Note AcademyNote Academy
Start

Sociology · May / June 2024 · Paper 11 · Question 1

0495

As printed in the paper

The question as text

Source A 1 The data in Table 1.1 shows the life expectancy of women and men in selected countries in 2020. The source of the data is official statistics from each country. The quantitative data has been adapted and life expectancy in the table has been rounded up or down to the nearest whole year. Table 1.1 2020 Life expectancy of men (years) Life expectancy of women (years) Country 73 80 Argentina 70 75 Egypt 63 65 Ghana 68 71 India 72 79 Mauritius 66 68 Pakistan 61 66 Uganda

Read automatically from the paper; the printed page above is exact.

Show the answer and mark scheme

  • 1(a)[2]

    From Source A identify the two countries with the smallest difference in life expectancy between women and men. Acceptable responses:

    Ghana
    Pakistan One mark for each country correctly identified from Source A (up to a maximum of two).

  • 1(b)[2]

    Identify two sampling frames that could be used in sociological research. Possible responses:

    the electoral roll
    telephone directories
    school registers
    list of patients
    list of employees
    any other reasonable response. One mark for each sampling frame correctly identified (up to maximum of two).

  • 1(c)[4]

    Using information from Source A, describe two problems with using the data for understanding life expectancy across the world. Possible responses:

    the data is quantitative – numbers alone cannot enable us to understand the reasons why life expectancy is difference between women and men in different countries;
    the data has been adapted – this means that information has been changed or modified and thus it may not show a true and accurate picture of life expectancy;
    the numbers in the table have been rounded up or down to the entire year and hence we do not have a fully accurate picture;
    the countries have been selected – we do not know about the other many countries across the world so it lacks representativeness;
    the data only comes from 2020 – data for other years may be different;
    the data source is official statistics which may be subject to bias as the governments in some countries may wish to present a more equitable picture of life expectancy between women and men;
    any other reasonable response. One mark for each point that appropriately references the source (up to a maximum of two). One mark for each point that is correctly developed (up to a maximum of two).

  • 1(d)[4]

    Describe two limitations of using group interviews in sociological research. Possible responses:

    some individuals may dominate the discussion and this may inhibit others, thus allowing social desirability to occur and have a negative effect on the validity of the data;
    the group may go off topic, if not managed properly, and this will lead to useless data;
    as with any interview there is always the possibility of interviewer bias in which the interviewer leads participants, having a negative effect on validity;
    the social characteristics of the interviewer may inhibit honest responses from participants, thus preventing a full and accurate picture emerging;
    because of the flexibility and dynamics of the format, group interviews are difficult to repeat and tend to be lower in reliability than some other types of interview;
    the resulting data may be difficult to transcribe and interpret afterwards and this may lead to inaccuracies creeping in about who said what;
    group interviews need to be skilfully managed, otherwise some individuals may not be given enough time and attention by the interviewer to gain their full response;
    it will yield qualitative data which does not allow for patterns and trends to be generated or statistics to be compiled;
    any other reasonable response. One mark for each limitation correctly identified (up to a maximum of two). One mark for each limitation that is developed (up to a maximum of two).

  • 1(e)[8]

    Describe two strengths and two limitations of using quantitative data in sociological research. Possible strengths:

    numbers can be easily converted into statistics which can then be compared across time;
    categories within the data can be compared e.g. in crime, whether the likelihood of being a victim of assault is greater than the likelihood of being the victim of a burglary;
    quantitative data is easily analysed as numbers can be easily compared and converted into charts, graphs, etc.;
    positivists argue that correlations and cause and effect relationships can be established from large amounts of quantitative data;
    quantitative data can often be generalised if the sample is large enough and representative of the target population;
    quantitative data can be more reliable as generated from closed questions which can be repeated and get equivalent results thus aiding comparability;
    any other reasonable response. Possible limitations:
    data in the form of numbers alone lacks validity in that it cannot give reasons why the data is as it is;
    the quantitative nature of the data does not allow social meaning to be discovered which needs words to be articulated;
    pure numbers can give a superficial picture, lacking in qualitative depth and detail;
    interpretivists argue that quantitative data such as official statistics are often said to be socially constructed and can be subject to bias at all stages;
    quantitative data can only be compared across time if the same phenomenon has been measured in the same way every time and this is often not the case e.g. definitions in laws change, so sociologists may not be measuring like with like;
    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 (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 (up to a maximum of two).

  • 1(f)[10]

    Explain why some sociologists prefer a micro approach to research. Possible responses:

    interpretivists believe that individuals are in control, pulling the strings of society, so researching the thoughts and motivations of individuals on a micro level is important;
    interpretivists are interested in how people understand themselves and their identities e.g. gender - a micro perspective will allow sociologists to study such individual meanings;
    smaller scale micro research is much less demanding in terms of resources e.g. only requires a small sample;
    in a micro approach, sociologists use research methods that allow us to see and understand how people perceive and interpret the world around them e.g. using participant observation to achieve verstehen;
    a micro approach will be more likely to achieve validity in research - an accurate picture of social behaviour will only be achieved if researchers can understand the meanings and motivations behind people’s actions;
    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 is it possible for sociologists to achieve validity in their research? Possible arguments for:

    use qualitative methods such as unstructured interview, as allowing respondents to speak freely and in their own words will give the detailed data needed for a true picture of social reality;
    using open rather than closed questions will give respondents the opportunity to explain and develop their points rather than giving a ‘yes/no’ answer and this will give better quality data;
    researchers can strive to be empathetic and develop rapport with respondents making it more likely that individuals will speak the truth and be open with the researcher;
    in some scenarios, covert participant observations will likely yield high validity as researchers will gain an insiders’ point of view undiminished by the Hawthorne Effect;
    adopting a micro approach will allow researchers to concentrate in depth on a small number of respondents, thus facilitating higher validity;
    studying individuals in the field and in a naturalistic way will encourage real-life behaviours and an authentic picture of the subjects;
    the use of triangulation aids validity in research, as two or more research methods are used in a single piece of research to check the validity of research evidence;
    longitudinal studies allow for a better understanding of a topic over time rather than just having a snapshot and this is more likely to give a more valid picture of the subject under study;
    choosing to gather primary data rather than relying on secondary data gives researchers more control over validity as secondary data may be prone to being biased, out of date etc.;
    any other reasonable response. Possible arguments against:
    the interviewer effect will inevitably occur when conducting research;
    this means that the data received is biased by the presence of the interviewer thus reducing accuracy and truthfulness of information;
    positivists argue that objectivity is harder to achieve using qualitative methods and more subjectivity may negatively impact the validity of the data gathered;
    the theoretical background of a researcher is likely to lead to bias at various stages of the research e.g. a feminist may be more likely to favour a woman’s perspective over a man’s, leading to skewed data;
    research projects which aim to measure aspects of social reality and behaviour will use quantitative methods which often use mainly closed questions which limit respondents answers thus inhibiting full validity;
    if researchers fail to achieve a rapport with respondents, or to have empathy with them, then this will likely lead to mistrust and less willingness to open up, thus negatively affecting validity of data;
    using methods like lab experiments may be more ‘scientific’ but the limitation of this approach is that it fails to understand the reality or behaviour of participants fully - the lack of a naturalistic setting discourages real-life behaviours;
    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.
Practise this paper →

Make a free account to save your answers and see your weak topics and ask the AI why a wrong answer is wrong.