Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
fs truethat the evidence itself may seem too constraining. Both
lomalists and social researchers have trouble with pesky evidence-
data that don't give the exact message the investigator would lilce to
present. The social "truths" that can be manufactured through novels,
plays, and other forms of fiction may be much more appealing. Finally,
some people want their cases to "speak for themselves" as much as pos-
sible.They may prefer to present exactrecordingslike videotapes and let
their audienceschoose their own messages in these representations.
While socialresearch is difficult and limiting, it also offers special re-
wards for those willingto make the investments.People who like to read
and write about social issues are drawn to social research. Often they
have strong political commitments (for example, to fairness in the eco-
nomic and political arenas). They hope to translate their concerns into
publications-representations of social life-that influence socialpolicy.
Publications can influencepolicy directly by bringing issues to the atten-
tion of public officials or indirectly by altering the social consciousness
of the informedpublic. L i e the three researchers mentioned in the intro-
duction to this chapter, thousands of other social researchers have con-
structed representations of social life reflecting their concerns. Many
have had a direct or indirect impact on socialissues.
The beauty of social research is that it tempers and clarifies the con-
cerns and interests of those who practice the craft. Social research has
this impact on people who address social issues in several ways: Social
researchers must engage in long-standing debates about society and so-
cial life when they conduct research. Social researchers must base their
representations on systematicexamination of large quantities of system-
atically collected evidence. Socialresearchers as a community pass judg-
ment on the representations of social life produced by socialresearchers
(Merton 1973; Kuhn 1962). In effect, they inspect and evaluate each
other's work.
Thus, of all ways of representing social life, those that emanate from
social research have a very strong grounding in ideas and evidence and
a great potential for influencing social policy. As a community of schol-
ars, social researchers work together to construct representations of so-
cial life that fulfill the many and varied goals of social research, from
documentingbroad patterns and testingsocialtheories to giving voice to
marginal groups in society.
The Goals of Social Research
Introduction
Social life is infinitely complex. Every situation, every story is unique.
Yet, people make their way through this world of complexity. Most
things, most situations seemfamiliarenough, and people can usually fig-
ure out how to avoid the unfamiliar. Also, there is order in complexity,
even ifpeople are not always conscious of the order. Some of this order-
in-complexity is easy to describe (asin what sports fans do to mark cer-
tain events in a game). Other examples of order-in-complexity are
difficult to explain, much less describe (for example, the interplay of pa-
gan and Christian symbols in the historical development of an elaborate-
religiousritual). i
Social researchers seek t'o identify order and regularity in the com-
plexity of social We; they try to make sense of it. This is their most fun-
damental goal. When they tell about society-how people do or refuse
to do things together-they describe whatever order they have found.
There is even a describable order to what may appear to be social chaos,
such as a mass political demonstrationthat gets out of hand and leads to
a violent attackon nearby symbols of authority.
While identifying order in the complexity of social life is the most
fundamental goal of socialresearch, there are many other, more specific
goals that contribute to this larger goal. They are quite diverse. For ex-
ample, the goal of testing theories about social life contributes to the
larger goal of identifying order in complexity;so does the goal of collect-
ing in-depth informationon the diversesocialgroups that make up soci-
ety. Another factor that contributesto the diversity of the goals of social
research is the simple fact that socialresearch reflectssociety, and society
itself is diverse, multifaceted, and composed of many antagonistic
groups. It follows that the goals of socialresearch are multiple and some-
times contradictory.Today, no single goal dominates socialresearch.
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
TIEGonls of Social Resenrcll 33
Several of the main goals of social research resemble the goals of
research in the "hard" sciences like physics and chemistry. These goals
indude, for example, the identification of general patterns and relation-
ships. When we show that people with more education tend to vote
more often and that this link exists in many democratic countries, we
have documented a generalrelationship for individuals livingin democ-
racies. Similarly,when we observe that countrieswith greaterincome in-
equality tend to be more politically unstable, we have identified a
pattern that holds across entirenation-states.
Knowledge of generalpattems and relationships is valuablebecause
it is a good starting point for understanding many specificsituationsand
for makingpredictions about the future.Also, generalpattems in society
are directly relevant to the testing of social science theory-the body of
ideas that socialscientists often draw upon in their efforts to make sense
of and tell about society.
Some of the other goals of social research, however, are not modeled
on the hard sciences.These other goals follow more directly from the fact
that social researchers are members of the social worlds they study (see
Chapter 1).For example, some social researchers try to "give voice" to
their research subjects-providing their subjects the opportunity to have
their stories told, their worlds represented. If not for the interest or con-
cern of social researchers, these groups might have little opportunity to
relate their lives, in their own words, to the literate public. For example,
the experiences of recent immigrants struggling for survival in the noise
and confusion of our largest and most congested cities ate rarely repre-
sented in the media.
