Você está na página 1de 39

SESSION 1. MODULE 1. RESEARCH DESIGN.

1. WHAT IS GOOD SOCIAL SCIENCE?


Good social science is good science having the social as the object of inquiry. TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE REALITY. Empirical propositions are propositions about how something actually is in reality. Our aim is to test wether empirical propositions are true or false (empirical knowledge). Empirical science is to investigate empirical propositions in a systematic way. We can reject a theory, but not to ensure it, since we never know what will come later. It is hard to make empirical sciences because we don't have direct access to reality. We have what psychologists call a confirmation bias: we want to be right. KARL POPPER (1902-1994): Science should always seek to test theories against empirical evidence. If testing cannot discount the theory ir can be retained. Otherwise, it can be said to have been falsified (David & Sutton 2011:84) THE ROLE OF THE METHODS-COURSE: to learn to produce systematic knowledge about the world. METHODS: A set of rules and guidelines which ensure that: you can investigate your empirical propositions that your need to be right is kept at bay that others can follow you

AN ILLUSTRATION OF THE RESEARCH PROCESS:


(inspiration for new projects) Conclusion, Research question generalization and perspectives Hypotheses

Data analysis

Theory and extant knowledge

Research design

Data collection Operationalization

Choice of cases and observations

1
Source: Translated from Andersen, Hansen & Klemmensen, 2010:67

2. IDENTIFICATION OF THE RESEARCH QUESTION.


The research question ins the anchor of your subsequent research process. It: guides your subsequent search for prior literature informs the way you filter and review prior literature determines the research design you select, which determines your data collection, analysis and interpretation.
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A GOOD RESEARCH QUESTION [Nicola Green (2008:47-9)]:

1. Interesting 2. Relevant 3. Feasible: achievable, realizable. (Factible, viable) 4. Ethical 5. Concise 6. Answerable ELEMENTS OF THE RESEARCH QUESTION: POPULATION: All the members of the category under investigation. The universe which we wish to say something about, can be more or less specific. (E.g. Germans, municipalities in Denmark, tabloid newspapers). THE UNIT OF ANALYSIS: What/who is to be investigated (e.g. individuals, countries...). THE VARIABLES: The characteristics of the units (e.g. gender, employment status, GDP...). Any unit of data collection whose value can vary. THE VALUES: The placement of the units on the variables (e.g. male/female, employed/ unemployed, high/low). Range of possible variations available to a variable. ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS IN THE PROCESS OF IDENTIFYING A RESEARCH QUESTION: What do we know: theory and extant knowledge? What do we need to know? What you would like to investigate? Why is this interesting, important and relevant to investigate?

TYPES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS I: DESCRIPTIVE: Mode of research that doesn't seek to explain why things are as they are, only to show what is going on. How big a proportion of the news do crime issues make up? EXPLORATIVE: Research that is design not to test a hypothesis by deductive means, but which instead aims to explore a field in a more inductive way. How do young people talk about politics? UNDERSTANDING: How do journalists motivate their framing of political issues? EXPLANATORY: Account that suggest a casual process behind data collection. Does the gender of political leaders affect citizens' perceptions of their leadership competences? PREDICTIVE: A statement about the future that can be tested if stated in a rigorous form (that is, as a hypothesis). What will happen to citizens' democratic trust if the use of negative campaigning is increased in Denmark? CHANGING: How should political candidates act to maximize the exposure of their view points in the media? TYPES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS II: TESTING OR EXPLORING. TESTING: When extant theory, research and knowledge enables you to build predictions (hypotheses) about what to expect. It is deductive (theory data) and usually is associated with the use of quantitative methods. EXPLORING: When you have no tentative predictions, only questions. Research that is design not to test a hypothesis by deductive means, but which instead aims to explore a field in a more inductive way. CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS. CRITERIA OF CASUALTY: Empirical correlation between the two variables The cause precedes the effect in time. The observed empirical correlation between the two variables cannot be explained away as being due to the influence of some third variable that causes both of them. 3

(A meaningful theoretical explanation of the observed empirical correlation can be given)

DEPENDENT VARIABLE: Variable that a researcher predicts will be affected by the variation of another variable (independent variable). Referred to as the Y in mathematical notation. It is what we wish to explain. INDEPENDET VARIABLE: Often referred to as the cause, assumed to be the variable influencing changes in the dependent variable. It is what explains the variation in the dependent variable. Referred to as the X variable in mathematica notation. CONTROL VARIABLE (third variable): A variable that the researcher suspects might influence the relationship between the independent and dependent variables. Referred to as Z variable in mathematical notation. Control variable (Z)

Media coverage (X)

Citizens' political preferences (Y)

3. RESEARCH STRATEGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN.


RESEARCH STRATEGIES: QUALITATIVE: Usually emphasizes words rather than quantification in the collection and analysis of data. As a research strategy it is inductive, constructivist (attention to smallgroup interaction) and interpretative (Bryman, 2008:697). It prioritizes depth over generalizability. QUANTITATIVE: Usually emphasizes quantification in the collection and analysis of data. As a research strategy it is deductive, objective/realist (attention to social structures and constraints) and incorporates a natural science model in the research process (Bryman, 2008:607). It prioritizes generalizability over depth. Both strategies are different, but follow one same logic: to make descriptive or casual inference about reality; to find a way to investigate our research question; and the follow the same fundamental criteria of evaluation of scientific research apply. RESEARCH APPROACHES. INDUCTION: Data theory. It is explanatory, seeking to build accounts of what is going on from the data collected. It generates

theory from evidence, rather than generating testable theory from rational extensions from existing theory. DEDUCTION: Theory (abstract) results (specific). Ir requires a greater degree of pre-emptive structure in the data collection process. HYPOTHETICO-DEDUCTIVE: Derives hypotheses from theory and tests the hypotheses in the data. RESEARCH DESIGN. It is a plan for the collection and the analysis of the data that contains: Which units are to be investigated. How many units you wish to investigate. When you want to investigate the units. Which data sources you want to use.

