1 / 20

The positive discourse

The negative discourse - Inherent controversy between quali and quanti – No compromise possible (any combination provides the mix of the downside of both methods). The positive discourse Re-invention of alternative methodological solutions might open new paths –

elewa
Download Presentation

The positive discourse

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The negative discourse - Inherent controversy between quali and quanti – No compromise possible (any combination provides the mix of the downside of both methods) The positive discourse Re-invention of alternative methodological solutions might open new paths – no panacea but better than the dead-end street

  2. The three evaluation criteria: reliability, validity and generalisability Reliability: the consistency of the measuring instruments and/or anytime repeated – same result Validity: consistency between the data and ”reality” , between the measuring instrument and the conclusion and the minimum of unobserved factors Generalisability: the extent to which research findings can be applied to settings other than that in which they were originally tested If all three perfect - predictibility is at the max - the dream of social sciences but it is impossible

  3. The inherent difference between quali and quanti The optimum The qualitative bias Validity Validity Reliability Generalisability Reliability Generalisability The quantitative bias Validity Reliability Generalisability

  4. The idealtypes of measurement techniques

  5. The illustration: the prevalence of discrimination to predict discriminative behavior • Not the attitudes towards discrimination (attitude survey) • Not the consequences of discrimination (wage data) • Not the media representation of discrimination (content analysis) • Not the unintended-unconscious (Implicit Association Test) But the behavior of average actors (employer, fellow employee, customer, landlord, teacher, policeman, clerk, salesman, etc.) in everyday circumstaces

  6. Official statistics I (juridicial, police data) - (V -, R +, G -) due to latency – the iceberg effect

  7. Official statistics II (Census) – (V -, R +, G ?) but G is - time series racial categorisation)) 1790 Free Whites, Other Free Persons, and Slaves 1900 White, Black, Chinese, Japanese, and Indian 1960 White, Negro, American Indian, Japanese, Chinese, Filipino, Hawaiian, Part Hawaiian, Aleut, Eskimo 2000 White; Black, African American, or Negro; American Indian or Alaska Native; Asian Indian; Chinese; Filipino; Other Asian; Japanese; Korean; Vietnamese; Hawaiian; Guamanian or Chamorro; Samoan; Other Pacific Islander; Some other race (individuals who consider themselves multiracial can choose two or more races)

  8. Surveys In general: V -, R +, G ? Perception --- V - - -, R +, G ? Experience --- V -, R +, G ? Victimisation --- V -, R +, G - Situation test --- V ?, R +, G ?

  9. Perception (Eurobarometer 2008) (V - - -, R +, G ?)

  10. Experience (Eurobarometer 2008) (V -, R +, G ?)

  11. Victim Survey (V -, R +, G -) EU-MIDIS - selected immigrants, ethnic minorities and national minorities, • mostly in urban areas, • - or in areas with high concentrations of minority populations Selection criteria: … chosen to reflect the the degree to which certain groups are considered to be vulnerable to victimisation and discrimination. • Sampling criteria: • - 16 years and older • - Self-identify themselves as belonging to one of the immigrant, ethnic minority or national minority groups, • - Are resident and have been resident for at least one year, • Have sufficient command of the national language • Random route, focused enumeration or snowball sampling

  12. Situation test – ethnicity based selection for secreterial job – (V ?, R +, G ?) 2 1 3 4 5 6

  13. Qualitative methods (V +, R -, G -) • Anthropology, sociography, investigative journalism, in-depth interview, focus groups, deliberative poll Günter Wallraff 1960ies and 2000ies „

  14. Laboratory and quasi-laboratory experiments (V +, R +, G -) A general case: Ethnic discrimination in Israel Playing „trust”, „dictator”, and „ultimatum” games (Fershtman & Gneezy, 2001) A special case: Discrimination testing for juridical purposes The methodology to be used in situation testing should be rigorously specified in order to neutralise variables that could falsify the analysis or discredit the operation (Rorive 2009).

  15. Natural experiment (V +, R -, G -) Ethnicity on the New York Stock Exchange during WW I (Moser, 2008) Ethnicity and gender in the „Weakest Link” TV Show (Levitt, 2004) Orchestrating Impartiality (Goldin-Rouse,2000)

  16. Controlled (or field) experimentDiscrimination testing (V ?, R ?, G ?) selected situations in natural settings Controlled for certain elements of the process and contextual factors • testers are assigned to treatment and controls • and are randomly assigned to pairs (e.g. one of each race) • and matched on equivalent characteristics (e.g. socioeconomic status

  17. Non-participant observation (V +, R +, G?) Ethnic discrimination in the Moscow metro (Ethnic… 2006) Observe and recorde data concerning the police stops: Two observers focused on benchmarking, one determined the ethnicity, the other one the gender and age of exiting passengers. A third observer recorded data for individuals being stopped by the police. Reliable data selection: exits of 15 Moscow Metro stations with the highest ridership and stable police presence Training of the observers: individuals classified into three ethnic categories: „Slavs”, „Minorities” (from the Caucasus and Central Asia), „Other” (African, East European, etc.) Benchmarking the „general population”: ethnic composition of the population at these locations ( min. 1000 observations)

  18. Tentative overview by the three evaluation criteria of the idealtypes of measurement techniques

  19. To sum up We know everything about nothing (R- and G-) qualitative methods, laboratory and quasi laboratory experiment, natural experiment We might know something about something (no -) discrimination testing, non-participant observation We know nothing about everything (V-) discrimination statistics, survey

  20. Controlled experiment and non-participant observation as best options Controlled experiment and non-participant observation The qualitative bias Validity Validity After major efforts and still not as panacea (most processes and stiuations are unobservable and uncontrollable Generalisability Reliability Reliability Generalisability The quantitative bias Validity Reliability Generalisability

More Related