Sociology Now, Census Update

own teacher will do if you misbehave. (Don’t worry, it’s not
true: Most teachers oppose it.)
In other situations, the feelings of our research subjects
are exactly what we are trying to study, and we will need to
rely on inductive reasoning,which will help us to understand
a problem using our own human capacity to put ourselves in
the other person’s position. In this case, the research leads the
researcher to a conclusion about all or many members of a
class based on examination of only a few members of that
class. For example, if you want to understand whyteachers
support corporal punishment, you might interview a few of
them in depth, go observe their classrooms for a period of
time, or analyze a set of texts that attempt to explain it from
the inside (Figure 4.1).
Loosely, inductive reasoning is reasoning from the specific to the general. This is what
Max Weber called verstehen, a method that uses “intersubjective understanding.” By
this he meant that you use your own abilities to see the world from others’ point of view.
Sometimes sociologists want to check all emotions at the door of their research lab, lest
they contaminate their findings with human error. At other times, it is our uniquely
human capacity for empathic connection that is the source of our understanding.
Sociologists study an enormous range of issues. Virtually every area of human
behavior is studied, from the large-scale activities of governments, corporations, and
international organizations like the European Union or the United Nations, to the
most minute and intimate decision making about sexual practices or conversations
or self-presentation. As a result, the methods that we use to study sociological prob-
lems depend more on the kind of problem we want to study than whether one method
is better than any other. Each method provides different types of data, and each type
can be enormously useful and illuminate a different part of the problem.
Research methods are like the different ways we use glass to see objects. Some
of us will want a magnifying glass, to bring the object so close that we can see every
single little feature of the particular object. Others will prefer a prism, by which the
object is fragmented into hundreds of tiny parts. A telescope is useful if the object is
really far away but pretty useless if you need to see what’s happening next door. Bifo-
cals are best if you want to view both close and distant objects through the same lens.
Each of these ways of seeing is valuable. A specific method may be inappropriate
to adequately study a specific problem, but no research method should be dismissed
as inadequate or inappropriate in all situations. It depends on what you want to know.

The Qualitative/Quantitative Divide

Most often we think that the real divide among social science methods is between
quantitative and qualitative methods. Using quantitative methods, one uses power-
ful statistical tools to help understand patterns in which the behaviors, attitudes, or
traits under study can be translated into numerical values. Typically, quantitative
methods rely on deductive reasoning. So, for example, checking a box on a survey
that gives your sex as “male” or “female” might enable the researcher to examine
the relative percentages of men and women who subscribe to certain ideas, vote a for
a particular political party, or avoid certain behaviors.
Qualitative methodsoften rely on more inductive and inferential reasoning to
understand the texture of social life, the actual felt experience of social interaction.
Qualitative methods are often derided as less scientific, as quantitative researchers
often assume that their own methods eliminate bias and that therefore only quanti-
tative methods are scientific.

WHY SOCIOLOGICAL METHODS MATTER 107

Generalization

Theory

Observations

Hypothesis

INDUCTIVE REASONING DEDUCTIVE REASONING

FIGURE 4.1Deductive and Inductive

Reasoning