Dimensions of Research  研究领域

Three years after they graduated from college. Tim and Sharon met for lunch. Tim asked Sharon, "So, how is your new job as a researcher for Social Data, Inc.? What are you doing?" Sharon answered. "Right now I'm working on an applied research project on day care in which we're doing a crosssectional survey to get descriptive data for an evaluation study." Sharon's description of her research project on the topic of day care touches on four dimensions of social research. This chapter discusses those dimensions.
他们大学毕业三年后。蒂姆和莎伦相约共进午餐。蒂姆问莎伦："你在社会数据公司做研究员的新工作怎么样？你在做什么？"莎伦回答说"现在我正在做一个关于日托的应用研究项目，我们正在做一个横断面调查，为一项评估研究获取描述性数据。莎伦关于她的日托研究项目的描述涉及社会研究的四个方面。本章将讨论这些方面。

The picture of social research in Chapter 1 was a simplified one. Research comes in multiple shapes and sizes. Before a researcher begins a study, he or she must decide on a specific type of research. Good researchers understand the advantages and disadvantages of each type, although most end up specializing in one.
第 1 章中的社会研究只是一种简化的描述。研究有多种形式和规模。研究人员在开始研究之前，必须确定具体的研究类型。优秀的研究人员了解每种类型的优缺点，尽管大多数人最终都会专攻一种类型。

In this chapter, you will leam four dimensions of research (see Chart 2.1). The first is the distinction between applied and basic research, or the primary audience for and use of research. The next is the purpose of doing research, or the goal of a study. The next two dimensions are more specific. The third dimension is how time is incorporated into the study design, and the last is the specific data col- lection technique used. The dimensions simplify decision making about research and they overlap in that certain dimensions are often found together (e.g., the goal of a study and a data collection technique). Once you learm the dimensions, you will begin to see how particular research questions you might want to investigate tend to be most compatible with certain ways of designing a study and collecting data.
在本章中，您将了解到研究的四个方面（见图表 2.1）。首先是应用研究和基础研究的区别，或者说研究的主要对象和用途。其次是开展研究的目的，或研究的目标。接下来的两个维度更为具体。第三个维度是如何将时间纳入研究设计，最后一个维度是使用的具体数据收集技术。这些维度简化了研究决策，而且这些维度相互重叠，某些维度经常在一起出现（例如，研究目标和数据收集技术）。一旦掌握了这些维度，您就会发现，您可能想调查的特定研究问题往往与设计研究和收集数据的某些方法最为匹配。

One way to see the dimensions is as decision points for a researcher when moving from a broad topic to a focused research question to the design of a specific study. An understanding of the dimensions will prepare you to make such decisions. In addition, an awareness of the dimensions of research and how they fit together will make it easier for you to understand the research reports that you hear about or read in scholarly journals.
一种方法是将这些维度视为研究人员从广泛的主题到重点研究问题再到设计具体研究时的决策点。对这些维度的了解将为您做出此类决定做好准备。此外，了解研究的各个维度以及它们如何相互配合，将使您更容易理解您听到的或在学术期刊上读到的研究报告。

For over a century, social research has had two wings. Some researchers adopt a more detached, scientific, and academic orientation; others are more
一个多世纪以来，社会研究一直分为两翼。一些研究人员采取了更加超脱、科学和学术的取向；另一些研究人员则更倾向于
activist, pragmatic, and reform oriented. This is not a rigid separation. Researchers in the two wings cooperate and maintain friendly relations. Some move from one wing to another at different stages in their careers. The difference in orientation revolves around who consumes the findings and who uses them. In simple terms, some use research to advance general knowledge, whereas others use it to solve specific problems. Those who seek an understanding of the fundamental nature of social reality are engaged in basic research (also called academic research or pure research). Applied researchers, by contrast, primarily want to apply and tailor knowledge to address a specific practical issue. They want to answer a policy question or solve a pressing social problem.
积极、务实和改革导向。这并不是僵化的分离。两翼的研究人员相互合作，保持友好关系。有些人在其职业生涯的不同阶段从一翼转向另一翼。取向上的差异围绕着谁消费研究成果和谁使用研究成果。简单地说，一些人利用研究来增进一般知识，而另一些人则利用研究来解决具体问题。那些寻求了解社会现实基本性质的人从事的是基础研究（也称为学术研究或纯粹研究）。相比之下，应用研究人员主要希望应用和调整知识，以解决具体的实际问题。他们希望回答一个政策问题或解决一个紧迫的社会问题。

