Symposium on Methodology in Qualitative Sociology

Topics: Sociology, Qualitative research, Quantitative research Pages: 22 (7365 words) Published: July 4, 2013
Qualitative Sociology, Vol. 25, No. 1, Spring 2002 ( C 2002)

Symposium on Methodology in Qualitative Sociology

Introduction: The Methodological Strengths and Dilemmas of Qualitative Sociology Jeff Goodwin and Ruth Horowitz

The articles in this symposium critically reflect upon the methodological strengths and limitations of several diverse yet important works of qualitative sociology, broadly defined: Michael Schwalbe’s Unlocking the Iron Cage: The Men’s Movement, Gender Politics, and American Culture (1996); Paul Willis’s Learning to Labour: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs (1977); Perry Anderson’s Lineages of the Absolutist State (1974); Doug McAdam’s Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930–1970 (1982); and Julian McAllister Groves’s Hearts and Minds: The Controversy Over Laboratory Animals (1997). Among the questions addressed in this symposium are the following: Are the general theoretical or empirical claims of these books persuasive, and are they well supported by the data that are presented by the authors? Are these books persuasive because they adhere to certain methodological rules or standards, if only implicitly? And what are those rules or standards? Or are these books powerful or persuasive despite, or even because of, their lack of methodological rigor, conventionally understood? And would these books have been improved appreciably had they been more methodologically self-conscious or differently designed? This symposium thus addresses the concern—shared by quantitative social scientists, general readers, and not a few qualitative sociologists themselves—that qualitative sociology lacks methodological rigor and, accordingly, truly reliable or generalizable findings. Some social scientists view qualitative sociology, in no uncertain terms, as methodologically and empirically “soft” and highly subjective, if not completely solipsistic—a characterization that a few qualitative researchers have ironically embraced. At best, according to certain critics, qualitative sociology might generate provisional hypotheses that more rigorous social scientists can then go forth to test and revise, but it cannot itself glean much solid understanding of the social world. We believe that this view of qualitative sociology is badly mistaken, and the essays in this symposium collectively refute it. Qualitative sociology is not— or need not be—merely literature or navel-gazing, and its findings have proven 33

C

2002 Human Sciences Press, Inc.

34

Goodwin and Horowitz

extraordinarily insightful, persuasive, and influential. At its best, qualitative sociology can be very rigorous and “scientific” indeed. This symposium demonstrates that a significant number of qualitative sociologists, who have not abandoned the idea that qualitative researchers can do scientific or quasi-scientific work as well as quantitative researchers, have produced important and influential research. Qualitative sociology, in short, has some very important things to say about the world beyond the researcher. Accordingly, both quantitative social scientists and those qualitative researchers who have bought into the quantitative critique and embraced subjectivism need to take another look at what qualitative sociology can achieve. DEFINING QUALITATIVE SOCIOLOGY: HOW “SCIENTIFIC” IS IT? Grave suspicions about the methodological rigor of qualitative sociology provide the intellectual backdrop to Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research (1994), a much-discussed methodological text by Harvard political scientists Gary King, Robert Keohane, and Sidney Verba. King, Keohane, and Verba believe that qualitative social scientists need to pursue their research in a more rigorous and scientific manner, which basically means, for them, adhering as much as possible to the standards of quantitative research. (Significantly, they do not ask whether quantitative work might be improved by emulating certain...

