Sociology · May / June 2020 · Paper 12 · Question 1
0495
As printed in the paper
Show the answer and mark scheme
1(a)[2]
From Source A, identify the two countries with the lowest female literacy rates. Acceptable responses:
AfghanistanNigeria One mark for each country correctly identified from Source A (up to a maximum of two).1(b)[2]
Identify two methods that could be used by positivists. Possible answers:
experimentquestionnairesurveystructured interviewcontent analysiscomparative studiesAny other reasonable response. One mark for each method correctly identified (up to maximum of two).1(c)[4]
Using information from Source A, describe two reasons why researchers use official statistics. Possible answers:
many of the questions are standardised – this means the data that makes up official statistics will be reliably collected;official statistical data from the UK census is taken every ten years this allows for comparisons to be made over time e.g. longitudinal studies;quantitative data is useful for the comparative method, it enables researchers to spot trends and patterns in official statistics;all households have to complete a detailed survey – official statistics often have large samples which are representative samples;many sources of official statistics the UK census gathers a large amount of quantitative data which improves the chances of generalisability;any other reasonable response One mark for each reason correctly identified from Source A (up to a maximum of two). One mark for each point that is developed (up to a maximum of two).1(d)[4]
Describe two limitations of using case studies in sociological research. Possible answers:
the findings may only apply to the case – so generalisations cannot be made;the study cannot be replicated as it is unique – and this limits reliability;the deep involvement of the researchers may lead them to being influenced by their own feelings – thus decreasing the validity of the findings;case studies can be very time consuming – the data collection process can be very intensive;when conducting a case study, it is very possible for the author to form a bias/subjective view – thus affecting the validity of results;case study method may have errors of memory or judgment – recorded data may not be accurate;with small studies, there is always the question of ethics – at what point do detailed and in depth studies become intrusive;any other reasonable response One mark for each limitation correctly identified (up to a maximum of two). One mark for each point that is developed (up to a maximum of two).1(e)[8]
Describe two strengths and two limitations of using unstructured interviews in sociological research Strengths:
unstructured interviews provide detailed and valid data on the point of view of the respondents – they are able to say what they really think;the flexibility of the unstructured interview – allows the interviewer to probe more deeply;the flexibility of the unstructured interview – may allow the researcher to open up new avenues of enquiry;being an unstructured interview the interviewer can clarify any misunderstandings by the respondent – and reformulate questions accordingly;the interviewer can develop a rapport with the respondent – allowing for deeper and more valid responses;unstructured interviews gain qualitative data through their conversational style – which is preferred by interpretivists;unstructured interviews helps with ethics – as rapport can lessen chances of emotional harm;feminists argue unstructured interviews are egalitarian – the interviewer and the interviewee have equal power in the process;any other reasonable response limitations:unstructured interviews are time consuming – both to carry out and analyse the data;positivists argue they are less reliable than structured interviews – as there are no set questions which makes it difficult to compare data across respondents;it can be difficult to make generalisations – from non-standardised questions;interviewers need to be highly skilled – so very few researchers can carry out unstructured interviews;in unstructured interviews the responses may be affected by interviewer bias – because the interviewer chooses what responses to record/analyse;in unstructured interviews the interviewer effect may cause the respondent to give answers that are not true;respondent may give socially desirable answers – this will impact the validity of the study;sample size in case studies is often small – this can lead to problems of representativeness;ethical issues – with all in-depth studies there is a danger of intruding to far into an individual’s privacy;any other reasonable response One mark for each strength correctly identified (up to a maximum of two). One mark for each strength that is developed with reference to unstructured interviews (up to a maximum of two). One mark for each limitation correctly identified (up to a maximum of two) One mark for each limitation that is developed with reference to unstructured interviews (up to a maximum of two)1(f)[10]
Explain why objectivity is difficult to maintain when carrying out sociological research. Possible responses:
sociological is not a pure science and so it is difficult to eradicate human factors from research – sociological research does not take place in a test tube;with case studies the researcher can become too close to the subject matter and lose a sense of objectivity;questionnaires often suffer from the imposition problem – there may be inherent bias in the questions;observations may lead to the researcher ‘going native’ – hence the researcher becomes too involved and loses objectivity;focus groups may affect individuals differently – some may become dominated by one respondent and so lose objectivity;official statistics used as secondary data may have been recorded to support the government’s position;interviewees may give socially desirable answers and hence the data gathered may be biased;when designing content analyses researchers construct categories according to their own preconceived ideas;when using historical documents the body of material may only represent a small portion of the views apparent at the time;when using diaries as secondary data it can be difficult to verify the truth of what was written, individuals may have lied or exaggerated;any other reasonable response Band 0 [0 marks] No creditworthy response. Band 1 [1–3 marks] Answers in this band will show only a limited awareness of the question. A tendency to description is likely. Responses may be short and undeveloped and points stated without explanation. Sociological terms and concepts are unlikely to be used. At the bottom of the band (1 mark), expect one weak point. Higher in the band (2–3 marks), candidates may offer more than one weak point. Band 2 [4–7 marks] Answers in this band will show basic sociological knowledge and understanding. Responses may be underdeveloped and lacking in range. At the bottom of the band, candidates are unlikely to use sociological terms and concepts accurately. Higher in the band, candidates may be beginning to use sociological terms and concepts with greater accuracy. However, some aspects of the answer may only be partially developed/explained. Band 3 [8–10 marks] Answers in this band will show good sociological knowledge and understanding and will be well-developed and explained. Sociological terms and concepts will be used accurately overall. Answers will be well-focused on the question and there will be a range of points presented. At the top of the band explanations will be clear throughout.1(g)[15]