Basic Research. Basic research advances fundamental knowledge about the social world. It focuses on refuting or supporting theories that explain how the social world operates, what makes things happen, why social relations are a certain way, and why society changes. Basic research is the source of most new scientific ideas and ways of thinking about the world. Its primary audience is the scientific community.
基础研究。基础研究增进有关社会世界的基本知识。它侧重于反驳或支持那些解释社会世界如何运作、是什么让事情发生、为什么社会关系会以某种方式存在以及为什么社会会发生变化的理论。基础研究是大多数新科学思想和世界思维方式的源泉。其主要受众是科学界。

Many nonscientists criticize basic research and ask, "What good is it?" They consider basic research to be a waste of time and money because it does not have a direct use or help resolve an immediate problem. It is true that knowledge produced by basic research often lacks practical applications in the short term. Yet, basic research provides a foundation for knowledge and understanding that are generalizable to many policy areas, problems, or areas of study. Basic research is the source of most of the tools-methods, theories, and ideasthat applied researchers use. Really big breakthroughs in understanding and significant advances in knowledge usually come from basic research. In contrast to applied researchers, who want quick answers to questions for use within the next month or
许多非科学家批评基础研究，并问："它有什么用？他们认为基础研究浪费时间和金钱，因为它没有直接用途，也无助于解决眼前的问题。诚然，基础研究产生的知识在短期内往往缺乏实际应用。然而，基础研究为知识和理解奠定了基础，而这些知识和理解可以推广到许多政策领域、问题或研究领域。基础研究是应用研究人员所使用的大多数工具--方法、理论和思想--的来源。理解方面的重大突破和知识方面的重大进展通常来自基础研究。与应用研究人员相比，基础研究人员需要快速回答问题，以便在下个月或更短时间内使用。

Basic research Research designed to advanx fundamental knowledge about how the world works and build/test theoretical explanations. The scientific community is its primary audience. year, basic researchers painstakingly seek answers to questions that could have an impact on thinking for over a century.
基础研究 基础研究旨在增进有关世界如何运作的基本知识，并建立/测试理论解释。基础研究人员每年都在煞费苦心地寻找问题的答案，而这些问题可能会影响一个多世纪的思考。

The questions asked by basic researchers seem impractical. For example, research on an unrelated topic-the causes of cancer in chickens-conducted over a decade before AIDS was discovered now provides the most promising source for advances in research on the AIDS virus. Basic research by the 1975 Nobel Prize-winner Howard Temin laid the foundation for understanding how viruses work and has had major implications for questions that did not even exist when he conducted his path-breaking research years ago. Today's com-
基础研究人员提出的问题似乎不切实际。例如，在艾滋病被发现之前十多年，人们对一个毫不相关的课题--鸡患癌症的原因--进行的研究，现在为艾滋病病毒研究的进展提供了最有希望的源泉。1975 年诺贝尔奖获得者霍华德-特明的基础研究为了解病毒的工作原理奠定了基础，并对多年前他进行开创性研究时还不存在的问题产生了重大影响。今天的

puters could not exist without the pure research in mathematics conducted over a century ago, for which there was no known practical application at the time.
如果没有一个多世纪前进行的纯数学研究，就不可能有计算机的存在，而当时还没有已知的实际应用。

Police officers, officials trying to prevent delinquency, or counselors of youthful offenders may see little relevance to basic research on the question, "Why does deviant behavior occur?" Basic research rarely helps practitioners directly with their everyday concerns. Nevertheless, it stimulates new ways of thinking about deviance that have the potential to revolutionize and dramatically improve what practitioners do. Although policymakers and service providers often feel that basic research is of little relevance, public policies and social services will be ineffective and misguided without an understanding of actual causes.
警察、试图预防违法犯罪的官员或青少年罪犯辅导员可能认为，关于 "为什么会出现偏差行为？"这一问题的基础研究与他们的工作关系不大。基础研究很少能直接帮助从业人员解决他们日常关心的问题。然而，基础研究激发了人们对偏差行为的新思维，有可能彻底改变并极大地改善从业人员的工作。虽然政策制定者和服务提供者常常认为基础研究无关紧要，但如果不了解实际原因，公共政策和社会服务将是无效和被误导的。

Applied research, too, can build new knowledge. Nonetheless, basic research is essential for nourishing the expansion of knowledge. Researchers at the center of the scientific community conduct and consume most of the basic research.
应用研究也可以积累新的知识。然而，基础研究对于知识的扩展也是必不可少的。处于科学界中心的研究人员从事并消耗着大部分基础研究。

