Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/49

Click to flip

49 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
comparative historical methods
are a set of techniques and approaches for doing sociology across or within different countries or time periods
path dependency
must understand sequence of events that caused a final event
Public Documents and official records
meetings or congress, court records, laws
private documents
(not intended for public)
diaries, letters, hospital records
mass media
newspapers
tv
study events based on reportings
physical, non verbal materials
artifacts
social science archives
books, articles written by historians
variable oriented approach
quantitative and deductive
use large # of countries and search for a generalized pattern across comparative historical units (years, countries)
deductive
specify hypothesis to be tested then include widest population with relavent observations
case oriented approach
qualitative
examine small amount of cases, attempt to construct a deep understanding of the cases, and develop a specific explanation that illustrates some social theory (doesn't prove or disprove), often relies on secondary archival sources, more interpretive
2 methods of Case Oriented Approach
Mills Method of Agreement, Mills indirect method of difference
mills method of agreement
if 2 or more instances of phenomena have only one of several causes in common then that common circumstance is the cause,
problems with mills method of agreement
limited amount of causes, spuriousness
mills indirect method of difference
1st identify instances of phenomena and use method of agreement, then identify similar cases where phenomena did not occur (but possibly could have) and check to be sure causes did not occur, eliminate supuriousness, use negative cases
Unique Leverage on theory
1. higher level of theory testing,2. generate theory in unknown terrain, 3. reconicel anomalous cases, 4. evaluate necessary and sufficient causes
concept analysis
provides chance to develop more comprehensive and deeper definitions for core sociological concepts
typologies
use check list
family resemblance
typologies
identify sets of similar cases in terms of unrelated concepts
use checklist
treat conceptual attributes as individually necessary, jointly sufficient for membership into that category
family resemblance
no single attribute shared by all members of a category but the members resembe one another on at least some attributes
process analysis
causation is a matter of sequence, historical data over time is best for analyzing sequences,ch scholars attempt to specify the mechanisms through which individual variables exert and effect dv
conjunctural causation
multiple combination of things that lead to an outcome
triangulation
joining the quantitative and qualitative, use different perspectoves to better understand phenomena
multiple methods
multiple measures 1 study
repeating and replicating
combined strategies
team work
what causes continuing order development
colonialism: influences persistent rankings
labor intensive landed estates
dense indigenous populations
why evaluate
administrative purposes
impact assessment
efficiency assessment
evaluating conventional practices
types of evaluative research
formative, summative
formative
before program is established, planning and implementation
summative
existing programs effectiveness and impact
purpose of evaluation
study other programs
contstruct flow models
target-intervention-outcome
measurement and design
specifying population, specifying outcomes
specifying interventions
assessing context
logistical problems
mismatch in science and policy research, managing projects is much tougher
ethical issues
public/private conflicts
withholding treatment
use of results
agenda by interest groups
go no go decision
developing rationale for action
legitimation+accountability
problems when
not presented effectively
contracted deeply held beliefs
vested interests (something to lose)
not knowledge limitations
how to critique
connecting theory and research
making a contribution
consumers guide to research
connecting theory and research
1.improve understanding of phenomena
2. should be important in real world
3.dealing with theoretical problems
4. front end/back end problems,(raise qu's can't answer)
making a contribution
1.choose important hypothesis that no one has systematically studied
2. choose hypothesis suspected false, scrutinize it
3. attempt to resolve a controversy in literature
4. design study to illuminate/eval assumptions
5. argue an overlooked topic
consumers guide to research
research design: who paid, conducted. unit of analysis
measurement: variables, how operationalized/measured
sampling: frame, technique
method
data analysis:
contribution
deontology
do not harm no matter what, there are no ends that justify means, harm is physical and psychological
potential harm
before doing a study try to estimate what potential harm might be
teleological
means evaluating the potential harm vs the potential benefits, if benefits > harm its ethical
institutional review board
reviews all research with human subjects except students doing for class
review process
3 categories
review before research starts
1. exempt
2. expediated
3. full
informed consent
tell subject about study including potential risks and expected benefits
participation
subjects should understand what they will be asked if they participate
voluntary
subjects should know they do not have to participate, they can stop at any time
risk and benefits
subjects should understand risk and any rewards
consent
individual has to sign a form, most be kep on file for five years
confidentiality
must secure before
forms kept separate
no identifying info in data
after data is constructed 5 yrs before identifying info should be destroyed
deception and debriefing
cover stories in experiments, necessary solution is debriefing minimize effect of the deception