The research design should ensure that the data you collect enables you to give an answer to your research question. DIFFERENT TYPES OF RESEARCH DESIGN

Experiments Cross-sectional studies Longitudinal studies Single case studies Comparative studies
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN.

Randomised division into test and control groups, manipulation of the independent variable Studies based on observations made at one time Studies based on observations made at many times In-dept investigation of a single case (but often several observations) investigation of a least two cases (the investigation focuses on differences and similarities i.e. comparison)

Research designed to test a hypothesis, usually through the establishment of controlled conditions and the manipulation of independent variables to measure changes in dependent variables. The scholars creates the situation which is needed to observe a phenomenon. Two or more groups are exposed to different stimuli and their subsequent response is measured. The scholar controls the values in the independent variable. The units of analysis are randomly assigned to values in the independent variable (ensures

control for third variables). The experiment is the logic which other types of research design seek to imitate.

CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES. Research design that involves collecting data from a sample at one point in time. The researcher is concerned with selecting many cases on the basis of variation in identified characteristics; these characteristics will often be the independent variable of the case, for example where an individual sex, marital status and age. Changes in the dependent variable, for example income, can be explored by examining the differences between men and women, or plotting the variation in income by age. The scholar collects data at one point in time focusing on two or more units of analysis. The values on the independent variable are given and must thus be observed. The units of analysis/cases can be selected randomly or based on theory. The scholar can comare many or few units of analysis. Example: a large-scale national survey which is collected at one given point in time to examine the sources of religious prejudice. LONGITUDINAL STUDIES. A research design that involves collecting data on cases over an extended period. The design will involve data collection from the same sample at two or more points in time. The data from each collection period can be compared to assess social change. The scholar investigates one or several units of analysis at different points in time. The values on the independent variable are given and must thus be observed. Tha units of analysis/cases can be selected randomly or based on theory. May include many or few units of analysis (e.g. individuals, countries, etc.). Example: Analysis of Supreme Court decisions over time.

SINGLE CASE STUDIES. Detailed examination of a single case. A case study may focus on one individual, one area, one group or one organization. It is not designed to compare one individual or group to another. Though it is possible to conduct a series of case studies, each study would not be designed specifically to enable comparison with others. Investigates one unit of analysis/case. 6

The case may be interesting in itself, but is often an example of a more general phenomenon. It is possible to include many different types of data/obervations. Can be analyzed over time.

COMPARATIVE CASE-STUDIES. Its focus is to identify differences and similarities between two or more different groups or cases. Comparison of a smaller number of cases where the main interest is to explain systematic differences and/or similarities. Often a very careful selection of cases: maximize variation in the independent variable control third variables do not choose on the dependent variable

Most similar system design (MSSD) vs. most different systems design (MDSD).

4. CRITERIA FOR THE EVALUATION OF SOCIAL RESEARCH:


REPLICATION: Can the study be replicated by someone else? Are the procedures spelled out in such great detail that others can replicate the research? VALIDITY: It is concerned with the integrity of the conclusions that are generated from a piece of research, the correspondence between data and reality. Validity problems often have the form of systematic mistakes. The concept of validity includes a number of dimensions: Measurement validity: It is to do with the question of wether a measure that is devised of a concept really does reflect the concept that it is supposed to be denoting. E.g. Does the grades really measure the intelligence? When the measure is unstable, hence it is unreliable. Internal validity: It concerns the question of wether a conclusion that incorporates a causal relationship between two or more variables holds water. Concerned with establishing whether no other factors, on which data may or may not have been recorded, could explain the research findings. Sampling technique and measurement tools can compromise internal validity. (book) If we suggest that X causes Y, can we be sure that it is X that is responsible for variation in 7

Y and not something else that is producing an apparent causal relationship? How confident can we be that the independent variable really is at least in part responsible for the variation that has been identified in the dependent variable? External validity: Concerns the question of wether the results of a study can be generalized beyond the specific research context; the extent to which research findings can be generalized to the population and different social settings. Generalizability. Ecological validity: Concerns the question of wether social research sometimes produces findings that may be technically valid but have little to do with what happens in people's everyday lives. RELIABILITY: Is concerned with the question of wether the results of a study are repeatable. When a data collection instruments records the same phenomenon, it is said to be reliable. This doesn't mean consistency of results every time, only consistency in the way, for example, a question is understood by interviewees. If a question was interpreted differently each time it was asked, or an experimental set of conditions were experienced differently by different participants, the responses generated could not be said to be reliable. Reliability can be tested during piloting (pre-testing of research instruments to identify weaknesses within it). Reliability is determined by how the measurement has been conducted. The concept refers to the accuracy of the phases in this process. If you repeat the measurement of the same phenomenon in the same way you should get the same results. Reliability problems often have the form of random mistakes.

ILLUSTRATION OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEASUREMENT VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY:

Problems with the measurement validity

Problems with the reliability

High measurement validity and high reliability Source: Freely after Andersen, Hansen og Klemmensen, 2010:102

SESSION 1. MODULE 2. CASE STUDIES AND COMPARATIVE RESEARCH


1. THE SINGLE CASE STUDY.
WHAT IS A CASE? Units of analysis (individuals, groups, places, organizations, events, eras, etc.) with some degree of self-regulation and internal coherence but which also requires reference to wider realms of social interaction (context, natural habitat) to be understood. Thus, cases are internally coherent, but not fully bounded.

SINGLE CASE STUDY: CHARACTERISTICS: Intensive investigation of a single case/unit depth internal validity rather than generalizability. Research that is non-comparable (David & Sutton 2004). There is a limitation on this affirmation, every research is comparable to others to some extent. Often aiming a rich description and detailed understanding (holistic). Often inductive seeks to operationalize concepts and categorize in the process of data collection.

2. COMPARATIVE CASE STUDIES.


9

STUCTURED, FOCUSED COMPARISON (George & Bennett 2005) Structured: ensuring meaningful comparison by using the same template for data collection on each case. Focused: delimitation to certain aspects/variables of cases. Comparison: Similarities and differences between cases are used to explain outcomes (control of variation). CONTROL OF VARIATION: A FEW EXTRA WORDS. Experiments: variation in relevant independent variables (control variables) is handled by randomly dividing the units of analysis into experimental and control groups, and the manipulating the key independent variable. Alternative: to hold control variables constant: Comparative designs: separate analysis for each value on the control variable. Statistical controlled.