The goal of giving voice clearly does not follow from the model of
tlie hard sciences. A physicist is usually not concerned to give voice to
the lives and subjective experiences of specificparticles. The goal of giv-
ing voice may come into direct conflict with the goal of identifyinggen-
eral patterns because it is dificult to both privilege certain cases by
giving them voice and at the same time chart general patterns across
many cases. When the goal is to identify general pattems, no specific
case, no specificvoice, should dominate.
Altogether, seven major goals of social research are examined in this- -- --chapter. Thev include:- 2
1. identifying general patterns~ and relationships
2. testing---. and~-~ .refining~...-. theories.. .. ~..
4. interpreting culturally or historically significant phenomena
.
6. giving~ voice
7. advancing new theories
".....,,
Generally, the first three goals follow the_,._.__,...lead of the hard sciences. The
f o x a n dsixth goals,bycont?as~~followfrom the socialnature of social
science-the'fact that social researchers study phenomena that are rel-
evant in some special way to the social world of the researcher.The fifth
and seventh goals straddle these two domains. In some ways they link
up with hard science models; in other ways they reflect the socially
grounded nature of socialresearch.
The list of goals discussed in this chapter is not exhaustive; several-. - -. ... ~
o t h e r a d be added. For example, evaluation research, which is a type. . . . - - .- . _ _ -
__l_____d.-.-~- .
particular....... ~ ,programs,.
such ;&earch is also relevant to general patterns,. .. .. ..,-
one of the key concerns, .. .. of sbcialresearch.Thus, most social research in-
vdli;&satleast one aiid G&Uallpkiikralof the seven goals discussed in
thischapter.
Because- :o~iil-re?& has multiple and competing goals, a vasiety
of different research strategieshave evolved to accommodate different~ ... ,... .,, , .
goals.A research strategy is best understood as t h e ~ e g - o f ? ~ . + a r y
research objective and a spatresearch method. The last part of this chap-.- _ter introduces three common research strategies, among the many dif-
ferent strategies that social researchers use. The three research strategies
discussed in this chapter and examined in detail in Part II of this book
are
1. q~tditntiveresearch on the commonalitiesthat exist across a relatively__ _.__-_- . , _-,.,.._"
smallng&e_r-offcascases-
2. nrative researcll on the
ate
-
3. q~~nntita~~~~~~~l~..oon..the.correspondencebetween two,or~more
at e number. . of cases,(co~~'ation)
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
34 Cllnpter2
The Seven Main Goals
1. Identifijitlg Geizernl Pnttenzs nizd Relntioizships
Recall that one of the key characteristics of social scientific representa-
tions discussed in Chapter 1was their focus on social phenomena that
are socially significant in some way. Phenomena may be significant be-
cause they are common or geizernl; they affect many people, either di-
rectly or indirectly. This quality of generality makes knowledge of such
phenomena valuable. For example, suppose it can be shown that in
countries where more public funds are spent on the prevention of iUness
(for example, by improving nutrition, restricting the consumption of al-
cohol and tobacco, providing children free immunization, and so on),
health care costs less in the long run. Knowledge of this general pattern
is valuablebecause it concerns almost everyone.
One of the major goals of social research is to identify general pat-
terns and relationships. In some comers, this objective is considered the
pil'iimry goal because social research that is directed toward this end re-
sembles research in the hard sciences. This resemblance gives social re-
searchmore legitimacy,making it seem more like socialphysics and less
like socialphilosophy or political ideology.
For most of its history, social research has tried to follow the lead of
the hard sciencesin the development of its basic research strategies and
practices. These approaches to research are especiallywell suited for ex-
amining general patterns, and knowledge of general patterns is a highly
valued form of knowledge. For example, if we know the general causes
of ethnic antagonism (one general cause might be the concentration of
members of an ethnic minority in lower social classes), we can work to
remove these conditions from our society or at least counteract their im-
pact and perhaps purge ourselves of serious ethnic antagonism.As more
and more is learned about general patterns, the general stock of social
scientificknowledge increases, and it becomes possible for social scien-
tists to systematize knowledge and make connections that might other-
wise not be made. For example, general knowledge about the causes of
ethnic antagonism within societies might help to further understanding
of nationalism and the international conflicts spawned by national senti-
ments.
Knowledge of general patterns is often preferred to knowledge of
specificsituationsbecause every situation is unique in some way. Under-
standing a single situation thoroughly might be pointless if this under-
standing does not offergelzerflliznble knowledge-if it doesn't lead to
some insight relevant to other situations. From this perspective, know-
The GoalsofSocial Resenrcl~ 35
ing one situation thoroughly might even be considered counterproduc-
tive because we could be deceived into thinking an atypical situation of-
fers useful general knowledge when it does not, especially if we are
ignorant of how thissituation is atypical.
