Types of Methodology
Chapter Seventy-Six
Syllabus topic 3.3, "Types of methodology – comparative, descriptive, diagnostic, exploratory, experimental."
Pages 337 to 341 of 451
In one line
The methodology is the kind of question a study is asking; the method is how it collects its material; the tool is the instrument it collects it with.
In the wording a student can write in an exam: the type of methodology is the design of a study, determined by the kind of question it seeks to answer. Exploratory or formulative studies investigate a subject about which little is known, in order to formulate the problem. Descriptive studies establish accurately what is the case. Diagnostic studies establish why a condition exists and what is associated with it. Comparative studies examine two or more cases in order to establish what varies with what. Experimental studies manipulate a factor deliberately in order to test a causal hypothesis.
The three words MU uses, kept apart
| Term | What it answers | MU's topic | Examples |
|---|---|---|---|
| Methodology or research design | What kind of question is this? | 3.3 | Exploratory, descriptive, diagnostic, comparative, experimental |
| Method | How is the material to be gathered? | 3.4 | Documentary, empirical, survey |
| Tool or technique | With what instrument? | 3.5 | Observation, interview, questionnaire, schedule, case study, sampling |
One study uses all three. A descriptive study of legal aid (methodology) may use the survey method, employing a schedule administered by interviewers to a sample (tools).
1. Exploratory or formulative
When it is used. Where the subject is new or little studied, so that the researcher does not yet know enough to frame a precise question. Its object is to formulate the problem, not to answer it.
How it proceeds. A review of existing literature and records; discussion with people who have experience of the field, sometimes called an experience survey; and the examination of a few illuminating instances.
Its characteristics: flexible, unstructured, small in scale, and productive of hypotheses rather than conclusions.
Indian example. Before any survey of the working conditions of platform-based delivery workers could be designed, somebody had to establish how the work is actually organised, who the parties to it are and what the workers themselves regard as their problems. That preliminary work is exploratory.
Its limitation: it proves nothing and cannot be generalised, and treating its impressions as findings is the commonest abuse of it.
2. Descriptive
When it is used. Where the question is what is the case: how many, how often, of what kind, among whom, where.
How it proceeds. With a precisely defined population, a carefully drawn sample, standardised instruments and, usually, quantitative analysis. Precision is its whole virtue, so the design must be rigid where the exploratory design is flexible.
Its characteristics: structured, planned in advance, larger in scale, and aimed at accuracy rather than explanation.
Indian example. The Census; the National Family Health Survey; the National Sample Survey; and, in a socio-legal setting, a study establishing the number of undertrial prisoners in a state's prisons and their distribution by offence and by duration of detention.
Types of Methodology
Its limitation: it establishes what, and not why. A description showing that one district's figures differ from another's does not explain the difference.
3. Diagnostic
When it is used. Where the question is why a condition exists, and what is associated with it. It is the natural sequel to a descriptive study.
How it proceeds. By identifying the characteristics associated with the condition, comparing those who have it with those who do not, and testing hypotheses about the association.
Its characteristics: it seeks relationships and causes rather than counts; and it requires a comparison group, without which no association can be established.
Indian example. Having described the number of undertrials, a diagnostic study asks why they are in that position: whether the cause is the inability to furnish bail, the absence of legal representation, delay in investigation, or the number of adjournments, and it does so by comparing those released with those detained.
Its limitation, and it is the important one: association is not causation. Two things may vary together because one causes the other, because a third causes both, or by chance. Establishing which requires either an experiment or careful reasoning about the alternatives.
4. Comparative
When it is used. Where the question is what varies with what, and where an experiment is impossible, which in sociology is almost always.
Why it matters more here than elsewhere. Sociology cannot ordinarily conduct experiments, as [The Nature and Scope of Sociology] records. Comparison is the discipline's substitute for the experiment, and it is why Durkheim called the comparative method sociology's method of proof.
How it proceeds. By selecting cases that resemble one another in most respects and differ in the one under study, and observing whether the outcome differs with it. Cases may be societies, regions, states, communities, periods or institutions.
Indian example. Comparing two states with similar income levels but very different literacy or health outcomes in order to identify what accounts for the difference; or comparing the operation of the same central statute in two states with different administrative capacity.
Durkheim's own study of suicide, in [Durkheim: The Theory of Suicide], is the classic demonstration: he compared rates across countries, religions, marital statuses and periods, and inferred from the covariation that the cause lay in social integration.
Its limitations: cases never differ in only one respect, so alternative explanations are hard to exclude; and units are not always genuinely comparable, since the same word may mean different things in two societies.
Types of Methodology
5. Experimental
When it is used. Where a factor can be deliberately manipulated and its effect observed. It is the strongest design for establishing causation and the least available in sociology.
How it proceeds. An experimental group receives the treatment and a control group does not; the two are made equivalent, ideally by random allocation; the outcome is measured in both; and the difference is attributed to the treatment.
Its forms. The laboratory experiment, which is precise and artificial; the field experiment, conducted in a real setting; and the natural experiment, in which a change occurs without the researcher's intervention and is studied as if it had been arranged, which in practice is how most social experimentation happens.