Which variables should be controlled?: Think!!

TWO CLASSIC VARIANTS OF COMPARATIVE CASE STUDIES: MOST SIMILAR SYSTEMS DESIGN: Attempts to exclude possible causes (control variables) and identify a causal relation (co-variation) between the key independent variable and dependent variable for otherwise comparable units. Recommendation: Maximize variation in the independent variable (X) and minimize variation in control variables (Z).
X 1 2 3 4 5 + + + Y + + + Z1 + + + + + Z2 Z3 + + + + +

10

MOST DIFFERENT SYSTEMS DESIGN: Attempts to exclude possible causes (control variables) and identify a causal relation between independent and dependent variables across variation in control variables. Recommendation: maximize variation in control variables (Z) and hold the independent variable constant (X). Problem of casualty: no variation in dependent variable (Y).
X 1 2 3 4 5 + + + + + Y + + + + + Z1 + + Z2 + + + Z3 + + +

3. CASE SELECTION.
CONSIDERATIONS FOR CASE SELECTION: SINGLE CASE STUDIES: Purpose of study? Ongoing case selection following the process. Snowballing? Variation and control of variation. Focus on internal or external validity? Intentional selection (different from random sampling). Reflect research objectives. Cumulation. Avoid selection bias. Pragmatism in data collection process.

COMPARATIVE CASE STUDIES:

BOTH:

11

SESSION 2, MODULE 3. QUALITATIVE DATA COLLECTION.


1. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH.
CHARACTERISTICS OF QUALITATIVE METHODS. Investigation in-depth rather than wide. Focus on text rather than numbers on interpretation rather than counting. Can be used both, prior and after quantitative studies: When a phenomenon cannot be quantified. When quantification raises questions that we have to address in other ways.

Often more inductive approach: giving priority to issues raised by those researched; a degree of openness in questions... But can also be deductive: using qualitative methods to test hypothesis (e.g. group interviews with vignettes).

PROS OF QUALITATIVE METHOD: Is more holistic and context-sensitive. Can give us access to knowledge we cannot get in other ways (e.g. Geertz' blinking boys). Is flexible in terms of possibilities of readjusting focus of research, question asked, sample... 12

CONS OF QUALITATIVE METHODS. It is a trade-off: when you go deep you cannot also go wide! It is time- and space-consuming.

NB: Whether we should use qualitative methods or not depends on our research question and data sources! QUALITATIVE DATA SOURCES: Interviews, individual or focus groups. Documentary material: laws, white papers, parliament debates, archives, correspondences, secondary literature, etc. Newspaper articles. Field notes (observation). Blogs, websites, sms Flyers, brochures, posters Non-textual material: tv, movies, art works, photographies, etc.

2. SAMPLING EXISTING QUALITATIVE DATA.


TYPES OF SAMPLING: SIMPLE RANDOM: involves randomly selecting individual units from a sampling frame. The term random refers to a selection based on a mathematical formula that will consistently give all units an equal chance of being selected. (E.g. random sample from body of newspaper articles on a certain topic). SYSTEMATIC: a probability sampling technique involving the selection of sampling units from a sampling frame (database of all members of a target population, or as near to that goal as possible) according to the proportion of the sample size to the total units in the sampling frame (e.g. 40% women, 60% men in a sampling frame keep the same proportion) STRATIFIED: non-random, but representative. Selecting in advance to represent particular social groups or strata within the sample, and in particular proportions (often based on prior knowledge or estimations of the distribution of those strata within the target population). A useful technique when seeking to select small groups whose representation within a random sample may be statistically insignificant, but whose characteristics are of 13

particular interest to the researcher. SNOWBALL sampling: identifying subsequent members of a sample by asking current members of the sample to identify other participants with the required characteristics. Often used where no sampling frame can be identified or constructed. (E.g. interviewing until saturation). Remember: We choose our material according to our research question, not in order to confirm our hypothesis. In qualitative research we have fewer units of analysis, so our sampling must be even more precise. Qualitative research should be just as systematic in sampling as quantitative research.

CRITERIA TO BE CONSIDERED ON SAMPLING TEXTS: Authenticity Credibility Representativeness Meaning

3. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH INTERVIEWS.


INDIVIDUAL VS. FOCUS GROPU INTERVIEWS: It depends on the focus of the research: Individual: Group: Group dynamics consensus building or conflict resolution. Ssocial relations interaction norms, power relations, creation of meaning, etc. Life worlds individual attitudes, motivations, convictions, moral beliefs, etc. Informations concrete pieces of information regarding an event, process, etc.

STANDARDIZED VS. STRUCTURED: Depends again on the focus of the research: Is it important to get directly comparable answers? - closed answers, ordered sequence. Is it important to tab interviewees life worlds in-depth? - Open answers, flexible sequence. Our focus here: Open-ended questions and semi-structured interview guides! 14

Structure refers to the degree to which the form and order of questions asked are kept identical from one interview to another. It seeks to maintain high levels of reliability and repeatability. The more unstructured interview seeks to emphasize the depth validity of each individual interview. Standardization refers to the level of closure placed around the answers interviewees can give. Closed answers allow greater scope for quantification. Open answers allow for greater depth and personal detail (more typical cualitative). Examples: Standardized questions: State your age in years... Have you ever been in UK? Yes/No How afraid are you of being robbed? (a) Not at all, (b) A little, (c) Afraid, (d) Very afraid. What type of accommodation do you live in? (house, flat, hotel, caravan...) What is your favorite sport? What university clubs and societies do you belong to? Please, describe the process that led you to study this course. Men should work, women should stay at home. Discuss. How do you feel the world has change since you were a child? Reliability Repeatable Measurement validity Internal validity Generalizability (external validity)

Semi-standardized questions:

Unstandardized questions:

RESEARCH CRITERIA AND INTERVIEWS:

INTERVIEWEES: WHO? Conscious/theoretical sampling Snowball sampling Needs justification Often difficult to say in advance (saturation)

HOW MANY?