Applied Research. Those doing applied research conduct a study to address a specific concern or to offer solutions to a problem of their employer, a club or organization they are affiliated with, their community, or a social movement to which they are committed. Rarely do applied researchers build, test, or connect to a larger theory, develop a long-term general understanding, or carry out a large-scale investigation that might span years. Applied researchers rely on a quick, small-scale study that provides practical results that people can use in the short term. For example, the student government of University X wants to know whether the number of University students who are arrested for driving while intoxicated or involved in auto accidents will decline if it sponsors alcohol-free parties next year. Applied research would be most applicable for this situation.
应用研究。从事应用研究的人开展研究，是为了解决他们的雇主、所属俱乐部或组织、所在社区或他们致力于的社会运动中的某个具体问题，或为这些问题提供解决方案。 应用研究人员很少建立、检验或连接到更广泛的理论，很少形成长期的普遍认识，也很少开展可能持续数年的大规模调查。应用研究人员依赖于快速、小规模的研究，以提供人们可以在短期内使用的实用结果。例如，X 大学的学生会想知道，如果明年举办无酒派对，因醉酒驾驶被捕或卷入车祸的大学生 人数是否会减少。应用研究最适用于这种情况。

People employed in businesses, government offices, health care facilities, social service agencies, political organizations, and educational institutions conduct a great deal of applied research. They use the results of applied research to make decisions. Applied research affects decisions such as starting a new program to reduce the wait time before a client receives benefits, adopting a new police response to reduce spousal abuse effectively, changing a student discipline procedure to increase fairness, emphasizing a candidate's stand on the environment instead of the economy, and marketing product to mature adults instead of teenagers.
受雇于企业、政府部门、医疗机构、社会服务机构、政治组织和教育机构的人员会进行大量的应用研究。他们利用应用研究的成果做出决策。应用研究会对决策产生影响，例如启动一项新计划以缩短客户领取福利金前的等待时间，采用一种新的警方应对措施以有效减少虐待配偶行为，改变学生纪律处分程序以提高公平性，强调候选人的环境立场而不是经济立场，以及向成熟的成年人而不是青少年推销产品 。

The primary audience for and consumers of applied research findings are practitioners such as teachers, counselors, and caseworkers, or decision makers such as managers, committees, and officials.
应用研究成果的主要受众和消费者是教师、辅导员和个案工作者等从业人员或管理人员、委员会和官员等决策者。

For example, when a court proceeding uses research results, such as survey results, peer researchers are not evaluating them. Instead, nonscientists (judges, jurors, lawyers) will assess research methodology and findings, usually on a nonscientific basis. They can misinterpret the results or use evaluation standards that differ from those of the scientific community. Nonscientists might accept a study that fails to meet basic scientific criteria or reject a study that passes the highest standards of scientific quality and rigor. This means that applied researchers need to be very careful to translate findings from scientific-technical knowledge into a language used by nonspecialist decision makers. They must also provide ample wamings about any limitations of a study's design or the research results. Even if a decision maker is uninterested in details of how a study was conducted and wants only a very short summary of key findings, the applied researcher should also prepare a complete, detailed research report for any others who are interested and who can evaluate the quality of the research.
例如，当法庭程序使用研究成果（如调查结果）时，同行研究人员并不对其进行评估。相反，非科学家（法官、陪审员、律师）通常会在非科学的基础上对研究方法和研究结果进行评估。 他们可能会曲解研究结果，或使用与科学界不同的评价标准。非科学家可能会接受一项不符合基本科学标准的研究，也可能会拒绝一项符合科学质量和严谨性最高标准的研究。这就意味着，应用研究人员需要非常谨慎地将科学技术知识的研究成果转化为非专业决策者所使用的语言。他们还必须充分说明研究设计或研究结果的局限性。即使决策者对如何进行研究的细节不感兴趣，只想要一份非常简短的主要研究结果摘要，应用研究人员也应为其他感兴趣的人准备一份完整、详细的研究报告，以便他们对研究质量进行评估。

The results of applied research are less likely to enter the public domain in publications. Results may be available to only a small number of decision makers or practitioners, who decide whether or how to put the research results into practice and who may or may not use the results wisely.
应用研究的成果不太可能通过出版物进入公共领域。可能只有少数决策者或实践者才能获得研究成果，由他们决定是否或如何将研究成果付诸实践，他们可能会也可能不会明智地使用研究成果。

Because applied research has immediate implications, it often generates conflict. This is not
由于应用研究具有直接影响，因此经常会产生冲突。这并不是

Applied research Research designed to offer practical solutions to a concrete problem or address the immediate and specific needs of dinicians or practitioners.
应用研究 旨在为具体问题提供切实可行的解决方案，或满足食客或从业人员的直接和具体需求的研究。
new. For example, in 1903, Ellwood conducted an applied study of the jails and poorhouses in Missouri and documented serious deficiencies. His research report generated great public indignation, and he was accused of slandering the state that gave him employment.
新。例如，1903 年，埃尔伍德对密苏里州的监狱和贫民院进行了一项应用研究，并记录了严重的缺陷。他的研究报告引起了公众的极大愤慨，他被指控诽谤给他提供工作的密苏里州。

