Sociological research methods vary dramatically. From the scientific methods within positivism and the subjective ones within anti-positivism. Then there is the realist approach who take positives from both. I’m now going to explain their methodology and how they differ.
Positivists study the social world in the same way as the natural sciences. They see themselves creating a science of society. Believing in social laws which are external objective forces that govern human behaviour for example the family, education and religion. Looking at these institutions in society as marco sociology. Studying the cause and effect of the relationships between them. Analysing the social facts as they are easily measured. Haralambos and Holborn (2000 p17) “in order to explain the reaction of particular chemical to heat, it is necessary to provide exact measurements of temperature, weight and so on. With the aid of such measurements it will be possible to observe accurately the behaviour of matter and produce a statement of cause and effect. This statement might read AxB=C where A is quantity of matter, B a degree of heat and C a volume of gas. Once it has been shown that the matter in question always reacts in the same way under fixed conditions, a theory can be devised to explain its behaviour. From the positivist viewpoint such methods and assumptions are applicable to human behaviour.” Positivists favour Quantitative data as it is easier to turn into numbers and statistics. Looking for correlations between the variables to uncover causal relationships. To make these connections they use official statistics, questionnaires with close-ended questions and structured interviews as they see them as reliable data. Trying to detach themselves from the participants of the research. For example Haralambos and Holborn (2000 p17) “if the majority of adult’s members of society enter into marriage and produce children, these facts can be observed and quantified. They therefore from...