1. Why is it important to think critically about research methods, even if you don’t plan on a research career?
Research methods tie scientific investigations together. Combine this with logic and ideologies and questions will be answered. Different research methods could be used throughout everyday life for solving common questions.
2. In the opinion of Montello and Sutton, how are informal, daily observations different from science?
Scientific observations want to be repeatable (to prove something true). Not looking for “happy endings”, science just wants the observations to be viewable by others. Informal, daily observations are not always investigated. In science, these observations are often taken note of to help answer a bigger picture. …show more content…
It sounds like they think falsifying is easier than confirming something correct.
10. In the view of Montello and Sutton, why are quantitative methods sometimes problematic in social science?
Quantitative methods can impose structure before observations are made. Results could be limited by the structure versus the freedom qualitative methods are constructed.
Ex: How do you feel about highway construction? (1-6 vs freedom to answer)
11. In the view of Montello and Sutton, how are humanities different from science? Do you agree or disagree?
Humanities typically include history, philosophy, language, literature, and art; yet geographic and environmental research is included. For the most part, humanities don’t employ systematic empirical observation of reality. Humanities are “rarely mathematical”. Humanity scholars may “promote the value of complicating our understanding as a goal of scholarship.”
I agree with these claims for the most part. It has always seemed to me that humanities do not include the mathematics or the scientific experiments or procedure. People in humanities would rather try to explain why something is the way it is, rather than just presenting the
Research methods tie scientific investigations together. Combine this with logic and ideologies and questions will be answered. Different research methods could be used throughout everyday life for solving common questions.
2. In the opinion of Montello and Sutton, how are informal, daily observations different from science?
Scientific observations want to be repeatable (to prove something true). Not looking for “happy endings”, science just wants the observations to be viewable by others. Informal, daily observations are not always investigated. In science, these observations are often taken note of to help answer a bigger picture. …show more content…
It sounds like they think falsifying is easier than confirming something correct.
10. In the view of Montello and Sutton, why are quantitative methods sometimes problematic in social science?
Quantitative methods can impose structure before observations are made. Results could be limited by the structure versus the freedom qualitative methods are constructed.
Ex: How do you feel about highway construction? (1-6 vs freedom to answer)
11. In the view of Montello and Sutton, how are humanities different from science? Do you agree or disagree?
Humanities typically include history, philosophy, language, literature, and art; yet geographic and environmental research is included. For the most part, humanities don’t employ systematic empirical observation of reality. Humanities are “rarely mathematical”. Humanity scholars may “promote the value of complicating our understanding as a goal of scholarship.”
I agree with these claims for the most part. It has always seemed to me that humanities do not include the mathematics or the scientific experiments or procedure. People in humanities would rather try to explain why something is the way it is, rather than just presenting the