References: Adler, P., & Adler, P. (1987). Membership roles in field research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Amenta, E. (1991). Making the most of a case study: Theories of the welfare state and the American experience. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 32, 172–94.
46
Goodwin and Horowitz
Anderson, E. (1976). A place on the corner. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Anderson, N. (1923). The hobo. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Anderson, P. (1974). Lineages of the absolutist state. London: New Left Books. Becker, H. (1963). The outsiders. New York: Free Press. Becker, H. (1966). Introduction. In C. Shaw, The Jack-roller: A delinquent boy’s own story. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Becker, H. (1967). Whose side are we on? Social Problems, 14, 239–47. Bennett, J. (1981). Oral history and delinquency. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Bohannan, L. (1954). Return to laughter. New York: Doubleday Anchor. Burawoy, M. (1979). Manufacturing consent. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Burawoy, M., et al. (2000). Global ethnography. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Cressey, P. (1932). Taxi dance hall. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Denzin, N. (Ed.) (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Denzin, N. (1997). Interpretive ethnography. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage. DiFazio, W. (1985). Longshoremen. South Hadley, MA: Bergin and Garvey. Emerson, R., Fretz, R., & Shaw, L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Feagin, J. R., Orum, A. M., & Sjoberg, G. (Eds.) (1991). A case for the case study. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Fine, G. (1993). The sad demise, mysterious disappearance, and glorious triumph of symbolic interaction. Annual Review of Sociology, 19, 61–87. Gerson, K., & Horowitz, R. (In press) Interviewing and observation: Options and choices in qualitative research. In Tim May (Ed.), Qualitative research in action. London: Sage. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Goldthorpe, J. H. (1991). The uses of history in sociology: Reflections on some recent tendencies. British Journal of Sociology, 42, 211–230. Goodwin, J., & Jasper, J. M. (1999). Caught in a winding, snarling vine: The structural bias of political process theory. Sociological Forum, 14, 27–54. Groves, J. M. (1997). Hearts and minds: The controversy over laboratory animals. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Horowitz, R. (1986). Remaining an outsider: Membership as a threat to research rapport. Urban Life, 14, 409–30. Horowitz, R. (1995). Teen mothers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Horowitz, R. (1997). Barriers and bridges to class mobility and formation: Ethnographies of stratification. Sociological Methods and Research, 25, 495–538. Jules-Rosette, B. (1976). The conversion experience: The apostles of John Maranke. Journal of Religion in Africa, 7, 132–64. Junker, B. (1960). Field work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. King, G., Keohane, R. O., and Verba, S. (1994). Designing social inquiry: Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Kornblum, W. (1974). Blue collar community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lamont, M. (1992). Money, manners and morals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lieberson, S. (1991). Small n’s and big conclusions: An examination of the reasoning in comparative studies based on a small number of cases. Social Forces, 70, 307–320. Liebow, E. (1967). Tally’s corner. Boston: Little, Brown. Lustick, I. (1996). History, historiography, and political science: Multiple historical records and the problem of selection bias. American Political Science Review, 90, 605–618. Mann, M. (1994). In praise of macro-sociology: A reply to Goldthorpe. British Journal of Sociology, 45, 37–54. McAdam, D. (1982). Political process and the development of black insurgency, 1930–1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Miller, S. M. (1952). The participant observer and “over rapport.” American Sociological Review, 17, 97–99. Milligan, J. D. (1979). The treatment of an historical source. History and Theory, 18, 177–96.
Introduction: The Methodological Strengths and Dilemmas of Qualitative Sociology
47
Mills, C. W. (1959). The sociological imagination. New York: Oxford University Press. Morrill, C. (1995). The executive way. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Morrill, C., & Fine, G. A. (1997). Ethnographic contributions to organizational sociology. Sociological Methods and Research, 25, 424–51. Munck, G. L. (1998). Canons of research design in qualitative analysis. Studies in Comparative International Development, 33, 18–45. Platt, J. (1981). Evidence and proof in documentary research. Sociological Review, 29, 31–66. Polsky, N. (1969). Hustlers, beats, and others. New York: Doubleday Anchor. Ragin, C. C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Ragin, C. C., & Becker, H. S. (1992). What is a case? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Richardson, L. (1999). Paradigms lost. Symbolic Interaction, 22, 79–92. Sanjek, R. (Ed.) (1990). Fieldnotes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Schwalbe, M. (1996). Unlocking the iron cage: The men’s movement, gender politics, and American culture. New York: Oxford University Press. Sjoberg, G., & Vaughan, T. (1993). The bureaucratization of sociology. In T. Vaughan, G. Sjoberg, & A. Sjoberg (Eds.), A critique of contemporary American sociology (pp. 54–113). Dix Hills, NY: General Hall. Skocpol, T. (Ed.) (1984). Vision and method in historical sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Smith, D. (1990). The conceptual practices of power. Boston: Northeastern University Press. Smith, D. (In press) Institutional ethnography. In Tim May (Ed.), Qualitative research in action. London: Sage. Snow, D., & Anderson, L. (1993). Down on their luck. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Suttles, G. (1968). The social order of the slum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Tilly, C. (1984). Big structures, large processes, huge comparisons. New York: Russell Sage. Tilly, C. (1995). To explain political processes. American Journal of Sociology, 100, 1594–1610. Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Van Maanen, J. (Ed.) (1995). Representation in ethnography. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Venkatesh, S. (2000). American project. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Vidich, A., & Bensman, J. (1960). Small town in mass society. New York: Anchor Books. Whyte, W. F. (1943 [1955]). Street corner society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Willis, P. (1977). Learning to labour: How working class kids get working class jobs. New York: Columbia University Press. Wirth, L. (1928). The ghetto. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Qualitative Research Methodology Research Paper
  • Essay about sociology
  • Sociology Essay
  • sociology Essay
  • Sociology essay
  • Sociology Essay
  • Sociology Essay
  • Sociology Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free