To what extent are macro structuralist approaches the most useful for understanding society? Possible arguments for:
the macro structuralist is a top down approach that sees social institutions and structures as more important than individual actions ;structuralist theories are supported by key sociological thinkers and perspectives such as Durkheim, Marx and Functionalism, they are supported by a large body of work produced by eminent sociologists;structuralism is a macro sociological approach that examines the relationship between key institutions such as family, education, religion, media, and law;structuralist approaches allow us to see the relationship between key institutions in society;structuralist approaches often use big studies such as social surveys to establish social facts;positivists use official statistics which are often large quantitative data sets so they can spot patterns, trends, correlations and causal relationships;Durkheim’s (a key Functionalist thinker) structural study of suicide remains a key sociological study despite having been carried out over 100 years ago – this provides a model for establishing large scale correlations;Marx’s conflict theory can be applied to the major institutions in society and this structural theory seeks to establish ideological links between the key institutions in a society e.g. education and the workplace;functionalists offer a consensus theory which can be can be applied to the major institutions in society and this structural theory seeks to establish functional links between the key institutions in a society e.g. the family and education;structuralists work with large samples which are representative and so can make generalisations;Marxism unveils the interests of the dominant and powerful groups in society – a micro study couldn’t make these claims;any other reasonable response Possible arguments against:structuralist approaches are not unified and there is disagreement between conflict and consensus theorists;structuralist theories fail to recognise the power of the individual – interpretivists see this a weakness;structuralism fails to show us how social reality is made through individuals interacting;Marxists tend to consider people treated as ‘cultural dopes’ – these structural theories can be seen as too deterministic;Marxism is very value laden – capitalism has no advantages, whereas many sociologists would argue capitalism has helped raise many out of poverty;interpretivists see major weaknesses in the structural methods such as social surveys, arguing these methods lack validity;interpretivists see society from the point of view of its members and give value to individual meanings and social interactions;interpretivists do not see the individual as simply a recipient of external social forces and recognise the complexity of factors influencing an individual’s actions;individual qualitative interviews are able to drill down and explore deeper meanings that surveys and questionnaires cannot;individual qualitative interviews enable a rapport between interviewee and interviewer to develop giving the respondent more of a stake in the research;participant observation has the advantage of seeing respondents in their natural environment, structuralists wouldn’t employ this type of method;structural functionalists’ organic analogy is too simplistic to account for the complex range of factors that impact members of a society;functionalists often rely upon official statistics as objective evidence however interpretivists would argue official statistics are socially constructed e.g. criticisms of Durkheim’s study of suicide;any other reasonable response Band 0 [0 marks] No creditworthy response. Band 1 [1–4 marks] Answers in this band may be vague and largely based on common sense showing limited knowledge of the debate. Use of sociological terms or concepts is very unlikely. Responses may be short, undeveloped and one- sided. Lower in the band (1–2 marks), expect one or two weak points. Higher in the band (3–4 marks) candidates may offer more than two points and provide a weak definition of key terms in the question. Band 2 [5–8 marks] In this band candidates will show some basic knowledge of the debate. Alternatively, they may offer an answer which is list-like in nature but there will be no real attempt to assess the issues raised by the question. There may be limited/some use of sociological terms or concepts. Responses may be underdeveloped and lack range. Answers may be simplistic and two- sided or only cover one side of the debate. Lower in the band, the response may be rather narrow in the points covered and there may be some development. Higher in the band, more points are likely to be covered with some development. Alternatively, a list-like answer with some development covering both sides of the argument may score up to 8 marks. A one-sided answer cannot score higher than 8 marks. Band 3 [9–12 marks] Answers in this band will show good sociological knowledge and understanding of the debate. Sociological terms and concepts will be used with greater accuracy and/or frequency. For the most part, answers will be well-developed, focused on the questions and there will be a range of points presented. There will be a two-sided response but it may lack range on one side. At the bottom of the band, candidates may provide a narrower range of developed points. At the top of the band, expect a wider range of developed points and clear focus on the question. Band 4 [13–15 marks] Answers in this band will show excellent knowledge and understanding of the debate. There will be a strong grasp of the arguments as well as accurate and frequent use of sociological terms and concepts. Answers will be well- developed, clearly focused on the question and discuss a wide range of points. Responses will be two-sided and have a range of points on each side. At the bottom of the band (13 marks), the answer may lack a specific conclusion. Higher in the band, there will be a clear attempt to offer an assessment of the ‘To what extent.?’ part of the question through a focused conclusion.
Make a free account to save your answers and see your weak topics and ask the AI why a wrong answer is wrong.