Note AcademyNote Academy
Start

Sociology · Oct / Nov 2024 · Paper 12 · Question 1

0495

As printed in the paper

The question as text

Source A 1 In 2004 a researcher began a sociological study into the experiences of stay-at-home fathers. These fathers had given up the breadwinner role to stay at home and look after the children. The researcher chose to use unstructured interviews. The researcher believed that unstructured interviews would be like a conversation. The study was based in a wealthy area of London. The researcher lived in the area and had been a stay-at-home father himself. Finding a sample was easy because the researcher knew where other fathers went with their children during the day. A sample of 16 stay-at-home fathers agreed to participate in the research. Each of the 16 participants was interviewed three times over a two-year period. The interviews took place in various settings including coffee shops, local parks and participants’ homes. Each unstructured interview lasted for about two hours.

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

Show the answer and mark scheme

  • 1(a)[2]

    From Source A, identify two settings where the interviews took place.

    coffee shops
    local parks
    the participants’ homes One mark for each setting correctly identified (up to a maximum of two).

  • 1(b)[2]

    Identify two ethical issues sociologists should consider when doing research. Possible answers:

    physical harm
    psychological/emotional harm;
    informed consent;
    privacy;
    deception;
    showing bias;
    right to withdraw;
    confidentiality;
    anonymity;
    legality;
    any other reasonable response One mark for each ethical issue correctly identified (up to maximum of two).

  • 1(c)[4]

    Using information from Source A, describe two reasons the data gathered might be accurate. Possible answers:

    the researcher lived in the area and had been a stay-at-home father himself, the researcher’s similar experiences allowed him to empathise with the participants allowing him to have greater insight;
    the interviews took place in various settings including coffee shops, local parks and participants’ homes – meeting the participants in their natural setting would make them feel comfortable and more likely to open up, leading to more accurate data;
    the researcher believed that unstructured interviews would be like a conversation – this would allow for trust between participant and researcher to be built, leading to more valid data;
    each unstructured interview lasted for about two hours – during the long interview the researcher would be able to gather in-depth data that is generally considered high in validity and therefore accurate;
    each of the participants was interviewed three times over a two-year period – this enabled the researcher to develop a rapport and build trust with the participants, increasing the chances of accurate data;
    any other reasonable responses. One mark for identifying a reason from Source A (up to a maximum of two). One mark for developing each reason given (up to a maximum of two).

  • 1(d)[4]

    Describe two limitations of using focus groups in sociological research. Possible answers:

    some participants may be less comfortable talking about sensitive issues in a group and hence hold back, negatively affecting the validity of the data;
    interviewer/researcher bias – the intentional/unintentional effects of the way the interviewer/researcher asks questions or interprets answers in a focus group can negatively affect validity;
    social desirability – respondents may feel uncomfortable disagreeing with other respondents and so change their answers to conform with the group;
    as a qualitative method focus groups tend to have smaller samples and thus can never be fully representative or generalisable;
    focus groups can be time consuming as they are a qualitative method and involve participants in a wide-ranging discussion;
    focus groups can be expensive – if a room needs to be hired, equipment such as projectors etc. need to be present plus the interviewer needs to be well trained for the group to be successful in achieving its outcomes;
    there is always the danger that some participants may dominate the group and this can mean that some points of view are missed;
    focus groups lack reliability – the dynamic of the group would make it difficult to replicate and hence positivists would avoid it;
    discussion can move away from original emphasis of research if the researcher isn’t skilled enough and this can waste time or worse affect the validity of the data;
    there may be problems with recording, transcribing or interpreting data as several people may speak over each other or at once – this may be difficult to decipher in transcription;
    any other reasonable response. One mark for each limitation correctly identified (up to a maximum of two). One mark for each limitation correctly developed (up to a maximum of two).

