Compare and contrast how content analysis and ethnographic research have been used to study children’s understanding of friendship
Compare and contrast how content analysis and ethnographic research have been used to study children’s understanding of friendship
There are many similarities and difference between content analysis and ethnographic research. This essay will explore these similarities and differences and will attempt to explain how they are relevant to a child’s understanding of friendship. Content analysis involves the analysis of written, audio or visual material through the identification of predetermined markers. Ethnographic research involves extensive observation and involvement with a group over a period of time. This essay will discuss the scientists that implemented each type of research and explain the method used by each researcher. By exploring how they are alike and how they are not so alike it will also hope to highlight the benefits and drawbacks of both types of research.
Bigelow and La Gaipa and Corsaro used different methods of research in their studies, but they were both striving for the same purpose, to explore the complexity of relationships and what is valued when it comes to friendship in children. Bigelow and La Gaipa (1975) became pioneers of the field when they began their research as very little research had been conducted about children’s friendships at the time. They decided to gather 480 essays from children of varied ages and then cross referenced the essays with 21 predetermined key words. This yielded a large amount of data. Their aim was to see how children’s view on friendship, more specifically their best friend, changes as they get older. This contrasts to Corsaro, who chose to follow an ethnographic research method, as he looked to discover how children communicate and interact with each other rather than about each other. He decided to observe the children and become a part of their regular interactions in order to get a more direct picture of how children see friendship.
Bigelow and La Gaipa therefore valued quantitative data over
There are many similarities and difference between content analysis and ethnographic research. This essay will explore these similarities and differences and will attempt to explain how they are relevant to a child’s understanding of friendship. Content analysis involves the analysis of written, audio or visual material through the identification of predetermined markers. Ethnographic research involves extensive observation and involvement with a group over a period of time. This essay will discuss the scientists that implemented each type of research and explain the method used by each researcher. By exploring how they are alike and how they are not so alike it will also hope to highlight the benefits and drawbacks of both types of research.
Bigelow and La Gaipa and Corsaro used different methods of research in their studies, but they were both striving for the same purpose, to explore the complexity of relationships and what is valued when it comes to friendship in children. Bigelow and La Gaipa (1975) became pioneers of the field when they began their research as very little research had been conducted about children’s friendships at the time. They decided to gather 480 essays from children of varied ages and then cross referenced the essays with 21 predetermined key words. This yielded a large amount of data. Their aim was to see how children’s view on friendship, more specifically their best friend, changes as they get older. This contrasts to Corsaro, who chose to follow an ethnographic research method, as he looked to discover how children communicate and interact with each other rather than about each other. He decided to observe the children and become a part of their regular interactions in order to get a more direct picture of how children see friendship.
Bigelow and La Gaipa therefore valued quantitative data over
References: C. Brownlow (2010). Making Friends, Investigating Psychology, The Open University, Milton Keynes Self Reflection In TMA 1 it was highlighted how I should avoid quoting straight from text. I have since practised referencing and used them only where I felt it was necessary. I also found the content of this chapter easier to discuss.