Week 1 Reading

Introduction to Sociology 2e

What is Sociology?
Sociology is the study of groups and group interactions, societies and social
interactions, from small and personal groups to very large groups. Sociologists
working from the micro-level study small groups and individual interactions, while
those using macro-level analysis look at trends among and between large groups
and societies. For example, a micro-level study might look at the accepted rules of
conversation in various groups such as among teenagers or business
professionals. In contrast, a macro-level analysis might research the ways that
language use has changed over time or in social media outlets.

A key basis of the sociological perspective is the concept that the individual and
society are inseparable. It is impossible to study one without the other. For
example, take the practice of religion. While people experience their religions in a
distinctly individual manner, religion exists in a larger social context. An
individual’s religious practice may be influenced by what government dictates,
holidays, teachers, places of worship, rituals, and so on. These influences
underscore the important relationship between individual practices of religion
and social pressures that influence that religious experience.

Why Study Sociology?

Sociology teaches people ways to recognize how they fit into the world and how
others perceive them. Looking at themselves and society from a sociological
perspective helps people see where they connect to different groups based on
the many different ways they classify themselves and how society classifies them
in turn. It raises awareness of how those classifications—such as economic and
status levels, education, ethnicity, or sexual orientation—affect perceptions.

Sociology teaches people not to accept easy explanations. It makes people more
aware that there are many different kinds of people in the world who do not
necessarily think the way they do. It increases their willingness and ability to try

1
to see the world from other people's perspectives. This prepares them to live and
work in an increasingly diverse and integrated world.

What is a Sociologist?
The prominent sociologist Peter L. Berger (1929– ), in his 1963 book Invitation to
Sociology: A Humanistic Perspective, describes a sociologist as "someone
concerned with understanding society in a disciplined way." He asserts that
sociologists have a natural interest in the monumental moments of people’s lives,
as well as a fascination with banal, everyday occurrences. Berger also describes
the “aha” moment when a sociological theory becomes applicable and
understood:

“There is a deceptive simplicity and obviousness about some sociological

investigations. One reads them, nods at the familiar scene, remarks that
one has heard all this before and don't people have better things to do than
to waste their time on truisms—until one is suddenly brought up against an
insight that radically questions everything one had previously assumed
about this familiar scene. This is the point at which one begins to sense the
excitement of sociology.” (Berger 1963)

All sociologists are interested in the experiences of individuals and how those
experiences are shaped by interactions with social groups and society as a whole.
To a sociologist, the personal decisions an individual makes do not exist in a
vacuum. Cultural patterns and social forces put pressure on people to select one
choice over another. Sociologists try to identify these general patterns by
examining the behavior of large groups of people living in the same society and
experiencing the same societal pressures. Sociologists identify and study patterns
related to all kinds of contemporary social issues.

What is Society?
A group of people who live in a defined geographic area, who interact with one
another, and who share a common culture is what sociologists call a society.
Sociologists study all aspects and levels of society.

2
What is Culture?
The term culture refers to the group’s shared practices, values, and beliefs.
Culture encompasses a group’s way of life, from routine, everyday interactions to
the most important parts of group members' lives. It includes everything
produced by a society, including all of the social rules.

Sociologists often study culture using the sociological imagination, which pioneer
sociologist C. Wright Mills described as an awareness of the relationship between
a person’s behavior and experience and the wider culture that shaped the
person’s choices and perceptions. It’s a way of seeing our own and other people’s
behavior in relationship to history and social structure (1959).

Elements of Culture

Values and Beliefs

The first, and perhaps most crucial, elements of culture we will discuss are its
values and beliefs. Values are a culture’s standard for discerning what is good and
just in society. Values are deeply embedded and critical for transmitting and
teaching a culture’s beliefs. Beliefs are the tenets or convictions that people hold
to be true. Individuals in a society have specific beliefs, but they also share
collective values. To illustrate the difference, Americans commonly believe in the
American Dream—that anyone who works hard enough will be successful and
wealthy. Underlying this belief is the American value that wealth is good and
important.

Values help shape a society by suggesting what is good and bad, beautiful and
ugly, sought or avoided. Values suggest how people should behave, but they
don’t necessarily reflect how people do behave.

Living up to a culture’s values can be difficult. It’s easy to value good health, but
it’s hard to quit smoking. Marital monogamy is valued, but many spouses engage
in infidelity. Cultural diversity and equal opportunities for all people are valued in
the United States, yet the country’s highest political offices have been dominated
by white men.

3
Values portray cultural ideals, the standards society would like to embrace and
live up to. But this differs from real culture, the way society actually is, based on
what people actually do.

One way societies strive to put values into action is through sanctions. People
sanction certain behaviors by giving their support, approval, or permission, or by
instilling formal actions of disapproval and nonsupport. Thus sanctions can be
positive (rewards) or negative (punishments). Both types of sanctions are forms
of social control, a way to encourage conformity to cultural norms. Utilizing social
control approaches pushes most people to conform to societal rules, regardless of
whether authority figures (such as law enforcement) are present.

When people observe the norms of society and uphold its values, they are often
rewarded. A boy who helps an elderly woman board a bus may receive a smile
and a “thank you.” A business manager who raises profit margins may receive a
quarterly bonus. Sometimes people conform to norms in anticipation or
expectation of positive sanctions: good grades, for instance, may mean praise
from parents and teachers.

When people go against a society’s values, they are often punished. A boy who
shoves an elderly woman aside to board the bus first may receive frowns or even
a scolding from other passengers. A business manager who drives away
customers will likely be fired. Breaking norms and rejecting values can lead to
cultural sanctions such as earning a negative label—lazy, no-good bum—or to
legal sanctions, such as traffic tickets, fines, or imprisonment.

Values are not static; they vary across time and between groups as people
evaluate, debate, and change collective societal beliefs. Values also vary from
culture to culture. For example, cultures differ in their values about what kinds of
physical closeness are appropriate in public. It’s rare to see two male friends or
coworkers holding hands in the United States where that behavior often
symbolizes romantic feelings. But in many nations, masculine physical intimacy is
considered natural in public. This difference in cultural values came to light when
people reacted to photos of former president George W. Bush holding hands with
the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia in 2005. A simple gesture, such as hand-holding,
carries great symbolic differences across cultures.

4
Norms
Norms define how to behave in accordance with what a society has defined as
good, right, and important, and most members of the society adhere to them.

Formal norms are established, written rules. They are behaviors worked out and
agreed upon in order to suit and serve the most people. Laws are formal norms,
but so are employee manuals, college entrance exam requirements, and “no
running” signs at swimming pools. Formal norms are the most specific and clearly
stated of the various types of norms, and they are the most strictly enforced. But
even formal norms are enforced to varying degrees and are reflected in cultural
values.

There are plenty of formal norms, but the list of informal norms—casual
behaviors that are generally and widely conformed to—is longer. People learn
informal norms by observation, imitation, and general socialization. Some
informal norms are taught directly—“Kiss your Aunt Edna” or “Use your napkin”—
while others are learned by observation, including observations of the
consequences when someone else violates a norm.

Although informal norms define personal interactions, they extend into other
systems as well. In the United States, there are informal norms regarding
behavior at fast food restaurants. Customers line up to order their food and leave
when they are done. They don’t sit down at a table with strangers, sing loudly as
they prepare their condiments, or nap in a booth. Most people don’t commit even
benign breaches of informal norms. Informal norms dictate appropriate behaviors
without the need of written rules.

Breaching Experiments: Sociologist Harold Garfinkel (1917–2011) studied

people’s customs in order to find out how societal rules and norms not only
influenced behavior but also shaped social order. He believed that members of
society together create a social order (Weber 2011). His resulting book, Studies in
Ethnomethodology, published in 1967, discusses people’s assumptions about the
social makeup of their communities.

One of Garfinkel's research methods was known as a “breaching experiment,” in

which the researcher behaves in a socially awkward manner in order to test the
sociological concepts of social norms and conformity. The participants are not

5
aware an experiment is in progress. If the breach is successful, however, these
“innocent bystanders” will respond in some way.

For example, if the experimenter is, say, a man in a business suit, and he skips
down the sidewalk or hops on one foot, the passersby are likely to stare at him
with surprised expressions on their faces. But the experimenter does not simply
“act weird” in public. Rather, the point is to deviate from a specific social norm in
a small way, to subtly break some form of social etiquette, and see what happens.

To conduct his ethnomethodology, Garfinkel deliberately imposed strange

behaviors on unknowing people. Then he observed their responses. He suspected
that odd behaviors would shatter conventional expectations, but he wasn’t sure
how. For example, he set up a simple game of tic-tac-toe. One player was asked
beforehand to mark Xs and Os not in the boxes but on the lines dividing the
spaces instead. The other player, in the dark about the study, was flabbergasted
and did not know how to continue. The second player's reactions of outrage,
anger, puzzlement, or other emotions illustrated the existence of cultural norms
that constitute social life. These cultural norms play an important role. They let us
know how to behave around each other and how to feel comfortable in our
community.

There are many rules about speaking with strangers in public. It’s OK to tell a
woman you like her shoes. It’s not OK to ask if you can try them on. It’s OK to
stand in line behind someone at the ATM. It’s not OK to look over his shoulder as
he makes his transaction. It’s OK to sit beside someone on a crowded bus. It’s
weird to sit beside a stranger in a half-empty bus.

For some breaches, the researcher directly engages with innocent bystanders. An
experimenter might strike up a conversation in a public bathroom, where it’s
common to respect each other’s privacy so fiercely as to ignore other people’s
presence. In a grocery store, an experimenter might take a food item out of
another person’s grocery cart, saying, “That looks good! I think I’ll try it.” An
experimenter might sit down at a table with others in a fast food restaurant or
follow someone around a museum and study the same paintings. In those cases,
the bystanders are pressured to respond, and their discomfort illustrates how
much we depend on social norms. Breaching experiments uncover and explore
the many unwritten social rules we live by.

6
Symbols and Language
Humans, consciously and subconsciously, are always striving to make sense of
their surrounding world. Symbols—such as gestures, signs, objects, signals, and
words—help people understand that world. They provide clues to understanding
experiences by conveying recognizable meanings that are shared by societies.

The world is filled with symbols. Sports uniforms, company logos, and traffic signs
are symbols. In some cultures, a gold ring is a symbol of marriage. Some symbols
are highly functional; stop signs, for instance, provide useful instruction. As
physical objects, they belong to material culture, but because they function as
symbols, they also convey nonmaterial cultural meanings - values in particular.

Symbols often get noticed when they are out of context. Used unconventionally,
they convey strong messages. A stop sign on the door of a corporation makes a
political statement, as does a camouflage military jacket worn in an antiwar
protest. Together, the semaphore signals for “N” and “D” represent nuclear
disarmament—and form the well-known peace sign (Westcott 2008). Today,
some college students have taken to wearing pajamas and bedroom slippers to
class, clothing that was formerly associated only with privacy and bedtime.
Though students might deny it, the outfit defies traditional cultural norms and
makes a statement.

Even the destruction of symbols is symbolic. Effigies representing public figures

are burned to demonstrate anger at certain leaders. In 1989, crowds tore down
the Berlin Wall, a decades-old symbol of the division between East and West
Germany, communism, and capitalism.

While different cultures have varying systems of symbols, one symbol is common
to all: language. Language is a symbolic system through which people
communicate and through which culture is transmitted. Some languages contain
a system of symbols used for written communication, while others rely on only
spoken communication and nonverbal actions. Societies often share a single
language, and many languages contain the same basic elements.

An alphabet is a written system made of symbolic shapes that refer to spoken

sound. Taken together, these symbols convey specific meanings. The English

7
alphabet uses a combination of twenty-six letters to create words; these twenty-
six letters make up over 600,000 recognized English words (OED Online 2011).

Rules for speaking and writing vary even within cultures, most notably by region.
Do you refer to a can of carbonated liquid as “soda,” pop,” or “Coke”? Is a
household entertainment room a “family room,” “rec room,” or “den”? When
leaving a restaurant, do you ask your server for a “check,” the “ticket,” or your
“bill”?

Language is constantly evolving as societies create new ideas. In this age of

technology, people have adapted almost instantly to new nouns such as “e-mail”
and “Internet,” and verbs such as “downloading,” “texting,” and “blogging.”
Twenty years ago, the general public would have considered these nonsense
words.

Even while it constantly evolves, language continues to shape our reality. This
insight was established in the 1920s by two linguists, Edward Sapir and Benjamin
Whorf. They believed that reality is culturally determined, and that any
interpretation of reality is based on a society’s language. To prove this point, the
sociologists argued that every language has words or expressions specific to that
language. In the United States, for example, the number thirteen is associated
with bad luck. In Japan, however, the number four is considered unlucky, since it
is pronounced similarly to the Japanese word for “death.”

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is based on the idea that people experience their
world through their language, and that they therefore understand their world
through the culture embedded in their language. The hypothesis, which has also
been called linguistic relativity, states that language shapes thought (Swoyer
2003). Studies have shown, for instance, that unless people have access to the
word “ambivalent,” they don’t recognize an experience of uncertainty from
having conflicting positive and negative feelings about one issue. Essentially, the
hypothesis argues, if a person can’t describe the experience, the person is not
having the experience.

In addition to using language, people communicate without words. Nonverbal

communication is symbolic, and, as in the case of language, much of it is learned
through one’s culture. Some gestures are nearly universal: smiles often represent

8
joy, and crying often represents sadness. Other nonverbal symbols vary across
cultural contexts in their meaning. A thumbs-up, for example, indicates positive
reinforcement in the United States, whereas in Russia and Australia, it is an
offensive curse (Passero 2002). Other gestures vary in meaning depending on the
situation and the person. A wave of the hand can mean many things, depending
on how it’s done and for whom. It may mean “hello,” “goodbye,” “no thank you,”
or “I’m royalty.” Winks convey a variety of messages, including “We have a
secret,” “I’m only kidding,” or “I’m attracted to you.”

From a distance, a person can understand the emotional gist of two people in
conversation just by watching their body language and facial expressions.
Furrowed brows and folded arms indicate a serious topic, possibly an argument.
Smiles, with heads lifted and arms open, suggest a lighthearted, friendly chat.

Subcultures and Countercultures

Subcultures
A subculture is just what it sounds like—a smaller cultural group within a larger
culture; people of a subculture are part of the larger culture but also share a
specific identity within a smaller group.

Thousands of subcultures exist within the United States. Ethnic and racial groups
share the language, food, and customs of their heritage. Other subcultures are
united by shared experiences. Biker culture revolves around a dedication to
motorcycles. Some subcultures are formed by members who possess traits or
preferences that differ from the majority of a society’s population. The body
modification community embraces aesthetic additions to the human body, such
as tattoos, piercings, and certain forms of plastic surgery. In the United States,
adolescents often form subcultures to develop a shared youth identity. Alcoholics
Anonymous offers support to those suffering from alcoholism. But even as
members of a subculture band together, they still identify with and participate in
the larger society.

Some sociologists study small groups of people who share an identity in one
aspect of their lives. Almost everyone belongs to a group of like-minded people

9
who share an interest or hobby. Scientologists, folk dancers, or members of
Mensa (an organization for people with exceptionally high IQs) express a specific
part of their identity through their affiliation with a group. Those groups are often
of great interest to sociologists.

In conducting studies about pockets of culture, most sociologists seek to discover

a universal appeal. Mihelich and Papineau stated, “Although Parrotheads are a
relative minority of the contemporary US population, an in-depth look at their
practice and conditions illuminate [sic] cultural practices and conditions many of
us experience and participate in” (2005).

Countercultures
Sociologists distinguish subcultures from countercultures, which are a type of
subculture that rejects some of the larger culture’s norms and values. In contrast
to subcultures, which operate relatively smoothly within the larger society,
countercultures might actively defy larger society by developing their own set of
rules and norms to live by, sometimes even creating communities that operate
outside of greater society.

Cults, a word derived from culture, are also considered counterculture group. The
group “Yearning for Zion” (YFZ) in Eldorado, Texas, existed outside the
mainstream and the limelight, until its leader was accused of statutory rape and
underage marriage. The sect’s formal norms clashed too severely to be tolerated
by U.S. law, and in 2008, authorities raided the compound and removed more
than two hundred women and children from the property.

Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology

Theories vary in scope depending on the scale of the issues that they are meant to
explain. Macro-level theories relate to large-scale issues and large groups of
people, while micro-level theories look at very specific relationships between
individuals or small groups.

Sociologists typically adhere to one of the following three theoretical

perspectives: structural functionalism, conflict theory, or symbolic interactionism.

10
 Sociological Level of Focus
Perspective Analysis
Structural Macro or The way each part of society functions together
Functionalism mid to contribute to the whole
Conflict Theory Macro The way inequalities contribute to social
differences and perpetuate differences in
power
Symbolic Micro One-to-one interactions and communications
Interactionism

Functionalism
Functionalism sees society as a structure with interrelated parts designed to meet
the biological and social needs of the individuals in that society. Functionalism
grew out of the writings of English philosopher and biologist, Herbert Spencer
(1820–1903), who saw similarities between society and the human body; he
argued that just as the various organs of the body work together to keep the body
functioning, the various parts of society work together to keep society functioning
(Spencer 1898). Functionalism thus makes “the organic analogy”. The parts of
society that Spencer referred to were the social institutions, or patterns of beliefs
and behaviors focused on meeting social needs, such as government, education,
family, health care, religion, and the economy.

Another noted structural functionalist, Robert Merton (1910–2003), pointed out

that social processes often have many functions. Manifest functions are the
consequences of a social process that are sought or anticipated, while latent
functions are the unsought consequences of a social process. A manifest function
of college education, for example, includes gaining knowledge, preparing for a
career, and finding a good job that utilizes that education. Latent functions of
your college years include meeting new people, participating in extracurricular
activities, or even finding a spouse or partner. Another latent function of
education is creating a hierarchy of employment based on the level of education
attained. Latent functions can be beneficial, neutral, or harmful. Social processes
that have undesirable consequences for the operation of society are called
dysfunctions. In education, examples of dysfunction include getting bad grades,
truancy, dropping out, not graduating, and not finding suitable employment.

11
Criticism
One criticism of the structural-functional theory is that it can’t adequately explain
social change. Also problematic is the somewhat circular nature of this theory;
repetitive behavior patterns are assumed to have a function, yet we profess to
know that they have a function only because they are repeated. Furthermore,
dysfunctions may continue, even though they don’t serve a function, which
seemingly contradicts the basic premise of the theory. Many sociologists now
believe that functionalism is no longer useful as a macro-level theory, but that it
does serve a useful purpose in some mid-level analyses.

The Conflict Perspective

The conflict perspective looks at society as a competition for limited resources. It
is a macro-level approach most identified with the writings of German
philosopher and sociologist Karl Marx (1818–1883), who saw society as being
made up of individuals in different social classes who must compete for social,
material, and political resources such as food and housing, employment,
education, and leisure time. Social institutions like government, education, and
religion reflect this competition in their inherent inequalities and help maintain
the unequal social structure. Some individuals and organizations are able to
obtain and keep more resources than others, and these “winners” use their
power and influence to maintain social institutions. Several theorists suggested
variations on this basic theme.

German sociologist Max Weber agreed with Marx but also believed that, in
addition to economic inequalities, inequalities of political power and social
structure cause conflict. Weber noted that different groups were affected
differently based on education, race, and gender, and that people’s reactions to
inequality were moderated by class differences and rates of social mobility, as
well as by perceptions about the legitimacy of those in power.

German sociologist Georg Simmel (1858–1918) believed that conflict can help
integrate and stabilize a society. He said that the intensity of the conflict varies
depending on the emotional involvement of the parties, the degree of solidarity
within the opposing groups, and the clarity and limited nature of the goals.
Simmel also showed that groups work to create internal solidarity, centralize

12
power, and reduce dissent. Resolving conflicts can reduce tension and hostility
and can pave the way for future agreements.

In the 1930s and 1940s, German philosophers, known as the Frankfurt School,
developed critical theory as an elaboration on Marxist principles. Critical theory is
an expansion of conflict theory and is broader than just sociology, including other
social sciences and philosophy. A critical theory attempts to address structural
issues causing inequality; it must explain what’s wrong in current social reality,
identify the people who can make changes, and provide practical goals for social
transformation (Horkeimer 1982).

More recently, inequality based on gender or race has been explained in a similar
manner and has identified institutionalized power structures that help to
maintain inequality between groups. Janet Saltzman Chafetz (1941–2006)
presented a model of feminist theory that attempts to explain the forces that
maintain gender inequality as well as a theory of how such a system can be
changed (Turner 2003). Similarly, critical race theory grew out of a critical analysis
of race and racism from a legal point of view. Critical race theory looks at
structural inequality based on white privilege and associated wealth, power, and
prestige.

Criticism
Just as structural functionalism was criticized for focusing too much on the
stability of societies, conflict theory has been criticized because it tends to focus
on conflict to the exclusion of recognizing stability. Many social structures are
extremely stable or have gradually progressed over time rather than changing
abruptly as conflict theory would suggest.

The Interactionist Perspective

This micro-level perspective, originally called “symbolic interactionism”, focuses
on the relationships among individuals within a society. Interactionists believe
communication—both verbal (through language) and nonverbal (through
gestures and use of symbols)—is the means by which people make sense of their
social worlds. Interactionists believe people actively shape their social world; they
are not simply being acted upon.

13
George Herbert Mead (1863–1931) is considered a founder of the interactionist
perspective. Mead’s student, Herbert Blumer, coined the term “symbolic
interactionism” and outlined these basic premises:
1. Humans interact with things based on meanings ascribed to those things
2. The ascribed meaning of things comes from our interactions with others
and society
3. The meanings of things are interpreted by a person when dealing with
things in specific circumstances (Blumer 1969).

Interactionists look for patterns of interaction between individuals. They often

observe one-on-one interactions. For example, while a conflict theorist studying a
political protest might focus on social class differences, an interactionist would be
more interested in how individuals in the protesting group interact, as well as the
signs and symbols protesters use to communicate their message.

The focus on the importance of symbols in building a society led sociologists like
Erving Goffman (1922–1982) to develop a specialized version of interactionism
called dramaturgy or the dramaturgical school. Goffman used theater as an
analogy for social interaction and recognized that social interactions often
showed patterns or cultural “scripts.” Because it can be unclear what part a
person may play in a given situation, he or she may have to improvise his or her
role as the situation unfolds (Goffman 1958).

Studies that use the interactionist perspective are likely to use qualitative
research methods, such as in-depth interviews or participant observation,
because they seek to understand the symbolic worlds in which research subjects
live.

Constructivism is an extension of symbolic interaction theory which proposes that

reality is what humans cognitively construct it to be. We develop social constructs
based on interactions with others, and those constructs that last over time are
those that have meanings which are widely agreed-upon or generally accepted by
most within the society.

This approach is often used to understand what’s defined as “deviant” within a

society. There is no absolute definition of deviance, and different societies have

14
constructed different meanings for deviance, as well as associating different
behaviors with deviance.

One situation that illustrates this is what you believe you’re to do if you find a
wallet in the street. In the United States, turning the wallet into local authorities
would be considered the appropriate action, and to keep the wallet would be
seen as deviant. In contrast, many Eastern societies would consider it much more
appropriate to keep the wallet and search for the owner yourself; turning it over
to someone else, even the authorities, would be considered deviant behavior.

Criticism
Research done from this perspective is often scrutinized because of the difficulty
of remaining objective. Others criticize the extremely narrow focus on symbolic
interaction. Proponents, of course, consider this one of its greatest strengths.

Sociological Theory Today

These three approaches are still the main foundation of modern sociological
theory, but some evolution has been seen. Structural-functionalism was a
dominant force after World War II and until the 1960s and 1970s. At that time,
sociologists began to feel that structural-functionalism did not sufficiently explain
the rapid social changes happening in the United States at that time.

Conflict theory then gained prominence, as there was renewed emphasis on

institutionalized social inequality. Critical theory, and the particular aspects of
feminist theory and critical race theory, focused on creating social change through
the application of sociological principles, and the field saw a renewed emphasis
on helping ordinary people understand sociology principles, in the form of public
sociology.

Postmodern social theory attempts to look at society through an entirely new

lens by rejecting previous macro-level attempts to explain social phenomena.
Generally considered as gaining acceptance in the late 1970s and early 1980s,
postmodern social theory is a micro-level approach that looks at small, local
groups and individual reality. Its growth in popularity coincides with the
constructivist aspects of symbolic interactionism.

15
Research Methods & Related Ethical Issues
When entering a particular social environment, a researcher must be careful.
There are times to remain anonymous and times to be overt. There are times to
conduct interviews and times to simply observe. Some participants need to be
thoroughly informed; others should not know they are being observed.

A researcher wouldn’t stroll into a crime-ridden neighborhood at midnight, calling

out, “Any gang members around?” And if a researcher walked into a coffee shop
and told the employees they would be observed as part of a study on work
efficiency, the self-conscious, intimidated baristas might not behave naturally.
This is called the Hawthorne effect—where people change their behavior because
they know they are being watched as part of a study. The Hawthorne effect is
unavoidable in some research. In many cases, sociologists have to make the
purpose of the study known. Subjects must be aware that they are being
observed, and a certain amount of artificiality may result (Sonnenfeld 1985).

In planning studies' designs, sociologists generally choose from four widely used
methods of social investigation: survey, field research, experiment, and secondary
data analysis, or use of existing sources. Every research method has advantages
and disadvantages. The nature of the phenomenon you choose to study will
influence your decision about which research method(s) to use.

Surveys
A survey collects data from subjects who respond to a series of questions about
behaviors and opinions, often in the form of a questionnaire. The survey is one of
the most widely used scientific research methods. The standard survey format
allows individuals a level of anonymity in which they can express personal ideas.

16
Questionnaires are a common research method; the U.S. Census is a well-known
example. (Photo courtesy of Kathryn Decker/flickr)

Not all surveys are considered sociological research, however, and many surveys
people commonly encounter focus on identifying marketing needs and strategies
rather than testing a hypothesis or contributing to social science knowledge. A
good contrast to these are the Nielsen Ratings, which determine the popularity of
television programming through scientific market research.

Surveys are a great method for discovering how people feel and think—or at least
how they say they feel and think. Surveys can track preferences for presidential
candidates or reported individual behaviors (such as sleeping, driving, or texting
habits) or factual information such as employment status, income, and education
levels.

Most researchers choose to survey a small sector of the population, or a sample:

that is, a manageable number of subjects who represent a larger population. The
success of a study depends on how well a population is represented by the
sample. In a random sample, every person in a population has the same chance of
being chosen for the study. According to the laws of probability, random samples
represent the population as a whole.

The researcher presents the subjects with an instrument, which is a means of

gathering the information. A common instrument is a questionnaire, in which
subjects answer a series of questions. For some topics, the researcher might ask

17
yes-or-no or multiple-choice questions, allowing subjects to choose possible
responses to each question. This kind of quantitative data—research collected in
numerical form that can be counted—are easy to tabulate. Just count up the
number of “yes” and “no” responses or correct answers, and chart them into
percentages.

Some topics that reflect internal thought are impossible to observe directly and
are difficult to discuss honestly in a public forum. People are more likely to share
honest answers if they can respond to questions anonymously. This type of
information is qualitative data—results that are subjective and often based on
what is seen in a natural setting.

An interview is a one-on-one conversation between the researcher and the

subject, and it is a way of conducting surveys on a topic. Interviews are similar to
the short-answer questions on surveys in that the researcher asks subjects a
series of questions. However, participants are free to respond as they wish,
without being limited by predetermined choices.

Field Research
Field research refers to gathering primary data from a natural environment
without doing a lab experiment or a survey. It is a research method suited to an
interpretive framework rather than to the scientific method. In field work, the
sociologists, rather than the subjects, are the ones out of their element. The
researcher interacts with or observes a person or people and gathers data along
the way. The key point in field research is that it takes place in the subject’s
natural environment, whether it’s a coffee shop or tribal village, a homeless
shelter or the DMV, a hospital, airport, mall, or beach resort.

While field research often begins in a specific setting, the study’s purpose is to
observe specific behaviors in that setting. Field work is optimal for observing how
people behave. It is less useful, however, for understanding why they behave that
way. You can't really narrow down cause and effect when there are so many
variables floating around in a natural environment.

Much of the data gathered in field research are based not on cause and effect but
on correlation. And while field research looks for correlation, its small sample size
does not allow for establishing a causal relationship between two variables.

18
Here, we will look at three types of field research: participant observation,
ethnography, and the case study.

Participant Observation
In 2000, a comic writer named Rodney Rothman wanted an insider’s view of
white-collar work. He slipped into the sterile, high-rise offices of a New York “dot
com” agency. Every day for two weeks, he pretended to work there. His main
purpose was simply to see whether anyone would notice him or challenge his
presence. No one did. The receptionist greeted him. The employees smiled and
said good morning. Rothman was accepted as part of the team. He even went so
far as to claim a desk, inform the receptionist of his whereabouts, and attend a
meeting. He published an article about his experience in The New Yorker called
“My Fake Job” (2000). Later, he was discredited for allegedly fabricating some
details of the story and The New Yorker issued an apology. However, Rothman’s
entertaining article still offered fascinating descriptions of the inside workings of a
“dot com” company and exemplified the lengths to which a sociologist will go to
uncover material.

Rothman had conducted a form of study called participant observation, in which

researchers join people and participate in a group’s routine activities for the
purpose of observing them within that context. This method lets researchers
experience a specific aspect of social life.

Researchers temporarily put themselves into roles and record their observations.
A researcher might work as a waitress in a diner, live as a homeless person for
several weeks, or ride along with police officers as they patrol their regular beat.
Often, these researchers try to blend in seamlessly with the population they
study, and they may not disclose their true identity or purpose if they feel it
would compromise the results of their research.

Participant observation is a useful method if the researcher wants to explore a

certain environment from the inside. In such a setting, the researcher will be
alert and open minded to whatever happens, recording all observations
accurately.

19
Some sociologists prefer not to alert the people they are studying to their
presence. The main advantage of covert participant observation is that it allows
the researcher access to authentic, natural behaviors of a group’s members. The
challenge, however, is gaining access to a setting without disrupting the pattern
of others’ behavior.

Once inside a group, some researchers spend months or even years pretending to
be one of the people they are observing. However, as observers, they cannot get
too involved. They must keep their purpose in mind and apply the sociological
perspective. That way, they illuminate social patterns that are often
unrecognized. Because information gathered during participant observation is
mostly qualitative, rather than quantitative, the end results are often descriptive
or interpretive.