Because of the general underdeveloped state of social scientific
knowledge, we are not always sure which situations are typical and
which are not. Furthermore, because every situation is unique in some
way, it also could be argued that every situation is atypicaland therefore
untrustworthy as a guide to general knowledge. In short, when the goal
is knowledge of general patterns, socialresearchers tend to distrustwhat
can be learned from one or a smallnumber of cases.
According to this reasoning, knowledge of general patterns is best
achieved through examination of many comparable situations or cases,
the more the better. The examination of many cases provides a way to
neutralize each case's uniqueness in the attempt to grasp as many cases
as possible. If a broad pattern holds across many cases, then it may re-
flect the operation of an underlying cause which can be inferred from
the broad pattern. (Onissues of plausible inference, see Polya 1968.)
For example, while it may be possible to identify both "kind and be-
nevolent" dictators and democraticgovernments that terrorize their own
citizens, the broad pattern acfossmany countries is that the more demo-
cratic governments tend to brutalize their own citizens less. This corre-
spondence between undemocraticrule and brutality, in turn, may reflect
the operation of an underlying cause-the effect that the concentration
of power has on the incidence of brutality. While not directly observed,
this cause might be inferred from the observed correspondencebetween
undemocratic rule and brutality. It is obvious that brutality and benevo-
lence exist in all countries. Still, across many cases the pattern is clear,
and exceptions should not blind us to the existenceof patterns.
2. Testiizg ntld Refini~zgTl~eoi.ies
General patterns matter not only because they affect many people, but
also because they are especiallyrelevant to social theory. As described
Chapter 1, social theories come out of a huge, on-going conversation
among social scientists and other social thinkers. This conversation is an
ever-changingpool of ideas, a resource to draw on and to replenish with
fresh thinking.
it is also important to note that there is a virtually limitless potential
for new ideas to emergefromwithin thispool because existingideas can
be combined with each other to producenew ones, and new implications
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
36 Chnpter 2
can be drawn from these new combinations.Also, socialtheory is forever
borrowing ideas from otherpools of thinking,includingphilosophy, psy-
chology,biology, and even physics, chemistry, and astronomy. The cross-
fertilization of ideas is never ending.
For example,ideas about the relationshipbetween workers and own-
ers in industrial countries, especiallythe idea that workers are exploited,
have been applied to the relations between countries. Some analyses of
work emphasize the degree to which profits are based on keeping the
wages of workers low, especially those with the fewest skills. From this
perspective, there is natural conflictbetween the owners of firms and the
workers: If wages are kept low, then profits will be higher; if wages are
too high, profits will suffer.
This thinkinghas been transferred to the international arena by some
theorists who assert that rich countriesbenefit from the poverty of poor
countries (see, for example, Baran 1957; Frank 1967, 1969; Wallerstein
1974,1979).Some theorists argue that labor-intensive production, which
uses simpler technologies and tends to offer only very low wages, has
been shifted to poor countries, while the rich countries have retained
capital-intensive production, which uses advanced technology. Workers
in rich countries benefit from the greater availability of high-wage jobs
and from the cheap prices of the labor-intensive goods imported from
low-wage countries. In this way, all the residents of rich countriesown-
ers, managers, and workers--exploit the cheap labor of poor countries
(seeLenin 1975).
This argument,which is an example of the cross-fertilizationof ideas,
can be tested with economic data on countries. In this way a new per-
spective--and a new source for testable hypotheses-is derived fromex-
isting ideas.
One of the primary goals of socialresearch is to improve and expand
the pool of ideas known as social theory by testing their implications, as
in the examplejust presented, and to refine their power to explain. Typi-
cally, this testing is done according to the general plan of the scientific
method, as described in Chapter 1.Hypotheses are derived from theo-
ries and their implications and then tested with data that bear directly
on the hypotheses. Often the data are collected specifically for testing a
particular hypothesis, but sometimes already existing data can be used
(for example, census and other officialstatistics published by govern-
ment agencies).
By testing hypotheses, it is possible to improve the overall quality of
the pool of ideas. Ideas that fail to receive support gradually lose their
appeal, while those that are supported more consistently gain greater
stature in the pool. While a single unsuccessful hypothesis rarely kills a
The Gonlsof Socinl Resenrch 37
theory, over time unsupported ideas fade from current thinking. It is im-
~ortantto identify the most fertile and powerful ways of thinking and to
assess Merent ideas, comparing them as explanations of general pat-
terns and features of social life. Testing theories can also serve to refine
them. By working through the implications of a theory and then testing
this refinement, it is possible to progressively improve and elaborate a
set of ideas.
