What I (am beginning to) think about Research Methods
3Saturday, September 15, 2012 by Unknown
A long, long
time ago, when I was an undergrad in the Social Sciences I was lucky enough to
be enrolled in a particular combination of programs that required I complete 2
(3 if you count Into to Stats Analysis) courses in research methods. I am only
slightly exaggerating when I say that I was traumatized by this experience. Don’t get me wrong; it
isn’t that I don’t like doing research. I do. But those courses were awful, and boring, and
if that was what professional research was, I wanted nothing to do with it.
So…needless
to say, I was a little hesitant coming into this course. But I think I’ve
learned something this week that I didn’t learn before. It’s all in the
attitude. Luker makes the bold prediction that to practice her form of research
you will have to ignore the conventional wisdom and ways to do research
advocated by other faculty and students (pg 17). But this requires an awareness
that was never required of me before. I was never made to question why. Why
would this method be suitable to my question? Why does this method fall short? Why
do I want to answer this question at all? It is this attitude of questioning (why? so
what?) that adds a layer of interest, of intrigue even, to this topic for me. I want
to challenge convention. But to do that I’ll have to learn the basics.
In undergraduate school I also had mixed feelings about the research process. I learned a bit about quantitative (psychological) research methods and a bit about qualitative methods (anthropological ethnographies.) The first few chapters put a voice to some of the “feelings” I had about both methods. Often I wondered whether statistically significant studies really gave a complex depiction of social and psychological issues. On the other hand, when I looked at a specific ethnography, I sometimes was left thinking, so what? How does this particular story have bigger meaning? I’m interested to see how the author will deliver on her promise of an ideal combination of the two. Also, so far I’m sort of lost by the metaphor between social science research and salsa dancing, any thoughts?
ReplyDeleteI feel the same way-- mixed feelings! I think what she means by salsa dancing is the right combination of rigorous training and steps, combined with improvisation and flexibility. Or in social science terms a balance between canonical quantitative methods and a more critical, theoretical, qualitative approach where the categories used in the quantitative methods are themselves problematized. I like this quote from Luker: "What canonicals want to estimate is the distribution of a population across categories, whereas you want to analyze the categories involved" (48).
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jesse’s assessment of the salsa dancing metaphor, insofar as social science research requires one to build upon established strategies – or “steps” – in order to make new, innovative connections and conclusions. I would argue, however, that social science research goes beyond making connections between what is already out there, and strives to make sense of new intellectual territories.
ReplyDeleteIn her explanation of the metaphor, Luker mentions the Internal Censor, or “that part of you that tells you not only are you terminally stupid, but no self-respecting social scientist would ever consider doing the research you have in mind” (2). From what I understand, salsa dancing – with its seductive rhythms and open movements – allows one to feel uninhibited in a way that encourages them to take risks in their social research. Only by taking risks and asking new questions can we come to understand better the people or subjects of our research.
That being said, I also come from a humanities background – with a focus on contemporary literature and Early Modern philosophy – so this type of research is new to me as well. I identify with the feeling of being “terminally stupid” insofar as I find it difficult to ask the right questions. I (problematically) view a lot of social science studies/research as being mundane or superfluous; I often can’t see the “what’s the point?” that we’ve been told legitimizes this type of research. I am going to attribute this to my lack of knowledge in the area – I’m not used to thinking about things so empirically – and say that I look forward to learning new research methods.