Middle-Range Theories.
Often, sociologists use middle-range theories, those theories that explain specific aspects of social life—such as deviant behavior, racial prejudice, and civic engagement—to make sense of the data they gather (Merton 1968). These theories tend to fall under the umbrella of one of the four major theoretical perspectives described earlier. For example, Erving Goffman, coming from a symbolic interactionist perspective, focused on the impact of stigmas (social characteristics that distinguish a person or group of people from other members of society) in social interactions. His analysis of the impact of stigmas and the midrange theory of social stigma he developed out of it provides one piece of the overall puzzle of explaining social interaction in society.
Theory and Research Methods.
Scientists, including sociologists, often use theories to predict changes in society and under what conditions they are likely to occur. Theory tells the researcher what to look for and what concepts or variables need to be measured. However, explanations about the relationships between social variables need to be tested. This is where research methods—the procedures one uses to gather data—are relevant. Data must be carefully gathered and then used to assess the accuracy of theory. If a theory is not supported by the data, it must be reformulated or discarded. Theory and research are used together and are mutually dependent.
To study Hector’s life in Brazil, researchers might focus on the micro-level interactions between Hector and his family members, peers, teachers, and employers as factors that contribute to his situation. For example, one theory could be that Hector’s family has socialized him to believe that certain activities (for example, working) are more realistic or immediately rewarding than others (such as attending school). A meso-level focus might examine the influence of the organizations and institutions—such as the business world, the schools, and the religious communities in Brazil—to see how they shape the forces that affect Hector’s life. Alternatively, the focus might be on macro-level analysis—the class structure (rich to poor) of the society and the global forces, such as trade relations between Brazil and other countries, that influence opportunities for Brazilians who live in poverty.
Whatever the level of analysis, as social scientists, sociologists use scientific methods of gathering evidence to disprove or to support theories about society.
Ideas Underlying Science
Throughout most of human history, people came to “know” the world by the traditions passed down from one generation to the next. Things were so because authoritative people in the culture said they were so. Often, there was reliance on magical, philosophical, or religious explanations of the forces in nature, and these explanations became part of tradition. For example, just 260 years ago, the conventional wisdom was that lightning storms were a sign of an angry god, not electricity caused by meteorological forces. As ways of knowing about the world shifted, tradition, religion, and magic as the primary means to understand the world were challenged. With advances in the natural sciences, observations of cause-and-effect processes became more systematic and controlled.
The scientific approach is based on several core ideas: First, there are real physical and social worlds that can be studied scientifically. Second, there is a certain order to the world, with identifiable patterns that result from a series of causes and effects. The world is not merely a collection of unrelated random events; rather, events occur in a systematic sequence and in patterns—that is, they are causally related. Third, the way to gain knowledge of the world is to subject it to empirical testing. Empirical knowledge is founded on information gained from evidence (facts), rather than intuition. Evidence refers to facts and observations that can be objectively observed and carefully measured using the five senses (sometimes enhanced by scientific instruments).
Consider the alternative to evidence. As early as middle school grades, children in some schools are asked to distinguish factual news stories from “fake news” stories, news that has little to no basis in facts that can be verified. Students are asked to look for half-truths, misinformation, and unsubstantiated claims by looking for the validity, accuracy, and reliability of information and sources. These are not always present in stories from Facebook, Twitter, and other social and news media sites (Barron 2017). For knowledge to be scientific, it must come from phenomena that can be observed and measured. Phenomena that cannot be subject to measurement are not within the realm of scientific inquiry. For example, what religion is “best” or the existence of God, the devil, heaven, hell, and the soul cannot be observed and measured and therefore cannot be examined scientifically. Religion, however, can be studied scientifically by looking at the role it plays in society and our lives, its impact on our values and behavior (the sociology of religion), the historical development of specific religious traditions (the history of religion), or the emotional comfort and stability it brings to people (the psychology of religion). Finally, science is rooted in objectivity; that is, one must take steps to ensure that one’s personal opinions or values do not bias or contaminate data collection and analysis. Scientists are obliged not to distort their research findings so as to promote a particular point of view. Scientific research is judged first on whether it relies on careful efforts to be objective. Social scientists, like all scientists, must explain what the data reveal, not what they wish it would reveal! Researchers must be open to finding results that support or disprove their hypothesis (an educated guess or prediction) about the research being conducted.
Failure to meet these standards—empirical knowledge, objectivity, and scientific evidence—means that a study is not scientific. Someone’s ideas can seem plausible and logical but may still not be supported by the facts. This is why evidence is so important. Sociology is concerned with using accurate evidence, and it is important to know what is or is not considered accurate. Perhaps you have seen an episode of Law and Order, Criminal Minds, NCIS, or Elementary on television. These series depict the importance of careful collection of data and commitment to objective analysis. Sociologists deal with different issues, but the same sort of concern for accuracy in gathering data guides their work. When sociologists establish theories as to why society works as it does, they must test those theories using scientific methods.
How Sociologists Study the Social World
Suppose you have a research question you want to answer, such as “Why do boys like Hector drop out of school?” For your research to be scientific, you must follow the basic steps of the scientific research process.
1 PLANNING A RESEARCH STUDYStep 1. Define a topic or problem that can be studied scientifically.Step 2. Review existing relevant research studies and theory to refine the topic and define variables, concepts (ideas) that can vary in frequency of occurrence from one time, place, or person to another (such as age, ethnicity, religion, and level of education).Step 3. Formulate hypotheses or research questions and determine how to define and measure the variables.
2 DESIGNING THE RESEARCH PLAN AND METHOD FOR COLLECTING THE DATAStep 4. Design the research plan that specifies how the data will be gathered.Step 5. Select a sample, a group of systematically chosen people who represent a much larger group to study.Step 6. Collect the data using appropriate research methods.
3 MAKING SENSE OF THE DATAStep 7. Analyze the data and relate it to previous findings on the topic, concluding exactly what the study says about the research question(s) from Step 3.Step 8. Draw conclusions and present the report, including suggestions for future research and policy recommendations (if appropriate). The study is then ready for peer review—critique by other social scientists. Publicize findings and recommendations supported by the peer review.
Planning