It is possible to conduct social research without paying much direct
attention to thispool of ideas. There are many aspects of social life and
many different social worlds that attract the attention of social research-
ers, independent of the relevance of these phenomena to social theory.
After all, socialresearchers,like most socialbeings, are curious about so-
cial life. However, improving the quality of social theory is an important
goal because this pool of ideas structures much thinking and much tell-
ing about society, by socialscientists and by others.
3. Making Predictio~zs
While social researchers use theories to derive "predictions" (actually,
hypotheses) about what they expect to find in a set of data (for example,
a survey), they also use acc~ulatedsocialscientificknowledge to make
predictions about the future and other novel situations. It is this second
meaning of the word prediction that is intended when we say that "malc-
ing predictions" is one of the major goals of socialresearch.
Consider an exampleof this secondkind of prediction: Researchindi-
cates that ethnic conflict tends to increase when the supply of economic
rewards and resources (jobs and promotions, for instance) decreases.
Thus,a socialscientist would predict increased ethnic tensionsin an eth-
nically diverse country that has just experienced a serious economic
downturn. Prediction is often considered the highest goal of science. We
accumulate knowledge so that we can anticipate things to come. We
make predictionsbased on what we know. Twokinds of knowledgehelp
us make predictions. Knowledge of history (pastsuccesses and failures)
and knowledge of general patterns.
Knowledge of history helps us to avoid repeating mistakes. Under-
standing of the Stock Market Crash of 1929 and the ensuing Great De-
pression, for example,has motivated our economic and political elites to
moderate the violent swings of market-oriented economiclife. An unsuc-
cessful military venture into Vietnam in the 1960s and 1970s has made
our militaryleaderswary of interveningin guerrillawars. Socialresearch-
ers draw lessons from history by relating events to general concepts. The
Stock Market Crash of 1929 provides clear lessons about the need that
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
38 Cllnpter2
arises for a balance between the free play of markets (forexample, stock
markets) and regulations imposed through hierarchies (forexample, the
SecuritiesExchangeCommission).Thepredictionhere is that unregulated
markets will fluctuatewidely and may even self-destruct.
The second kind of knowledge, understanding of generalpatterns, is
useful for making projections about likely future events. For example,
we know that certain types of crime (drugdealing, for instance)increase
when legitimate economic opportunities decrease. We can use this
knowledge combined with assumptions about other causal factors to ex-
trapolate future crime rates given different employment conditions. If
current hends toward higher production levels with fewer workers con-
tinue, it would seemreasonable to anticipateincreases in certain types of
crimes. Projections of this type are quite common and sometimes can be
surprisingly accurate. It is much easier to predict a rate (the rate of
homelessness, the rate of drug-related crimes, the rate of teenage preg-
nancy, and so on) than it is to predict what any single individual might
do. For example, it is easy to extrapolateor project a good estimate of the
number of people who will be murdered in LosAngeles next year, but it
is impossible to predict very much about who, among the millions, will
be the perpetrators or the victims.
While making predictions is one of the most important goals of social
research, it's not always the case that prediction and understanding go
hand in hand. Sometimes our predictions are quite accurate, but our un-
derstanding of the actual underlying processes that produce outcomes is
incomplete or simply erroneous.For example, the causes of drug addic-
tion are quite complex, as is the process of becoming an addict. How-
ever, it is a relatively simplematter to forecastlevels of drug addictionin
major U.S. cities based on knowledge of the social conditions that tend
to favor high levels of addiction.
A simpler example: It might be possible to predict with fair precision
how many murders willbe committednext year based on the number of
automobilesstolen this year. However,that doesn't mean that some fixed
percentage of the people who steal cars one year graduate to homicide
the next. More than likely, the two rates both respond to the same causal
conditions (such as unemployment or the formation of sheet gangs),but
at diFferentspeeds.
Predicting rates is much easier than predicting specific events. The
kinds of things many social scientists would like to be able to predict-
namely, the occurrence of specific events at specific points in time in the
future-are simply beyond the scope of any science. For example, many
social scientists chastised themselves for being unable to predict the fall
Tlle Gonlsof SocinlResenrclt 39
of communism in Eastern Europe in 1989. Their failure to predict these
dramatic eventsmade them feel impotent. However, no science, social or
otherwise, could possibly achieve this kind of prediction-the timing of
specific future social or natural events. The key to understanding this is
the simple fact that it is very difficult to predict specificfuture events.