  • 1(e)[8]

    Describe two strengths and two limitations of using triangulation when doing sociological research. Possible answers: Strengths:

    allows the researcher to support quantitative data with qualitative examples, thereby providing a study with more reliability and validity;
    triangulation allows researchers to gather more data than simply a single method – this will give a bigger picture;
    it can be used for cross-referencing the researcher’s interpretations to other data collected to check for accuracy;
    it can provide balance between methods, where one may be weaker than another in that particular area of research e.g. using observation to support data gained from a questionnaire;
    triangulation uses methods that appeal to both positivists and interpretivists and this may give both macro and micro perspectives on the same issue;
    triangulation expands the research in a way that a single approach can’t and this can develop new areas and ideas for research;
    any other reasonable response. Limitations:
    using several methods can be time consuming as researchers are likely to use quantitative and qualitative methods;
    using several methods can be costly as more resources will be required and possibly more researchers too;
    for triangulation to be conducted successfully the researcher needs to be skilled in several research methods;
    use of triangulation may cause some confusion in the research e.g. results from the different methods may contradict one another;
    positivist and interpretivist approaches are based on quite different ideas, so it may be difficult to combine them in one piece of research;
    any other reasonable response. One mark for each strength correctly identified (up to a maximum of two). One mark for each strength correctly 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 correctly developed (up to a maximum of two).

  • 1(f)[10]

    Explain why questionnaires may lack validity. Possible answers:

    respondents may lie or exaggerate when completing a questionnaire (no interviewer present) and this will affect the validity of the data;
    questions may be misunderstood by the respondent and the researcher is not able to explain, this impacts on validity;
    respondents may show social desirability in their answers to fit in with the dominant social perspective, rather than giving their own opinion, thus impacting on validity;
    on pre-coded questionnaires respondents may have to select a less valid option e.g. the option they want is not available and this may negatively impact on the validity of the data;
    online questionnaires are not always treated seriously by respondents and they may answer questions without thought and hence impact the validity of the data;
    postal questionnaires may not be completed by the intended respondent, so may not include answers from the relevant type of person which is likely to impact the overall validity of the data gained;
    closed questions do not give the respondent the opportunity to develop their response fully and so the data gained lacks validity;
    questionnaires are mainly composed of closed questions – hence lack qualitative data and cannot provide in depth reasons for the data gathered;
    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 positivism the best approach to sociological research? Possible answers: Arguments for:

    the macro approach associated with positivism allows for large scale research on whole societies which the micro approach cannot achieve;
    positivism offers a scientific approach to the study of social behaviour and allows for causality and correlation between different social variables to be explored;
    positivist methods are quantitative and allow for the identification of patterns and trends in the data which are useful in comparative studies over time and between different social groups;
    data produced is generally high in reliability due to the standardised measuring tools used e.g. closed questions in surveys;
    positivist methods are seen as being more objective and aiming at value freedom which should minimise the amount of bias and enhance accuracy;
    positivist approach has some practical advantages e.g. positivists favour social surveys or questionnaires which are relatively cheap and easy compared to interpretivist methods e.g. it is cheaper to send out a questionnaire than pay for an experienced interviewer;
    a positivist approach could be better than an interpretivist one depending on the topic e.g. if the topic required researching the views of a whole country on a particular issue then a nationwide survey would be the most appropriate;
    functionalists advocate a positivist approach as it allows them to research the impact of social institutions on a macro scale e.g. Durkheim’s study on suicide in different countries;
    Marxists would likely favour macro-scale research into the workings of national institutions like the government, schools, the welfare state, law enforcement etc. and how they impact the working class;
    any other reasonable response. Arguments against:
    interpretivists would argue that researchers are never value free – all research is influenced by the researcher’s values, either consciously or unconsciously, and therefore there is no advantage to adopting a positivist approach on these grounds;
    research is seldom purely objective e.g. there may be a bias towards a predictive hypothesis or research aims or towards the interests of those providing the funding;
    interpretivists are critical of the positivist approach arguing quantitative data is not appropriate to establish social meaning e.g. numbers cannot easily provide reasons, feelings and in-depth views from participants;
    positivist methods often tend to be low in validity e.g. people lie in questionnaires and statistics (secondary data) are more social constructions than social facts;
    feminists argue that research should be subjective and approaching the research with an empathetic viewpoint enables the researcher to gain rich data e.g. feminist victim surveys;
    the aspiration to emulate the methodology of the natural sciences is wrong-headed because positivists are dealing with human beings who possess agency and decision-making power unlike the more law-like physical natural forces in nature;
    social facts don’t exist meaning they are a product of social interactions and the meanings generated by the participants and these can only be accessed by qualitative methods such as unstructured interviews and participant observations;
    triangulation or a mixed methods approach is better than a purely positivist approach as this enables the weaknesses of any single approach to be balanced against the strengths of another approach;
    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.