15

Depends on the number of relevant distinctions (age, sex, etc.) Kvale: 15 (+/-10)

BEFORE THE INTERVIEW: Have much knowledge of the topic? Creating contact to interviewees Briefing (introduction and summary at the beginning) Think of location: comfort, tranquility, naturalistic setting... Creating and testing of interview guide (piloting)

THE INTERVIEW GRUIDE: THEORETICAL GUIDE: Builds on theoretical concepts and research questions. Lists concepts and questions as interview topics. Consider the ordering of the questions. The actual question one plan to ask interviewees. Normally short and easily understandable questions (no theory). Focus on concrete actions, experiences, events, attitudes, etc.

OPERATIONALIZED GUIDE:

EXAMPLE: KVALE'S INTERVIEW ON SCHOOL GRADES

Theoretical guide Research questions

Operationalized guide Interview questions

- Do you find the subjects you learn important? What type of motivations for learning are - Do you find learning interesting in itself? dominant in high schools? - What is your main purpose in going to highschool? - Have you experienced a conflict between what Do the grades promote an external instrumental you wanted to read and what you had to read to motivation at the expense of an intrinsic interest obtain a good mark? motivation for learning? - Have you been rewarded with money for good grades? THE STRUCTURE OF THE INTERVIEW: Briefing

16

Control and power asymmetry Creating confidence and a good atmosphere How critical can/should one be? Warm up questions to establish rapport. Demographic questions. Core questions covering all key themes within the research question. Prompts and probes to elicit more detail and depth that are initially forthcoming. Clarifying questions to check interviewees' understanding of what they have been asked. Debriefing

CONDUCTING THE INTERVIEW: The dynamic dimension: flow in conversation Types of questions Being sensitive: Listen! Avoiding bias/interviewer effects Ongoing validation

AFTER THE INTERVIEW: Documentation Notes on immediate reflections Transcription

PILOTING: Pretesting of research instrument such as the questionnaires or interview schedules with a small subsample of the target population to identify weaknesses within the data collection instrument.

SESSION 2. MODULE 4. INDUCTIVE DATA ANALYSIS.


1. INDUCTION AND DEDUCTION
INDUCTION: Theory Empirical data Example: Radicalization among young Muslims in Aarhus. Research question: How do young neo-orthodox Muslims understand radicalization, and how do they themselves link this to issues of jihad, democracy, sharia, discrimination, etc. (p. 12) DEDUCTION: Empirical data Theory Example: Cognitive Openings as Triggers of Radicalization. Research question: What is the impact of cognitive openings and seeker-ship on radicalization processes? (p.22) 17

2. INDUCTIVE DATA ANALYSYS: WHAT IS IT?


It is a baby with many names: Inductive coding, Open coding, In vivo coding, Grounded Theory. Coding is the process of applying codes to chunks of text so that those chunks can be interlinked to highlight similarities and differences within and between texts. It is identifying a series of tags which are attached.

3. INDUCTIVE DATA ANALISYS. WHY?


WHEN TO USE AN INDUCTIVE APPROACH? When you are uncertain what data contains When you want to retain maximum openness in the analysis of your data When you want to build conclusions as much as possible on what data tells you, ando not what you can tell about data. ADVANTAGES OF INDUCTIVE DATA ANALYSIS Maximization of sensitivity towards the empirical data. Our theories/concepts are grounded in the reality we are investigating: showing what the text is actually saying. DISADVANTAGES OF INDUCTIVE DATA ANALYSIS A potential cover-up: Are we using inductive/open coding because we want to retain openness in our analysis, or because we do not dare pose a falsifiable research question? Primitive/naive notion of meaning and text: Showing what the text is actually saying. Well, that depends on the author, reader, context, etc. Time consuming

4. INDUCTIVE DATA ANALYSIS: HOW?


GROUNDED THEORY: It is not a theory, but an analytical approach that aims at making theory development empirically grounded. The starting point is open/inductive coding. Movement from text to concept, and from concept to category. Goal: identification of key categories and patterns of relations in the textual material. Coding until saturation.

18

Text

Concept/Codes

Category

Data material that we want to The immediate associations our The topic which our concepts/ analyze reading generates codes can be subsumed under

GROUNDED THEORY OPEN CODING


TEXT Interviewer (I): What is a good journalist in your view? Interview person (IP): A good journalistthat isI think it is one that pursues ones ideals without compromising professional standards I: Professional standards? IP: yes, what it takes, in praxis, when you work in a news room what is expected. The written and unwritten rules, that exist both for interaction with bosses and the people you are in contact with () Praxis Written and unwritten rules Prof. hierarchy Journalist and surroundings Social contexts and their norms Pursues ideals Ideals Not compromising professionalism vs.(?) Professionalism CODE CATEGORY

CLOSED DEDUCTIVE CODING: professionalism?


TEXT Interviewer (I): What is a good journalist in your view? Interview person (IP): A good journalistthat isI think it is one that pursues ones ideals without compromising professional standards I: Professional standards? IP: yes, what it takes, in praxis, when you work in a news room what is expected. The written and unwritten rules, that exist both for interaction with bosses and the people you are in contact with ()

Focus:
TEST

Dilemma

between

ideals

and

Ideals and professional standards: Should coincide

Professional standards = norms

EXPLICATING AND VALIDATING CODING PROCEDURES: Memos Code book/code framing Inter-coder reliability Intra-code reliability

19

SESSION 3 -MODULE 5. DEDUCTIVE ANALYSIS,


1. DEDUCTIVE QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS
Deductive coding: The generation of the codes to be used in coding data prior to any analysis of the data themselves. It is closed coding. We have some concepts/theories/issues in advance and we try 20

to test it with our research. WHEN TO USE DEDUCTIVE ANALYSIS OF QUALITATIVE DATA? When you have formulated a clear hypothesis (test). When you want to contain a theoretical focus in the investigation. When you want to maximize the contribution to specific research field.