Consider the "hard science of meteorology.At best, this science can
predict the probability of rain over the next several days. But what if we
want to know when it will start, when it will stop, and how much it will
rain? It should be possible to predict these things. After all, no human
intenrention, interpretation, or subjectivityis involved, only measurable,
physical qualities like temperature, wind direction and velocity, mois-
ture, and so on. But the hard science of meteorology cannot offer this
precision; it simply cannot predict specific events. Nor can meteorology
predict which day, or even which year, a hurricane will again sweep
across Galveston Island, Texas. Even when there is a hurricane in the
middle of the Gulf of Mexico, it's very difficult to tell which, if any,
coastal area it will demolish.
In a similar manner, no social scientists could predict, say in 1980,
that communism would fall in Eastern Europe in 1989. For many years,
some social scientists claimed that communism was likely to fall in the
near future. Even in 1980 a few would have been willing to attach spe-
cificprobabilities to specificyears, say a 40%chanceof fallingby the year
'2000. Social science is not impotent,but appears so because of the speci-
ficity of the predictions we desire.
Will a new religious movement, emphasizingconsemativevalues, the
sanctity of marriage and the family, self-reliance, and the rejection of
white culture and its materialism sweep black inner-city neighborhoods
next year? Sometimein the next ten years? Will wild spasms of nihilistic
self-destructiveness sweep through teenage populations in the white
suburbs of major U.S. cities in the year 2009? It would certainly be im-
pressive to be able to predict events such as these, but it is outside the
scope of any science to offer this degree of specificity. At best, social re-
searchers can make broad projections of possibilities using their knowl-
edge of generalpatterns.
Knowledge of general patterns is not the only kind of valuable knowl-
edge, however, especially when it comes to understanding social life. In
the social sciences, knowledge of specific situations and events, even if
they are atypical (and usually becotrse they are atypical; see Dumont
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
40 Chnpter 2
1970), is also highly valued. The significanceof most historical phenom-
ena derives hom their atypicality, the fact that they are dramatically
nomoutine, and from their impact on who we are today.
For example, many social researchers address important historical
events like the French Revolution or the civil rights movement. We care
about these events and their interpretation (forexample,how the Roman
Empire fell or the history of slavery) because of the relevance of these
events for understanding our current situation-how we got to where
we are. We are fascinatedby the U.S. Civil War not because we expect it
to be repeated, but because of its powerful impact on current race rela-
tions and the structure of power (who dominates whom and how they
do it) in the United Statestoday.
Other phenomena are studied not because of their historicalrelevance
to current society but because of their cultural relevance. The bits and
pieces of African cultures that slaves brought with them, for example,
have had a powerful impact on the course and developmentof American
culture. Other phenomena may be culturally significantbecause of what
they may portend. Theheavy metalrock culture of the late twentieth cen-
tury, for example, could signalfuture directions of Americanculture.
Often there is competition among social researchers to establish the
"accepted" interpretation of significanthistoricalor culturalphenomena.
For example, socialresearchers have examined the events that led to the
fall of communist regimes (that is, of the power cliques that controlled
the centrally planned economies of Eastern Europe). These events have
been addressed because they are historically and culturally relevant and
significant, and different researchers have merent ideas about how and
why these regimes fell. The interpretation of these events that prevails,
especially the interpretation of the fall of the communist regime in the
former SovietUnion, has important implicationsfor how both socialsci-
entists and the literate public think about "communism" and the possi-
bility of centralized control of national economies. It is not always the
case that a single interpretation prevails, not even in the very long run.
The struggle to have an interpretation accepted as "correct" can extend
over generationsof scholarship and stretch over centuries of debate.
Social researchers who study general phenomena usually do not ad-
dress specific events or their interpretation. They would rather know
about a generalpattern (forexample, the covariationacross countriesbe-
tween the extent to which democratic procedures are practiced, on the
one hand, and the level of politicalrepression, on the other) than about a
specific set of events (the detention of Japanese-Americans by the U.S.
rite Gonls of Social Resenrcl~ 41
government'during World War 11,forinstance).It is difficult,however, to
address many of the things that interest socialresearchers, and their au-
diences, in research that focuses only on what is general.
For example, socialresearchers sometimes address the subjectivity or
consciousness of their subjects. There are many possible interpretations
for any set of events. Did the Nazis intend to exterminate the Jews all
along, or did they adopt this policy in response to the conditions of
World War II? Was it necessary for Stalin to terrorize Soviet citizens in
order to forge state socialism?Was he insecure and paranoid, or was ter-
rorism simply an effective way of maintaining his personal power? In
both episodes of massive inhumaniv, it is not enough to know that mil-
lions of people died or how they died. We want to know why. Research-
ers who study general pattems typically do not address issues related to
the consciousness of their research subjects.