Indian example. A natural experiment: a scheme introduced in some districts before others allows the districts to be compared as treatment and control. A field experiment: a legal awareness intervention delivered in randomly selected villages and not in others, with knowledge and claims measured in both.
Its limitations in social research, which must be stated because they are the reason the design is rare here: most social conditions cannot be manipulated; those that can are often the trivial ones; ethics forbid many experiments that would be informative, since one cannot withhold a benefit from a group in order to observe the consequences; the laboratory setting is artificial; and the knowledge of being studied changes behaviour, which is the observer effect noted in [Observation].
The five compared
| Methodology | Question | Design | Typical use |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exploratory | What is going on here? | Flexible, unstructured, small | A new or unstudied field |
| Descriptive | What is the case, and how much? | Rigid, structured, large, sampled | Census, survey, situation studies |
| Diagnostic | Why is it so, and what goes with it? | Structured, with a comparison group | Causes of a social problem |
| Comparative | What varies with what? | Selected cases alike but for one factor | Cross-state and cross-society studies |
| Experimental | Does this factor produce that effect? | Experimental and control groups | Evaluating an intervention |
They form a sequence: exploration formulates the problem, description establishes the facts, diagnosis proposes explanations, comparison tests them where an experiment is impossible, and experiment tests them where it is possible.
A worked example
The problem: children in a district are dropping out of school after the eighth standard.
Exploratory: talk to teachers, parents and children, read the school records, and discover what people themselves say the reasons are. Output: a set of hypotheses, none proved.
Descriptive: measure it. How many drop out, in which schools, at what age, boys or girls, from which communities and which economic groups. Output: the facts.
Diagnostic: compare those who dropped out with those who did not, on distance to the secondary school, household income, parents' education, availability of transport, and whether the child works. Output: the associated factors.
Types of Methodology
Comparative: compare this district with a neighbouring one that has similar income and a much lower drop-out rate, and identify what differs. Output: candidate causes tested against a real contrast.
Experimental: where the district has provided free transport in some villages and not others, compare them. Output: an estimate of what that factor alone does.
The point of running one problem through all five is that the methodology is chosen by the question, not by preference, and a study that uses the wrong design cannot be rescued by the quality of its fieldwork.
Quick revision
- Methodology is the design and the kind of question; method is how material is gathered; tool is the instrument. MU's topics 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 respectively.
- Exploratory: little is known; flexible and unstructured; formulates the problem and proves nothing.
- Descriptive: establishes what is the case; rigid, sampled, precise; says what, not why.
- Diagnostic: why, and what is associated with it; needs a comparison group. Association is not causation.
- Comparative: cases alike but for one factor. Sociology's substitute for the experiment; Durkheim's study of suicide is the demonstration.
- Experimental: experimental and control groups, ideally randomised; forms are laboratory, field and natural. Rare in sociology because most conditions cannot be manipulated and ethics forbid withholding benefits.
- They form a sequence: explore, describe, diagnose, compare, experiment.
Test yourself
1. Distinguish methodology, method and tool with an example. The methodology is the study's design, determined by the kind of question asked; the method is the way material is gathered; the tool is the instrument used to gather it. A descriptive study of access to legal aid is the methodology; the survey is the method; and the schedule administered to a drawn sample by interviewers is the tool. MU's topics 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 correspond to the three.
2. What is an exploratory study for, and what is its limitation? It is used where a field is new or little studied and the researcher does not yet know enough to frame a precise question; its object is to formulate the problem and to generate hypotheses, and it proceeds flexibly through literature, discussion with experienced persons and the examination of a few instances. Its limitation is that it proves nothing and cannot be generalised, so treating its impressions as findings is the commonest abuse of it.
3. Distinguish descriptive from diagnostic studies. A descriptive study establishes what is the case, how many, how often, of what kind and among whom, using a defined population, a drawn sample and standardised instruments; precision is its virtue and it does not explain. A diagnostic study asks why the condition exists and what is associated with it, comparing those who have it with those who do not in order to test hypotheses about the association. Description answers what; diagnosis attempts why.
Types of Methodology
4. Why is the comparative methodology so important in sociology? Because controlled experiment is generally impossible: social conditions usually cannot be manipulated, and ethics forbid many manipulations that would be informative. Comparison is therefore the discipline's substitute for the experiment, proceeding by selecting cases alike in most respects and differing in the factor under study and observing whether the outcome differs. Durkheim called it sociology's method of proof and demonstrated it in his study of suicide.
5. Why are experiments rare in social research? Because most social conditions cannot be manipulated by a researcher; those that can are often the least significant; ethics forbid many informative designs, since a benefit cannot be withheld from one group in order to observe the consequences; laboratory conditions are artificial and the findings may not hold outside them; and people who know they are being studied alter their behaviour. Natural experiments, where a change occurs independently and is studied as though arranged, are the usual substitute.
The rest of this subject
These notes are cut from the University's printed syllabus. Open the syllabus itself, or the past papers, for the same subject.