PROS AND CONS OF USING DEDUCTIVE ANALYSIS OF QUALITATIVE DATA: PROS: A clear question generates a clear answer A clear answer generates a clear contribution to the literature Having clearly defined categories/codes in advance makes it easier to cover large bodies of texts CONS: Is reality ordered after our theoretical categories? Would different coders reach the same result?

CODE LISTS/CODE BOOK Structured, systematic presentation of codes and sub-codes (definitions and descriptions). Sub-codes can de types of the main-code or values on a variable. Start code list vs. end code list (often not the same)

Variable PROGNO1 (PROGNO2, PROGNO3) Variable label: prognostic frame of claim Note: A prognostic frame describes the claimants vision of what should be done to solve a problem/the issue at hand. Thus, a prognostic frame is the presented ways of solving the identified problem, the hypothesised new social patterns or the suggested alternatives. Often a prognostic frame will be a call for specific or more general action Value labels: 10 FREEDOM OF SPEECH 11 limiting freedom of speech (including legal revisions) 12 widening freedom of speech (including legal revisions)

CODE BOOK EXAMPLE: 13 fighting self censorship


14 conviction on the grounds of existing legislation 15 teaching Muslims about freedom of speech and democracy 16 accepting ridicule in the name of freedom of speech 17 balancing freedom of speech and concerns of harm by speech 18 we need to be able to say things directly 19 other freedom of speech prognosis

21

20 EQUALITY/PARITY 21 general call for equal treatment of Muslims and non-Muslims 22 abolishment of the state church 23 no special rights/treatment 24 Muslims should treat non-believers with respect in order to receive respect for 25 fair treatment of Muslims in the Media 29 other equality/parity prognosis their believes

30 DISCRIMINATION 31 general call for anti-discrimination/islamophobia measures 33 changing the tone of the debate 39 other discrimination prognosis

CLOSED/DEDUCTIVE CODING Hypothesis: Closed political opportunity structures made Danish Muslims perform a scale-shift in the Cartoons.
Text Interviewer (I): Tell me about the delegations that went to Egypt and Lebanon in December 2005? Interviewperson (IP): Well, after having contacted the ambassadors, the Prime Minister, after we petitioned and demonstrated for three months, and nobody took us serious, we thought we had to try a last possibility. I: The delegations? IP: Yes, we went abroad and tried to raise awareness of our demands there. Code

Closed political opportunity structures

Upwards scale-shift

2. DISPLAYS:
It is a technique that helps to illustrate and draw conclusions. Condensed, visual depiction of

22

qualitative data, which facilitates analysis and helps to detect patters, anomalies, trends and themes. Matrix displays: tables that present cross-tabulations of variables or codes. Network displays: graphs that depict flow of events and processes of connection.

DISPLAYS: WHY? Problem 1: Qualitative data analysis often leads to extended texts, which never gets around to analyzing data at a higher level of abstraction. Problem 2: Qualitative research reports tend to glose over the move from data to conclusions. Solution: Displays can condense qualitative data, visualize key findings and aid analysis.

DISPLAYS: HOW? CRITERIA FOR MAKING DISPLAYS: Authenticity Inclusion Transparency

TYPES OF DISPLAYS: Within-case displays: present characteristics of flows of one case/unit of analysis. Cross-case displays: highlight similarities and differences between cases/units of analysis. Time ordered displays. Conceptual displays.

EXAMPLE 1: Within-case, comparative.


Cultural Muslims Focus Mobilization Secularism Emphasis on nondiscrimination Mobilization is difficult Neo-orthodox Muslims Emphasis on the right to difference Empowerment by mobilization Ultra-orthodox Muslims Rejection of the struggle for recognition Empowerment by political action Islamic symbols are expressions of political loyalty Ascetic and religious virtuosity Isolation Islamization of modernity

Rejection of ostentatious Fight for Islamic symbols in religious symbols in public public Religion integrated in everyday life Assimilation Acceptance of cultural modernity Methodist and systematic religiosity Integration Search for alternative modernity

Religiosity Modus Modernity

EXAMPLE 2: within-case network 23

EXAMPLE 3: Matrix, time-ordered.


Phase 1: Initial Responses Central events - the non-meeting with the Muslim ambassadors - the imamdelegations go abroad Phase 2: Internationalization - boycott of Danish products Phase 3: Violent Escalation - Attacks on Danish embassies in, and Phase 4: Re-domestication - Fogh's sheep and goats interviewees

- discontinuation of - Government - state sponsored the legal case against decision to no longer Dialogue JP by the Danish State work with imams. conference in DK Prosecutor - Intervention by the - reprints of the Danish excaricatures - US, NATO and EU - Manifesto by ambassadors supports Rushdie, Hirsi Ali & The Pakistani bounty - flag burnings co. on the illustrators - Demonstrations - Reopening of Danish against the caricatures embassies abroad. all over the world - Fogh distances himself from the drawings JP apologizes To To To To

Time period

24

SESSION 3 MODULE 6. DISCOURSE ANALYSIS


DISCOURSE: WHAT? Lingistics: Original meaning: Spoken word (in contrast to writing) Argumentation: A structured argument (in contrast to intuitive statement) Context dependent language: legal discourse, media discourse, political discourse A way of structuring reality: a particular, and actively created, set of relations between objects, concepts and actions (classical discourse analysis). An expression of the social order, the change of which can be studied through changes in the relative positioning of discourses (critical discourse analysis). DISCOURSE ANALYSIS: WHEN? When we are interested in texts not just as reflections of social reality, and its meaning to participants, but in how texts construct and maintain social reality and its meaning. When we want to analyze the coming into existence of a social phenomenon (e.g. radicalization, welfare state, etc.) When we want to analyze the reproduction of a social phenomenon (e.g. national identity)

Sociological:

1. CLASSICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS


BASIC CLAIMS ABOUT POLITICS Language is an important tool in creating political conflicts and relations of dominance. Language has real life effects: e.g. it can invite certain policies/actions. Political actions are a reflection of actors' discursive perception of the world: preferences are linguistically constituted. LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL REALITY: 1. POINT Human understanding of social reality is constituted by our interaction with social reality All human activity and understanding is constituted by language Reality is only accessible through language: Extreme version Classical discourse analysis LANGUAGE REALITY

25

Moderate version Critical discourse analysis LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL REALITY: 2. POINT Social reality is only accessible through language Social relations are relations of power

LANGUAGE

REALITY

Thus, linguistic analysis of social relations are power analysis LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL REALITY: 3. POINT Linguistic analysis of social relations are power analysis Both linguistical relations and social relations are constantly negotiated

Thus, linguistic analysis provides a snapshot of power relations in a given context. CLASSICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS A linguistic analysis (point 1), which aims at making visible dominant power relations (point 2), which are constantly changing (point 3). CLASSICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS: HOW? Analyzing: Articulation: e.g. smoking used to be cool, now it is considered disgusting Nodal-points: key concepts, central/main ideas Antagonisms: opposition, polarization (how the discourse constructs it) Hegemony: dominant discourse having the monopoly on the articulation Chains of equivalence: associations, things that become alike Empty signifiers: concepts that are often so wide that are filled with many meanings and characteristics. CHAIN OF EQUIVALENCE. EXAMPLE: In Denmark we have for generations built a safe, rich and free society. The decisive glue of society has been and still is our common values. Freedom to be different. Equal opportunities for men and women. Responsibility. Democracy. Respect for the laws of society. Moving the Ghetto back in society, Regeringen 2010 Society= Denmark for generations = safe = rich = freedom = equality = responsibility = democracy 26

= respect for the law However, there exist in Denmark today areas where the Danish values are no longer fundamental. And where the rules that apply in the rest of society do not have the same effect. This is the situation in those residential areas that we in everyday language call Ghettoes. The Ghetto = different from the rest of society = (unsafe) = (poor) = (unfree) = (inequality) = (no responsibility taken) = (undemocratic) = (no respect for the law)

2. CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS


THE TWO SELECTED TYPES OF DISCOURSE ANALYSIS:
Classical discourse analysis Critical discourse analysis

Critical Language constitutes social reality Discursive stability Operationalization

% %

()

CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

Social practice - macro-sociological analysis of context Discursive pratice (production, distribution and consumption) - micro-sociological analysis of how text relates to existing discourses Text (discursive event) - Linquistical analysis of how a discourse/genre is constituted

Source: Fairclough: Discourse and Social Change (1992) 27 Jrgensen & Phillips: Diskursanalyse som teori og metode (1999)

ANALYSIS OF THE TEXT: Choice of wording Grammar (tense and person) Textual structure (analysis of genre)

Central question: Why exactly this word, this tense and this structure rather than others? ANALYSIS OF DISCURSIVE PRACTICE: Production: How is the text produced? Consumption: What audience is the text aimed at? Inter-discursivity: How does the text draw upon other existing discourses? Interpretation: How is the text read/understood by the readers? Intertextuality: How does the text interact with existing texts? ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL PRACTICE: Ideology: How does the text relate to existing ideologies? Hegemony: Which discourses are dominant in the social order/discursive order? Social processes: a) Social stability reproduction of discursive/social order b) Social change challenge or re-formulation of discursive/social order

28

SESSION 4 MODULE 7. QUANTITATIVE CONTENT ANALYSIS: FRAME AND CLAIM ANALYSIS


QUANTITATIVE CONTENT ANALYSIS: FROM WORDS TO NUMBERS. Coding sometimes means exactly to transform text into numbers. Predefined categories/codes are necessary, it is deductive coding. Quantitative content analysis: The quantification of pre-existing qualitative data in order to answer a specific research question. Quantitative content analysis works with large numbers of texts, and aims at producing results that can be generalized to a wider population: Population investigation (all texts in a population) Randomized sampling (random sample of texts of the population) Sampling unit (unit of analysis): the textual unit which os being analyzed. Coding unit: the units in the text that is being coded can be the same as the sample unit, but does not have to be. Variables: characteristics of the units. Values: scores on the variables

ADVANTAGES OF QUANTITATIVE CONTENT ANALYSIS: In the most simple form (computer counting of word/phrases) can give an overview of patterns in data and developments (e.g. Google Trends). From words to numbers and back again (combining quantitative and qualitative analysis), gives the opportunity to go from abstract, quantified patterns, to concrete ddetails. Makes it possible to analyze data in-depth as well as at large (e.g. analyzing an entire debate, one actor, one topic, one phase, etc.) Deduced categories/variables and induced sub-codes/values Enables the use of descriptive statistics and statistical comparison (e.g. between actors, time,

29

place, etc.) Can be used for both explorative studies and hypothesis testing. Gives the opportunity to answer research questions such as: to what extent..., how often..., what is the typical...

DISADVANTAGES OF QUANTITATIVE CONTENT ANALYSIS: Reduction of reality data/information is lost Says little about how meaning in texts is produced (discourse analysis). Methodological over-kill: cab't we get the same results from coding much less text? Time consuming Problems of coding reliability Selection bias: e.g. newspapers will only report on certain events.

CLAIM-ANALYSIS: WHAT? A version of quantitative content analysis, based on deductive coding of qualitative data Focuses on claims-making = the expression of a political opinion by physical or verbal action in the public sphere (Statham et al. 2004) Combines protest event analysis and elements of discourse analysis (frame analysis) Sampling units are typically newspaper articles, while coding units are instances of public claims-making. CLAIM-ANALYSIS: WHEN? When we are interested in the amount, character, change, etc. of public claims-making on a given topic, in a given area or by a given actor. When we want to study coalition formation, conflict lines, relative positioning, etc. within a field. Ideal when we want to study a delimited public controversy or period of public debate. When we want to be able to make generalizable statements (external validity). When your data is not produced with quantification in mind.