5. Exploritzg Diversity
Another major goal of social research is to explore and comprehend the
social diversity that surrounds us. While this goal may seem similar to
the goal of identifying generalpatterns, and does complementit in some
respects, it is quite different.fFor example, one general pattern is that
educational and economic development tend to go together; counhies
with better schools and higher literacy rates tend to be richer. However,
the fact that a general pattern exists doesn't mean that there aren't i?l-
portant and interesting exceptions. Some poor countries have well-de-
veloped educational systems and very high literacy rates &or example,
Sri Lanka), and some rich counhies have poorly developed schools and
surprisingly low levels of literacy (SaudiArabia, for instance).
Exploring diversity often means that the researcher ignores dominant
patterns and focuses on the vni7'ehJ of circumstances that exist. How is
livingin a poor country with a high level of lileracy dikmtfrom living
in other poor counhies? What happens when a low level of educational
development or literacy is combined with wealth? In short, the study of
diversityavoids an exclusivefocus onwhat is most common or on domi-
nant patterns.
More generally, exploring diversity furthers an understanding and
appreciation of sociodiversity, a concept that parallels the ecologicalno-
tion of biodiversity. We protect biological species close to extinction be-
cause we are concerned about biodiversity. The human species
dominates all others, so much so that many species are threatened with
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
42 Clfnpter2
extinction.Many environmentalistssee decliningbiodiversity as an indi-
cator of the degree to which human societies have threatened the self-
regulating natural order of the biosphere we callEarth.
People are less concerned about sociodiversityAnthropologists have
documented dramatic declines in sociodiversity.They have studied soci-
eties in all comers of the world over much of the last century. As the
reach of global economic and political forces has expanded, these forces
have more deeply penetrated many parts of the world. Small-scalesoci-
eties that were once more or less external to the international system
have been incorporated into it. One directconsequenceof thisincorpora-
tion is the disappearance of many cultural forms and practices and the
transmutation of countless others. Sociodiversityat the levelof whole so-
cieties has declined dramatically.More and more, there is a single, domi-
nant global culture.
A simple example of this change is the worldwide decline in ar-
ranged marriages and the increased importanceof romantic involvement
(seeBarash and Scourby 1970).From the perspective of modem-day U.S.
Americans, this shift seems natural and inevitable, and arranged mar-
riages seem quaint. But in fact arranged marriages have been an impor-
tant source of social order and stability in many societies, joining
differentfamilies together in ways that undercut social conflict.
The efforts of anthropologists to document rapidly disappearing so-
cieties have been presenred in their writings and in data comzilations
such as the Human Relations Area File (HRAF),which catalogs many
different aspects of hundreds of societies and cultures that no longer ex-
ist. It is important to understand societies that differ from our own be-
cause they show alternative ways of addressing common social issues
and questions. For example, societies cope with scarcity in different
ways. In some societies great feasts involving entire communities are a
routine part of social life. These feasts not only provide protection
againststarvation,especiallyduring leanyears, but they also increase the
strength of the socialbonds joining members of communities. There has
also been remarkable diversity among human societies in how basic ar-
rangements like the family, kinship, the gender division of labor, and
sexuality have been structured or accomplished.
Of course, great social diversity exists today, despite the impact of
that giant steamroller, the world capitalist economy, on sociodiversity
worldwide. There are many socialworlds (and social worlds within so-
cial worlds-see Chapter l)in all parts of all countries. There is great
diversity even in the most advanced countries-those most closely
joined by the world economy. Often, much diversity is simply unac-
bowledged or ignored. Sometimes assumptions are made about
sameness (for example, that people living in inner-city ghettos think or
act in certain ways) that turn out to be false when the diversity within a
social category is examined closely. Also, people often respond to
sameness and uniformity by craftingnew ways of differentiatingthem-
selves from others. Sometimes,these effortslead only to new fads; some-
times, they culminate in entirely new social formations (as when a
religious cult withdraws from mainstream society).
Sometimessocialresearchers start out not knowing if studying a new
case or situation will offeruseful knowledge of diversity. They study it
in order to make this assessment. For example, some immigrant groups
are very successful. It is important to find out how and why they are
successful in order to determine if this knowledge is relevant to other
groups (or, more generally, to U.S. immigration policy). It may be that
their success is due to circumstances that cannot be duplicated else-
where. But there is no way to know this without studying the specific
causes of their success. Another example: Catholic nuns tend to live
longer and healthier lives than most other groups, religious or secular. It
may not be the case that we have to live like nuns to match their longev-
ity,but we won't know this unless we study them and find out why they
live longer than others. Whether or not the study of diverse groups of-
fers knowledge that is useful, research on diverse groups contributes to
social scientists' understanding of social life in general.
