4274737
Descripción
Mapa Mental por Phoebe Fletcher, actualizado hace más de 1 año
|
|
Creado por Phoebe Fletcher
hace casi 9 años
|
|
P.E.R.V.E.R.T
- Practical
- How
much;
- Time
- Cost
- Access
- Travel
time/cost
- Time
- For example;
- Not practical to give
children/elderly a
questionaire
Nota:
- Because they cant read/see/understand the questions
- Attention span
of sample
Nota:
- Young children will have a small attention span, so a long formal interview probably is not the best option
- It can be too
dangerous to do
certain methods for
certain situations
Nota:
- e.g it may be to dangerous to interview a street gang
- Some people may
be defensive in
formal situations
Nota:
- so they may not give you the whole truth
- Not practical to give
children/elderly a
questionaire
- How
much;
- Ethics
- Whether it is
morally/socially
acceptable to do
- Do not harm your
subjects
- Consent
- The method used
may not give
informed consent
Nota:
- e.g a child can not give informed consent, they are not aware enough.
- The method used
may not give
informed consent
- Confidnetiality
- You must not make
it clear who the
subject is
Nota:
- anonymise your infomation
- Do not inform others
what the subject has
told you
- You must not make
it clear who the
subject is
- Consequences
- Question whether the
subject could get hurt
from you using one
method
Nota:
- you could hurt the person mentally, or lead them to getting physically hurt
- Is it too intrusive?
- Question whether the
subject could get hurt
from you using one
method
- Give people
a range to
hide in
- Is the subject
to sensitive?
- Whether it is
morally/socially
acceptable to do
- Reliability
- Can another researcher
do your experiment
getting the same results
- Structured
questionaires are a good
method for reliability
Nota:
- Exactly the same questions, with no changing and the same subject should lead to the same results
- Crime stats are
generally reliable
Nota:
- easy to compare you can find them in the public domain (no ethical issues)
- Can another researcher
do your experiment
getting the same results
- Validity
- Is it true?
- Are you likely to
get the truth?
- Are you likely to
get the truth?
- You are likely to get the
truth in participant
observation
Nota:
- More likely to get the truth in the subjects 'natural' setting than in a formal interview setting
- Is you go natural to find how
people normally act, how will your
presence affect the way people
act?
- Secondary data is not valid as
it is socially constructive
Nota:
- e.g in catholic countries families will cover up sucides as accidents, to save the deceased 'face'
- Is it true?
- Examples
- Always use an
example, to explain
or illustrate your
point.
- Always use an
example, to explain
or illustrate your
point.
- Representativeness
- Is this method likely to
produce results that
can be generalized?
- e.g Large-scale more
likely to be
representative, but
small-scale is more likely
to provide valuable
insights
- Is this method likely to
produce results that
can be generalized?
- Theoretical
- Is the method more
likely to produce
value-free objective
information?
- Is the suggested method
more associated with
positivists or
interpretivists?
- Is the method more
likely to produce
value-free objective
information?
¿Quieres crear tus propios Mapas Mentales gratis con GoConqr? Más información.