# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
16. 2024 methods strengths and weaknesses handout

# data[].attributes.body
no specific thing your trying to identify

# data[].attributes.body
P: so much data that it difficult to analyse and make sense of

# data[].attributes.body
• get indepth qualitative data makes it more valid

• first hand experience so more accurate

• Eileen Barker Moonies

• Laud Humphreys

# data[].attributes.headline
T: the interviewer could be subjective in the way the question is asked influencing the participants 

# data[].attributes.subject
T: the interviewer could be subjective in the way the question is asked influencing the participants 

# data[].attributes.body
Cheaper to carry out - do not need interviewer

# data[].attributes.body
quick and easy
easy to analyse results
more reliable as the questions are are

# data[].attributes.body
the interviewer could influence the answer based on gender

# data[].attributes.body
no detail

could be inaccurate or could include an anomaly

may not valid data as people could have lied

# data[].attributes.body
weaknesses:

P: time consuming

E: could feel under pressure

T: subjective to analyse

# data[].attributes.headline
P: Can be time consuming having to train up the interviewers and have long interviews 

# data[].attributes.subject
P: Can be time consuming having to train up the interviewers and have long interviews 

# data[].attributes.body
time consuming
can be expensive to employ and training interviewers

# data[].attributes.body
able to gain qualitative data

# data[].attributes.headline
Scientific - quantitative data, easy to repeat (reliable).

# data[].attributes.subject
Scientific - quantitative data, easy to repeat (reliable).

# data[].attributes.body
Potential Interviewer bias

# data[].attributes.headline
T: valid data as it has been witnessed first hand 

# data[].attributes.subject
T: valid data as it has been witnessed first hand 

# data[].attributes.body
the way you interpret the situation can influence your answers

# data[].attributes.body
• not detailed enough so less valid

• interpretivist won't like it because it can be too debatable

• can be easily misinterpretated and taken subjectively

• can be dehumanising to personal experience

•Durkheim suicide study

# data[].attributes.body
• eliminates extraneous variables

• can control the experiment on your terms

• valid as they are unaware so can’t change behaviour (hawthorne effect)

# data[].attributes.body
Gathers quantitative data which is easy to analyse/interpret.

# data[].attributes.body
strengths

P: in person data

E: participants are aware

T: valid qualitative data

# data[].attributes.body
Easy to compare and collect

Ethical

No one there to pressure you to answer to completely honest

Theoretical

Reliable

# data[].attributes.body
difficult to replicate - unreliable

# data[].attributes.body
can be subjective interpretation

# data[].attributes.body
allow you to generate lots of qualitative data at a deep understanding

# data[].attributes.body
Gathers quantitative which is easy to analyse/interpret.

# data[].attributes.body
• less data

• easy and quick

• easy to analyse

• easy to produce questionnaire

• no researcher bias

# data[].attributes.body
Ofsted

# data[].attributes.body
• more likely to get funding as science is more respectable

• no external factors affecting the situation (very controlled and more reliable)

• standardised procedures

• bandura bobo dolls

# data[].attributes.body
dark figures

# data[].attributes.body
Practical
Time consuming and can be costly due to trained interviewers

Ethical

Theoretical
Not representative
Small scale

# data[].attributes.body
gain first hand knowledge

# data[].attributes.body
researchers cannot control how the original data was collected.

# data[].attributes.body
A lot of qualitative data

# data[].attributes.body
you find what your looking for to begin with

# data[].attributes.body
Subjective interpretations, relies on skills of researcher

# data[].attributes.body
• quick and easy to do

• relatively cheap

• easier to analyse

• Ofsted

# data[].attributes.body
• a lot of data

• time consuming

• subjective when analysing and thinking of meaning

# data[].attributes.body
(Bandura?)

Variables controlled

Participants would give consent

# data[].attributes.body
Practical

In depth data

Primary data

Theoretical

Details

# data[].attributes.body
the questions can be interpreted differently based on the person

# data[].attributes.headline
E: can be dehumanising to a sensitive topic 

# data[].attributes.subject
E: can be dehumanising to a sensitive topic 

# data[].attributes.body
Moonies, Eileen barker

# data[].attributes.body
(OFSTED)

Anonymous, give consent

Can be given out on a large scale

# data[].attributes.body
there is control over the experiment and ability to isolate the targeted variable.
researchers can trace cause and effect relationship
they have high degrees of reliability as the lab conditions can be replicated.

# data[].attributes.body
• participants trust you

• more valid

• more ethical

• get context

# data[].attributes.body
• too much data to understand and analyse

• time consuming

• can cost money for an extra interview

• dependent on the skills of the interview

• Anne Oakley

# data[].attributes.body
Theoretical

No qualitative data

Ethical

Dehumanising