6. Givilzg Voice
Sometimes the goal of exploring diversity is taken one step further, and
the researcher studies a group not simply to learn more about it, but also
to contribute to its having an expressed voice in society. In research of
this type, the objective is not only to increase the stock of knowledge
about difFerenttypes, forms, and processes of social life, but to tell the
sto~yof a specific group, usually in a way that enhances its visibility in
society.
Very often the groups studied in this way are marginal groups, out-
side the social mainstream (for example, the homeless, the poor, minor-
ity groups, immigrant groups, homosexuals,people labeled mentally ill,
and so on). This approach to social research asserts that every group in
society has a "story to tell." Some groups (forexample,business people,
middle dass whites, and so on), are presented in the mainstream beliefs
and values of society as the way life is and should be. Many social re-
searchersbelieve that it is their responsibility to identify excluded groups
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
and tell their stories. By giving voice, researchers often are able to show
that groups that are considered deviant or differentin some way do not
deviate asmuch asmost people think.For example, a common findingis
that even people in the most dire and difficult circumstances strive for
dignity.
While social researchers who do this kind of research often focus on
marginal or deviant groups, this emphasis is neither necessary nor uni-
versal. Arlene Daniels (1988),for example, studied the wives of rich and
powerful men in a West Coast city and argued that many of them car-
ried on what she called "invisible careers." In a book bearing that title
she documented their tireless charitable activities and showedhow these
privileged women organize volunteer efforts to improve the quality of
life in their communities. Still, their efforts are hidden and taken for
granted, and the women themselves portray their labor not as work but
as self-sacrifice.
In research that seeks to give voice, social theories may help the re-
searcher identify groups without voice and may help explain why these
groups lack voice, but theory is not considered a source of hypotheses to
be tested. When the goal of a project is to give voice to research subjects,
l
it is important for the researcher to by to see their world through their
eyes, to understand their socialworlds as they do. Thus, researchers may
have to relinquish or "unlearn" a lot of what they know in order to con-
struct valid representations of their research subjects-representations
that embody their subjects' voice.
To achieve this level of in-depth understanding, researchers must
gain access to the everyday world of the group. It might be necessary, for
example, to live with the members of a marginalized group for extended
periods of time and gradually win their confidence (see, for example,
Stack 1974; Harper 1982).When the researcher feels he or she knows
enough to tell their stories, one goal of the tellingmight be to try to mini-
mize, as much as possible, the voice of the researcher.
Some researchers,for example, take photographs of the social worlds
of a group and then record their subjects' descriptionsand interpretations
of the photographs. A transcript of their descriptions is then published
along with the photographs (see Harper 1987;Suchar and Markin 1990).
In fact,a variety of systematic techniques have been developedby social
researchers to facilitate this type of in-depth knowledge and understand-
ing (seeDenzin 1970,1978;McCall and Simmons1969;Strauss 1987)
Some social researchers consider research that seeks to give voice ad-
vocncl~research and thereforedoubt its objectivity. (Becker 1967addresses
this issue in depth.) How can research that seeks to enhancethe visibility
Tile Goalsof Socinl Resenrcl~ 45
of a marginal group be conducted in a neutral way? Isn't it inevitable
that researchers will favor the positive aspects of marginal groups in
their representations of these groups? Most social researchers are com-
mitted to objectivity and neutralityin much the sameway that most jour-
nalists are. Somecommon cautions are
don't whitewash
present the good and the bad
be wary of how people rationalize what they do
maintain skepticism
examine the same eventsfrom severalpoints of view
Giving voice does not necessarily entail advocacy.Still,socialresearchers- ~ ., ~ . .~~ ~.~.~..
who seek to give voice must be vigilant in their efforts to represent their
groups appropriately. Most social worlds, marginal or mainstream, are
quite complex.Advocacy typically oversimplifies. Generally,it is not dif-
ficult to spot a one-sided representation or to recognize research that
merely advocatesfor a group.
Those who argue that giving voice is not a valid research objective
should acknowledgethat almost all research gives voice in the sense that
it enhances the visibility of the thing studied and represents the view-
d
point of some group or groups, even implicitly. Even a study of the gen-
eral social conditions that favor stable democracy across many countries
enhances the importance and visibility of stable democracy as a desir-
able condition simply by studying it. Research that seeks to give voice is
clear in its objectives.
7. AdvnflcingNew Tlzeoiies
Many different kinds of social research advance social theory, even re-
search that seeks to interpret historical or cultural significance.The test-
ing of theories (goal 2) also advances theory in the limited sense that
these tests indicate which theoretical ideas have more support as expla-
nations of social life. The goal of advancing theory as it is used here,
however, involvesmore than assessingand refiningexistingideas. When
theory is advanced, ideas are elaborated in some neru way. To advance
theory it is not necessary to comeup with a completemodel of society or
even some part of it. The developmentof new ideas and new conceptsis
the most that research seeking to advance theory usually accomplishes.