CLAIM-ANALYSIS: HOW? 30

Identification of instances of claims-making in a text: an actor who expresses a political opinion about the topic of interest. Coding of only the factual elements of e.g. a news artivle (the events/actions described and actual statements made). This means that we don't code evaluations, judgments and commentary by the journalist.

Coding of both physical actions and speech acts referred to in a text, speech acts being the discursive statements in a debate (found in press releases, speeches, interview comments, complaints, etc.)

Often coding of claims-making by all actors in a debate institutional actor as well as noninstitutional actors (multiorganizational field)

THE CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS OF A CLAIM.


WHERE/ WHEN Where was the claim raised and when WHO (SUBJECT) Individuals or collectives. All actors in the debate (or just selected ones) HOW (FORM) Physical actions: demonstration, petitions, terror, meetings, law suites, etc. Speech acts demand, critique, propose, support, threat, wish etc. TO WHOM (ADDRESSEE) Primary addressee Secondary addressee WHAT (TOPIC) What is the claim about? E.g.: Free speech Discrimination Tolerance Delegations Government actions Etc.

FRAME ANALYSIS THE DISCURSIVE CONTENT OF CLAIMS. Focuses on how actors try to construct an argument, and frame a message so that it mobilize support and de-mobilize adversaries. Deconstructs arguments what is the analysis of the situation, what needs to de done, and why. FRAME, FRAMING AND RESONANS. FRAMES are (according to Goffman) schemata of interpretation, which enables individuals to localize, perceive, identify and name events in their everyday life and the

31

world at large. By ascribing meaning to events/situations frames organize our experience and guide our actions (frames as strategic vs. unconscious constructs). FRAMING refers to the process by which actors ascribe meaning to events/situations in a way that aims to mobilize support and demobilize adversaries. RESONANCE emerges when framing is successful when frames successfully speaks to individuals existing perceptions and situations, and makes them responsible to the content of the message. (See Snow & Benford for constraints on resonance-building). THREE CORE FRAMING TASKS: DIAGNOSTIC FRAMING: identification of a problem and ascription of the blame/explanation for the problem. Often one explanation/factor is highlighted instead of others. Example 1: The focus within Marxism on capitalism/the capitalist, and the exploitation of the worker as the main problem. Example 2: Al-Qaeda's blaming of the West oriented elites or crusaders as the root of all bad in Muslim societies. PROGNOSTIC FRAMING: the proposed solution to the identified problem. The indication of strategies, tactics and goals. Example 1: The suggestion within Marxism of class struggle, revolution and the communist society as the solution. Example 2: Al-Qaeda's yihad by the sword against the crusader alliance. NOTE: is most often around prognoses that organizations, groups or movements fight internally. MOTIVATIONAL FRAMING: the indicator of a rational for action. Motivational frames are registers of motives for action. Example 1: The stressing within Marxism of the believe that the revolution is near, and capitalism is unjust (injustice frames). Example 2: Al-Qaeda's attempt to make violent yihad against the crusaders a religion duty to individual Muslims.

32

CLAIM AND FRAME ANALYSIS COMBINED: EXPANDED CODING-SCHEME WITH EXAMPLES.


WHEN/ WHERE WHO HOW TO WHOM DIAGNOSE PROGNOSE MOTIVATIO N

13-02-06, Copenhagen

Sharin Khankan, spokesperson of Critical Muslims

criticises

prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen

for inviting only Democratic Muslims to an official meeting for blasphemy and racism

(more Muslim actors should be invited)

because Democratic Muslims only represents secular Muslims arguing a violation of international conventions of human rights because violence is not the solution, and because the prophet Muhammad is sacred to all Muslims

17-03-06, Copenhagen

Ahmed Akkari, spokesperson of a coalition of Muslim organisations Imam, Ahmed Abu Laban of The Community of Islamic Faith

appeals the court decision not to press charges

against the newspaper Jyllands-Posten

(press charges)

03-02-06, Copenhagen

gives a Friday sermon, where he suggests

that a consortium of independent actors from Denmark and the Middle East should be created to solve the conflict as certain roumours are circulating explaining how the political system works in Denmark

08-02-06, Copenhagen

Democratic Muslims

places ads in Middle Eastern newspapers

OTHER POSSIBLE VARIABLES...


POSITIONING SUPPORT CRITICISM REACTION/ PROACTION STRING VARIABLE

e.g. positive ,negative or neutral evaluation of Muslim protests Who were Muslim friends and foes in the debate?

Who does the claim support who is it in agreement with Which alliances were formed?

Who does the claim criticize who does it disagree with Where were the major fault lines in the debate?

Is the claim stated in reaction to other claims or proactively Who is setting the agenda in the debate?

DIAGNOSE PROGNOSE MOTIVATIO Etc.

Storing words, not just numbers

33

SESSION 4 MODULE 8. QUANTITATIVE DATA COLLECTION.


1. DATA SOURCES
DATA Qualitative data: any information that can be captured that is not numerical in nature. E.g. written documents, interviews, direct observation Quantitative data: data which can be measured, categorized or identified on a numerical scale. E.g. survey data (www.europeansocialsurvey.org), register data (www.dst.dk) TYPES OF SURVEYS Survey

Structured Face-to-face Telephone WHY TO DO SELF-COMPLETION

Self-completion Postal/mail SURVEYS Internet-based INSTEAD OF STRUCTURED

INTERVIEWS? CRITERIA ADVANTAGES OF SELF- DISADVANTAGES OF SELFCOMPLETION COMPLETION (or disadvantages of structured) (or advantages of structured) Cheaper Fewer questions The respondents can complete Fewer complex questions the survey at a time convenient to themselves No interviewer effects No help

GENERALLY

RELIABILITY

MEASUREMENT VALIDITY More honest answers (specially Questions can be read and to sensitive issues) answered in a different order (not internet-based surveys) EXTERNAL VALIDITY Distribution over geographical area limited timespan a wider We don't know who answers within a Difficult to reach the illiterate Often low responses rates 34

2. OPERATIONALIZATION AND SURVEY QUESTIONS


OPERATIONALIZATION Is the process of translating abstract theoretical concepts into observable and measurable entities. The ladder of abstraction: 1. Theoretical definition define the concept 2. Operational definition 3. Development of appropriate indicators EXAMPLE: 1. Theoretical definition: Consumption of channels which transmit communication, information or entertainment. 2. Operational definition: Consumption of print media, television, radio and internet. 3. Indicators: how often do you read news papers?, how often do you read weekly? DEVELOPING SURVEY QUESTIONS TYPES OF QUESTIONS Factual Behaviour (did you vote in the las elections? Knowledge and information (how frequent is the bus service to your nearest town? Personal attribute (are you male or female?) Attitudes, beliefs and opinions (are you in favor of tax cuts?)

