the obtaining of large amounts of quantitative data in a
relatively short period of time. This is sometimes called the sample survey.
The postal questionnaire
Quick revise
Most social surveys use a postal questionnaire. These can be closed, meaning that
respondents are normally given a fixed number of responses to tick. Some questionnaires use
open-ended questions, especially attitude surveys. The postal questionnaire has particular
advantages. It is cheap – especially if the sample is large or geographically scattered. It can use
larger samples than any other method.
It is reasonably quick in that the bulk of returned questionnaires are usually back within a month.
Questionnaires that use closed questions are customer-friendly and easily quantified.
However, the postal questionnaire suffers from a number of potential problems. A low response
rate may call into question the representativeness of the sample.
Researchers can never be sure the right person filled it in. It is inflexible because there is usually
no opportunity to probe or observe the social context in which questions are answered. They can
only be considered when questions are simple and straightforward. Question design is not easy,
e.g. leading and ambiguous questions must be avoided because they undermine objectivity and
introduce bias. Interpretivists don’t like them because both the questions and fixed responses
reflect what the sociologist thinks is important. Closed questions don’t allow people to speak for
themselves, and don’t allow for the fact that, although people may share similar views, their
reasons for doing so may be different.
Observational studies
Quick revise
Ethnographic studies describe the way of life of a group of people from their point of view and so appeal
most to interpretivist sociologists.
Observation is the main type of ethnographic approach. There are four main types.

 External observation involves an observer objectively viewing a group but not taking any part in
their activities, e.g. classroom observation.
 Non-participant covert observation involves secretly observing a group, e.g. through a one-
way mirror.
 Participant observation involves the sociologist joining the everyday routines of a group and
observing action in its natural context. Those being observed have given their permission and
are aware of the research aims.
 Covert observation involves the sociologist concealing their identity and totally immersing
themselves in a group culture.

Interpretivists see observation as having a number of advantages:

 It is naturalistic – people are observed as they follow their everyday routine. The sociologist sees
life through their eyes.
 The rapport established between the sociologist and the social group may produce more valid
data.
 Participant observation can uncover behaviour and attitudes that people may be unaware of.

Covert observation is good for studying deviant/criminal groups or groups that feel threatened. It is
especially useful when participant observation would disturb natural rhythms and create artificial
behaviour. Positivists claim observation studies are unscientific.

 The presence of outsiders may influence the behaviour of the group observed – creating less
valid data.
 The researcher may ‘go native’, i.e. become over-involved and lose detachment. Observers may
see only what they want to see.
 Observation is not replicable. The same quality of relationship may not be established with
another observer. The method is therefore unreliable.
 Observation is rarely quantified.
 It is difficult to generalise from observation studies because they focus on small samples – many
of which are exotic and unrepresentative of mainstream society.

Observation may be impossible in some social situations because of differences in status. Observation
may generate moral problems such as breaking the law, e.g. covert observation is seen by some as
violating the principles of informed consent. Observation studies are time-consuming and costly. There
are also practical problems in writing up notes without causing artificiality or without arousing suspicion if
covert.
However, interpretivists argue that these problems of reliability are made up for by the validity of the
information produced.
The experimental method
Quick revise
This is the main method used by natural scientists. Experimentation normally involves the testing of a
hypothesis about the relationship between an independent variable (cause) and a dependent
variable (effect). Experiments are usually set up so that the scientist controls the introduction of possible
independent variables. Used more by psychologists than sociologists, e.g. see Milgram, Zimbardo. In the
natural sciences, such control is enhanced by use of a laboratory. Any change in the participant’s
behaviour should be the result of the change introduced by the experimenter. Interpretivist sociologists
note that the experimental method is rarely used in sociological research for both practical and ethical
reasons:

 Practical reasons: Sociologists can never be sure that behaviour is caused by the social
phenomena they are interested in. For example, people usually know they are taking part in an
experiment. Their performance may be distorted by their desire to impress the experimenter.
Moreover, only a limited number of social conditions can be re-created in the laboratory.
 Ethical reasons: Some sociologists argue that it is morally wrong not to tell people they are part
of an experiment or to expose them to adverse social conditions. E.g. media research on
children, see Bandura.