Theory testing (goal 2) is primarily dedxictive. Hypotheses about so-
cial life are derived tom theories and then tested with relevant data. The
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
The Gonlsof Socinl Resenrclr 47
researcher then draws the implications of the results of these tests for
theory (see Chapter 1).Research that advances theory, by contrast, is
usually described as having an ilzd~rctinequality. On the basis of new evi-
dence, the researcher developsa new theoretical concept or new relation-
ship or advances understanding of existingones.
Not only does the researcher use data to illustrate the new concept,
he or she may also elucidate the relation of the new concept to existing
concepts. One researcher, for example, developed the conceptof edgezuurk
based on his studies of people who skydive and from related research on
people who seek out other dangerous situations (Lyng 1990).When de-
veloping a new concept,it is necessary to distinguish it from related con-
cepts and to explain its logicaland causal connections to others (see also
Wieviorka 1988,1992).
Many theoretical advances come from detailed, in-depth examina-
tion of cases.soring diversity, for example, may lead to the discov-
ery of new social arrangemen%and practices. The study of behavior of
the groupies who surround certain kinds of rock bands, for example,
might lead to new insights about the importance of rituals in contempo-
rary social life. The mere existence of novel phenomena also may chal-
lenge conventional thinking. Existing theories may argue that certain
ways of doing things or certain behaviors are incompatible, that it has
to be either one or the other. The discovery that "incompatible" ele-
ments can coexist calls such theories into question and may force re-
searchers to theorize about how such logically incompatible things can
coexist.
Re~earch~thgis voice also may lead to theoretical advances be-
cause such research oftZiile~v9SS~~sS&~theories behind in its attempt
to see socialworlds through the eyes of their members. This openness to
the viewpoints of low-status and low-visibility people may expose the
inadequaciesof existing theoreticalperspectives. Finally,work that seeks
to interpret cultu~alor historical significance may also advance theory
because it too is based on detailed analyses of cases. For example, in-
depth research on the Jianian revolution could lead to new insights on
the importance of the interplay of religious ideology and political orga-
nization in large-scalepolitical change.
Research that seeks to identify general patterns across many cases is
usually associated with the goal of testing theory (via hypotheses), and
less often with the goal of advancing theory, even though, as already
noted, testing theory does r e h e it. However, the analysis of broad pat-
terns can lead to theoretical advances (see, for example, Paige 1975;
Rokkan 1970,1975; Tilly 1984;Rueschemeyer et al. 1992).Sometimes hy-
potheses fail or are only partially supported, and researchers generally
want to know why. They may study additional patterns in their data to
find out why the theory they are testing does not fit the data well.
For example, using a generally accepted theory as a starting point, a
researcher might test the hypothesis that richer countries tend to have a
more equal distribution of income (that is, within their own borders)
than poorer counhies. Analysis of relevant data might show that while
this pattern holds for most countries, among the richest fifteen or so it
does not-they might all have roughly the same degree of equality. This
finding might lead the researcher to speculate about the newly discov-
ered pattern: Why is it that greater national wealth does not lead to
greater equality once a certain level of economic development is
reached?A variety of factors might be examined in the effort to account
forthis pattern. This search might lead to the identificationof causal fac-
tors that suggest fundamental revision of the theory used to generate the
initialhypothesis about patterns of income inequality.
While the deduction-versus-induction distinctionis a simple and ap-
pealing way to differentiate kinds of social research, most research in-
cludes elements of both (see Stinchcombe 1968). For this reason some
philosophers of science (for example, Hanson 1958) argue that all re-
search involves retroduction4-the interplay of induction and deduction.
It is impossible to do researchwithout someinitialideas, even if the goal
1, is to give voice to research subjects. Thus, almost all research has at least
/ an element of deduction. S i a r l y , almost all research can be used to ad-
// vance theory in some way. After all, social theories are vague and impre-
( cise. Every test of a theory refines it, whether or not the test is
\ supportive. Research involves retroduction because there is typically a
dialogue of ideas and evidencein socialresearch.The interaction of ideas
and evidence culminates in theoretically based descriptions of social life
(that is, in social scientificrepresentations) and in evidence-basedelabo-
rations of social theory.
The Link between Goals and Strategies
It is clear that no researcher can tackle all seven goals at once, at least not
in the same study. A classic view of science says that it is a violation of
the scientific method to h.y to advance theory (goal 7) and test theory
(goal 2) in the same study. Data used to generate a new theory should
not also be used to test it. Most of the tensions between goals, however,
revolve around practicalissues.
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely