Research issues — common mistakes

In exam answers, always evaluate a method's ethical strengths and weaknesses. For example, when discussing covert participant observation, explicitly state the ethical problem of deception and lack of informed consent, but also explain why a researcher might justify it (e.g., to access a deviant group that would otherwise be inaccessible).

Not necessarily. This is a common misconception. A study can be highly reliable but not valid. For example, a poorly worded question on a survey might be consistently misinterpreted by all participants. The results would be reliable (consistent) but invalid (not measuring the intended concept). Think of a faulty weighing scale that consistently shows you are 5kg lighter than you are; it's reliable in its error, but not valid.

While covert research raises serious ethical concerns, particularly the lack of informed consent, some sociologists argue it can be justified in specific situations. For example, when studying powerful or deviant groups who would not consent to being observed, or where overt observation would cause the 'Hawthorne Effect' and invalidate the findings. The British Sociological Association (BSA) suggests it should only be used as a last resort where no other method would work.

This is a central debate. While positivists argue for objectivity (value freedom), many sociologists, including interpretivists and feminists, argue it's impossible and perhaps undesirable. They suggest that acknowledging one's own values and position ('reflexivity') can lead to more honest and insightful research. For 'committed sociologists', the goal is not neutrality but to use research to expose inequality and advocate for social change. Therefore, good research is not necessarily 'objective' but is always rigorous and systematic.