These difficulties have led to some sociologists adopting variations on the experimental method.
The comparative method is an experimental method which uses the social world as the laboratory. The
researcher, usually using official statistics, compares a before and after situation in a social group where
a change has taken place with one where it has not. I.e. Durkheim’s suicide.
Interpretivist sociologists have used field experiments – a qualitative examination of particular social
contexts in order to explore the interpretations which underpin everyday interaction. However, these too
involve some degree of manipulation.
Positivists note that this type of experiment may suffer lower levels of reliability. I.e. Rosenthal and
Jacobson

Sampling
Quick revise
The selected sample must be representative of the population being studied because normally
sociologists wish to generalise. It is also important to find a sampling frame (a list of people who may
potentially take part in a survey) which is representative of the population being studied. Sociologists
prefer to use random samplingmethods in order to minimise the possibility of bias. At its most basic,
random sampling allows everyone the same chance of being selected. A number of sampling methods
are available to sociologists:

 Systematic sampling: Every nth person is chosen from a sampling frame. For example, 50
people out of a group of 500 may be chosen by randomly selecting a number between 1 and
10, e.g. 6. Every tenth name beginning with the randomly selected number ‘6’ is taken from the
list, e.g. 6, 16, 26, 36, 46... up to 496. This process will generate fifty names for the sample.
 Stratified sampling: A random sample is taken from particular social categories, e.g. age,
gender, race, etc., which make up the population being studied.
 Cluster or multi-stage sampling: Households may be randomly selected from a random sample
of streets from a random selection of areas.

Sometimes non-random and unrepresentative sampling methods may be preferred despite the danger of
unreliability:

 Quota sampling is mainly used by market researchers in the street. For example, they may be
under instructions to stop and interview a quota of housewives aged between 25 and 40 years
of age.
  Snowball, or opportunity, sampling is mainly used in areas in which it is difficult to find a
sample because behaviour is seen as deviant by society, e.g. a researcher interested in heroin
addiction may find an addict willing to introduce him or her to other addicts.

Positivists approve of the social survey because it is regarded as scientific (variables are controlled via
sampling and questionnaire design), reliable (standardised questionnaires can be replicated), objective
(samples are randomly selected) and quantifiable. However, some social groups are difficult (and
sometimes impossible) to survey, e.g. people who are illiterate and criminals.
Surveys which monitor a group over a period of years are called longitudinal surveys. They supply an
in-depth picture of a group or social trends over time. Trust can be built up between a group and the
researchers. This may generate more valid data and lessen the possibility of non-response. However, it
can be difficult to find samples and research teams committed to long-term research. The sample may
drop out, die, move away, etc. This increases the chance of it being unrepresentative. If different
researchers are used, it can be difficult to re-establish trust with a group. The sample may become too
‘survey-friendly’. They may consciously or unconsciously tell researchers what they want to hear.

Types of Interview
Quick revise
The structured interview

The structured or formal interview involves the researcher working through a questionnaire or interview
schedule as part of a social survey.
Like the postal questionnaire, all respondents are exposed to the same set of questions.
Positivists like this type of interview because:

 They produce large amounts of factual information very cheaply and quickly compared with the
unstructured interview and observation.
 An interviewer can explain the questionnaire, thus reducing the possibility of non-response and
ask for clarification of vague responses.
 An interviewer can observe the social context in which answers are given, e.g. the facial
expression, tone of voice, body language, status, etc., of the respondent.

The unstructured interview

Interpretivists argue that research should focus on the respondent’s view of the world through the use of
unstructured interviews (sometimes known as ‘guided conversations’). This method involves the
interviewer informally asking open-ended questions about a topic and allowing the respondent to respond
freely and in depth.
Interpretivists claim a number of strengths for this method:

 Trust can be developed, which may generate more qualitative information about the respondent’s
interpretation of the world.
 They are flexible because the conversation is not constrained by fixed questions. This may
generate more valid information (especially if the respondent can see their input is valued) and
allows for probing of deeper meanings.
 They provide more opportunity for respondents to say what they want rather than what the
interviewer expects.
However, positivists see this method as unscientific because it isn’t standardised and doesn’t produce
quantifiable data. It depends upon a unique relationship between interviewer and interviewee and is
therefore difficult to replicate.
Both structured and unstructured interviews share similar potential problems. The major problem is
interview bias or effect. People may not act naturally in interviews because all interviews are interaction
situations and may be adversely affected by status differences between the interviewer and interviewee,
e.g. social class, gender, ethnicity and age. Bias may be caused by the interviewer’s facial expression or
tone of voice, leading the interviewee to a response that reflects the interviewer’s own opinions. A social
desirability effect may occur in that the interviewee may wish to please the interviewer.
Interviews only provide a snapshot of social life whereas other methods such as observation may better
capture everyday life. Interviews may be ineffective if people are unaware of behaving in the way they do.