1) The research question Hauser’s study asks is, “what part women play in the maintenance of traditional parenting roles”(Hauser 2012: 36-37). Other topics questioned in the study are related to marital gatekeeping and how it takes shape, what it looks like, and how women and men react to it.
2) Hauser used a qualitative approach in his study, as it is centered on human experience and the use of a subject and researcher connection is created. With the use of semi-structured interviewing, she asked a series of questions about the subject’s experiences as a parent. This type of interviewing allowed for flexibility and change in the study including a series of questions that were added as the interviewing progressed. Hauser’s approach was based …show more content…
This limits the study because it creates a bias as it suggests that women are the “bad guys”, prior to the interview process. The study also uses the participant’s real names; anonymity in this case would prevent partners knowing about each other’s opinions on the matter, which in turn can affect their relationship. In this there is also an issue of confidentiality that is not mentioned in the paper, however the consequences of no anonymity are not at large or dangerous. The study is also limited to a midwestern, middle class selection of families; it may have been helpful to have a more diverse sampling with a lower class area included. It would also create a more diverse study if a snowball sampling effect were not used, as the people that are recommending participants may be similar to each …show more content…
The fact that a woman wrote the article was interesting as well, with the negative view that the study seemed to display on female parents. It was interesting to see what the parents thought of each other and how they viewed parental gatekeeping in general. Hauser’s use of a snowball technique to find participants was fascinating as well. While the study was diverse with the use of open-ended questions, I thought that it would be more culturally and economically diverse, but it was limited to the same type of people. I felt this was a disadvantage to the outcome of the study. Perhaps including families of lower class may have created a more difficult study, but I believe it would create more depth. Although, Hauser did note at the end of the article more in depth interviewing could have been done with different sampling and more diverse
2) Hauser used a qualitative approach in his study, as it is centered on human experience and the use of a subject and researcher connection is created. With the use of semi-structured interviewing, she asked a series of questions about the subject’s experiences as a parent. This type of interviewing allowed for flexibility and change in the study including a series of questions that were added as the interviewing progressed. Hauser’s approach was based …show more content…
This limits the study because it creates a bias as it suggests that women are the “bad guys”, prior to the interview process. The study also uses the participant’s real names; anonymity in this case would prevent partners knowing about each other’s opinions on the matter, which in turn can affect their relationship. In this there is also an issue of confidentiality that is not mentioned in the paper, however the consequences of no anonymity are not at large or dangerous. The study is also limited to a midwestern, middle class selection of families; it may have been helpful to have a more diverse sampling with a lower class area included. It would also create a more diverse study if a snowball sampling effect were not used, as the people that are recommending participants may be similar to each …show more content…
The fact that a woman wrote the article was interesting as well, with the negative view that the study seemed to display on female parents. It was interesting to see what the parents thought of each other and how they viewed parental gatekeeping in general. Hauser’s use of a snowball technique to find participants was fascinating as well. While the study was diverse with the use of open-ended questions, I thought that it would be more culturally and economically diverse, but it was limited to the same type of people. I felt this was a disadvantage to the outcome of the study. Perhaps including families of lower class may have created a more difficult study, but I believe it would create more depth. Although, Hauser did note at the end of the article more in depth interviewing could have been done with different sampling and more diverse