Ethnography
Ethnography is the extended observation of the social perspective and cultural
values of an entire social setting. Ethnographies involve objective observation of
an entire community.

The heart of an ethnographic study focuses on how subjects view their own social
standing and how they understand themselves in relation to a community. An
ethnographic study might observe, for example, a small U.S. fishing town, an Inuit
community, a village in Thailand, a Buddhist monastery, a private boarding
school, or an amusement park. These places all have borders. People live, work,
study, or vacation within those borders. People are there for a certain reason and
therefore behave in certain ways and respect certain cultural norms. An
ethnographer would commit to spending a determined amount of time studying
every aspect of the chosen place, taking in as much as possible.

A sociologist studying a tribe in the Amazon might watch the way villagers go
about their daily lives and then write a paper about it. To observe a spiritual
retreat center, an ethnographer might sign up for a retreat and attend as a guest
for an extended stay, observe and record data, and collate the material into
results.

20
Institutional Ethnography
Institutional ethnography is an extension of basic ethnographic research
principles that focuses intentionally on everyday concrete social relationships.
Developed by Canadian sociologist Dorothy E. Smith, institutional ethnography is
often considered a feminist-inspired approach to social analysis and primarily
considers women’s experiences within male-dominated societies and power
structures.

Case Study
A case study is an in-depth analysis of a single event, situation, or individual. To
conduct a case study, a researcher examines existing sources like documents and
archival records, conducts interviews, engages in direct observation and even
participant observation, if possible.

Case studies are useful when the single case is unique. In these instances, a single
case study can add tremendous knowledge to a certain discipline. For example, a
feral child, also called “wild child,” is one who grows up isolated from human
beings. Feral children grow up without social contact and language, which are
elements crucial to a “civilized” child’s development. These children mimic the
behaviors and movements of animals, and often invent their own language. There
are only about one hundred cases of “feral children” in the world.

Experiments
There are two main types of experiments: lab-based experiments and natural or
field experiments. As a research method, either type of sociological experiment is
useful for testing if-then statements: if a particular thing happens, then another
particular thing will result. To set up a lab-based experiment, sociologists create
artificial situations that allow them to manipulate variables.

Classically, the sociologist selects a set of people with similar characteristics, such
as age, class, race, or education. Those people are divided into two groups. One is
the experimental group and the other is the control group. The experimental
group is exposed to the independent variable(s) and the control group is not.

21
A real-life example will help illustrate the experiment process. In 1971, Frances
Heussenstamm, a sociology professor at California State University at Los Angeles,
had a theory about police prejudice. To test her theory, she conducted an
experiment. She chose fifteen students from three ethnic backgrounds: black,
white, and Hispanic. She chose students who routinely drove to and from campus
along Los Angeles freeway routes, and who’d had perfect driving records for
longer than a year. Those were her independent variables—students, good
driving records, same commute route.

Next, she placed a Black Panther bumper sticker on each car. That sticker, a
representation of a social value, was the independent variable. In the 1970s, the
Black Panthers were a revolutionary group actively fighting racism.
Heussenstamm asked the students to follow their normal driving patterns. She
wanted to see whether seeming support of the Black Panthers would change how
these good drivers were treated by the police patrolling the highways. The
dependent variable would be the number of traffic stops/citations.

The first arrest, for an incorrect lane change, was made two hours after the
experiment began. One participant was pulled over three times in three days. He
quit the study. After seventeen days, the fifteen drivers had collected a total of
thirty-three traffic citations. The experiment was halted. The funding to pay traffic
fines had run out, and so had the enthusiasm of the participants (Heussenstamm
1971).

Secondary Data Analysis

Secondary data are the already-completed work of other researchers. Sociologists
might study works written by historians, economists, teachers, or early
sociologists by reviewing periodicals, newspapers, or magazines from any period
in history.

Using available information not only saves time and money but can also add
depth to a study. Sociologists often interpret findings in a new way, a way that
was not part of an author’s original purpose or intention.

22
One of the advantages of secondary data is that it is nonreactive research (or
unobtrusive research), meaning that it does not include direct contact with
subjects and will not alter or influence people’s behaviors.

Using available data does have its challenges. Public records are not always easy
to access. A researcher will need to do some legwork to track them down and
gain access to records. To guide the search through a vast library of materials and
avoid wasting time reading unrelated sources, sociologists employ content
analysis, applying a systematic approach to record and value information gleaned
from secondary data as they relate to the study at hand.

23