QUESTION FORMATS Closed-ended: questions which require the respondent to select from a range of stated answers. (are you male or female? A. Male B. Female) Open-ended: unstandardized questions which enable the respondent to enter a response in their own words. (what words you use to describe people who receive social welfare?)

35

DIFFERENT FORMATS OF CLOSED-ENDED QUESTION RESPONSES


FORMAT DICHOTOMIES RATING QUESTION EXAMPLES Do you think the Prime Minister is doing a good job? 1. Yes 2. No Below a list of statements from the political debate, to what extent do you disagree or agree with each statement? 1. To create progress in society we have to accept some level of inequality 2. It is only natural that there is economic inequality in a society (Strongly agree, Agree, Undecided, Disagree, Strongly disagree) Rank the following candidates in order of preference from the best to the worst... ( __ Sarah Palin, __ Barak Obama, __ John McCain) If you did vote in the 2008 Presidential Election, who did you vote for? 1. The Republican John McCain, 2. the Democratic Barack Obama, 3. Other candidate, 4. Don't know, 5. Did not vote.

RANKING QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS WITH A LIST OF RESPONSES

DEVELOPING THE WORDING OF QUESTIONS: Challenges: Questions are answered very quickly. The respondents answer question based on their extent knowledge and the associations which are triggered by the question. Your task: To make it simple and easy for the respondents. To make the question wording clear, direct and simple.

You want to measure differences in opinions, values and believes, not differences in people's understanding of the question.

RULES: SURVEY QUESTIONS Avoid ambiguous terms Avoid technical terms Avoid asking two questions in one question Avoid negations Avoid long questions Avoid too general questions Avoid leading questions

RULES: RESPONSE CATEGORIES Exhaustive Mutually exclusive categories Response categories should match the question balanced Neutral response category? (don't know/ don't answer / don't care) Don't know option? Be careful with dichotomous response categories

36

AN

EXAMPLE:

ATTITUDES

TOWARDS

THE

GOVERNMENT'S

ECONOMIC

REFORMS AMONG DANISH CITIZENS.


The government wants to solve the short-term economic problems of the state by freezing all taxes and all regulations of public welfare payments for two years. Furthermore, there should be zero growth in all public expenses and the planned modification of the top tax rate till be postponed for two years. Do you think this is a good idea? (Yes, no, don't know.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The question What are short-term economic problems? Understanding Good idea to whom -me? -society? -people on public welfare? Information recall What did I read about this last weak? / Will it cause any problems for me, the tax payers, people on public welfare? Making a conclusion So is this a good idea after all? Giving an answer Which category of response matches my conclusion?

RELIABILITY AND MEASUREMENT VALIDITY Take-away point: the rules for questions wording and response categories are important because violations may damage the reliability (increase random errors in the measurement) and the measurement validity (increase systematic errors in the measurement). SURVEY LAYOUT From the individual question to the survey questionnaire things to consider: Effects of the question order The use of routing (enrutamiento) questions and funneling (canalizacin) questions Maintaining the respondent's motivation. Avoid response-set

VARIABLES AND LEVELS OF MEASUREMENT: A general way of categorizing variables. Different statistical analysis techniques available for the four data types: 1. Nominal It is a level of measurement where response categories cannot be placed into any specific order and no judgement can be made about the relative size or distance of one category to another. When you only have two possible answers it is a dichotomy. Examples: gender, party preference. 2. Ordinal Level of measurement that is applied to categorical variables whose response categories can 37

be placed into a rank order of importance: for example rating scales. No mathematical calculations can be made in relation to the distance between the categories. Example: Attitudes (Likert Scale: completely agree/ agree/ don't care/ disagree/ completely disagree) 3. Interval/Ratio. Level of measurement where data are measured on a continuous scale. Data can be placed in rank order and can be subjected to mathematical calculations. The distance between the observations is known and can be calculated. Ratio has a true zero point, while interval doesn't. Example: age, sympathy (on a 10-point scale), number of sources in a news story.

4. SAMPLING
POPULATION DATA OG SAMPLE DATA The objective of data collection is to collect information about the units of analysis dictated by the research question. The population data /census: all relevant units of population of interest are observed. It is often the case with individual level register data e.g. criminal records, education, health... Sample survey: a sample of the population is observed. Typically used in opinion surveys, assessments, user surveys. POPULATION: Every possible case that could be included in your study. It will be defined by the nature of your enquiry (David & Sutton, 2011: 226) SAMPLING FRAME: A list of every unit in the population. EXAMPLE: Population
Danish municipalities Countries Danes

Sampling Frame
List of Danish municipalities List of all countries acknowledged by the UN? Civil registration system, the phone book?

38

TYPES OF SAMPLING: Probability samples: Simple random sampling: random selection from a sample frame. Systematic sampling: random selection mathematically done. Stratified sampling: random selection within strata which reflect the population. Cluster and multi-cluster sampling: sample based on naturally occurring groups.

Non-probability samples: Used when no convenient sampling frames of the population are available or because of time or cost restrictions. Limited generalizability.

Technique

Characteristics

Representativeness
Our point of reference

Simple random sampling Systematic sampling Stratified sampling Cluster sampling Non-probability

Random selection from a sampling frame The first unit is selected by random numbers and every xth subsequent unit is then selected Random selection within strata which reflect the population Selecting a sample based on naturally occuring groups within the population -

The same

Stronger

Weaker

Much weaker

39

Você também pode gostar