Whyte (1984) encountered conflict over findings in his applied research on a factory in Oklahoma and on restaurants in Chicago. In the first case, the management was more interested in defeating a union than in learning about employment relations; in the other, restaurant owners sought to make the industry look good rather than have findings about the nitty-gritty of its operations made public.
Whyte (1984)在对俄克拉荷马州的一家工厂和芝加哥的一家餐馆进行应用研究时，遇到了与研究结果有关的冲突。在前一个案例中，管理层更感兴趣的是击败工会，而不是了解雇佣关系；在另一个案例中，餐馆老板试图让该行业看起来不错，而不是让有关其运营细节的研究结果公之于众。

Indeed, calls for applied research on major policy issues may be a delaying tactic by officials who want to deflect criticism or postpone a decision until after the political heat dies down.
事实上，要求对重大政策问题进行应用研究可能是官员们的一种拖延战术，他们想转移批评或推迟决策，直到政治热度消退之后再做决定。

Applied and basic researchers adopt different orientations toward research methodology (see Chart 2.2). Applied researchers make more tradeoffs. They may compromise scientific rigor to get quick, usable results. Compromise is no excuse for sloppy research, however. Applied researchers squeeze research into the constraints of an applied setting and balance rigor against practical needs. Such balancing requires an in-depth knowledge of research and an awareness of the consequences of compromising standards.
应用研究人员和基础研究人员对研究方法采取不同的取向（见图 2.2）。应用研究人员需要做出更多权衡。他们可能会为了快速获得可用的结果而牺牲科学的严谨性。但是，妥协并不是马虎研究的借口。应用研究人员要根据应用环境的限制条件进行研究，并在严谨性与实际需要之间取得平衡。这种平衡需要对研究有深入的了解，并意识到降低标准的后果。
Three Types of Applied Research. There are many specific types of applied research. Here, you will learn about three major types: evaluation, action, and social impact assessment.
应用研究的三种类型。应用研究有许多具体类型。在此，您将了解三大类型：评估、行动和社会影响评估。

a marketing campaign, a policy, and so forth is effective-in other words, "Does it work?"
营销活动、政策等是否有效--换句话说，"是否有效？

Sample evaluation research questions are: Does a Socratic teaching technique improve learning over lecturing? Does a law enforcement program of mandatory arrest reduce spouse abuse? Does a flextime program increase employee productivity? Evaluation research measures the effectiveness of a program, policy, or way of doing something. Evaluation researchers use several research techniques (e.g., survey and field). If it can be used, the experimental technique is usually most effective.
评估研究问题示例如下苏格拉底教学法比讲授法能提高学习效果吗？强制逮捕的执法计划能否减少配偶虐待？弹性工作时间计划是否能提高员工的工作效率？评估研究衡量一项计划、政策或做事方式的有效性。评估研究人员使用多种研究技术（如调查和实地考察）。如果可以使用，实验技术通常是最有效的。

Practitioners involved with a policy or program may conduct evaluation research for their own information or at the request of outside decision makers, who sometimes place limits on researchers by setting boundaries on what can be studied and determining the outcome of interest.
参与政策或计划的实践者可能会为了自己的信息或应外部决策者的要求进行评估研究，而外部决策者有时会对研究者施加限制，规定可以研究的范围并确定感兴趣的结果。

Ethical and political conflicts often arise in evaluation research because people have opposing interests in the findings about a program. Research results can affect getting a job, building political popularity, or promoting an alternative program. People who are personally displeased with the finding often try to attack the researcher or his or her methods as being sloppy, biased, or inadequate. In addition to creating controversy and being attacked, evaluation researchers are sometimes subjected to pressures to rig a study before they begin.
评估研究中经常会出现道德和政治冲突，因为人们对某项计划的研究结果有着截然 相反的兴趣。研究结果可能会影响到工作的获得、政治声望的建立或替代计划的推广。对研究结果不满的人往往会试图攻击研究人员或其研究方法，认为他们马虎、有偏见或不适当。除了引起争议和受到攻击之外，评估研究人员有时还会受到压力，要求他们在研究开始之前就进行操纵。

Evaluation research greatly expanded in the 1960s in the United States when many new federal social programs were created. Most researchers adopted a positivist approach (see Chapter 4) and used cost-benefit analysis. By the 1970s, evaluation research was mandated by most federal social programs. Evaluation research has limitations, however. The reports of research rarely go through a peer review process, raw data are rarely publicly available, and the focus is narrowed to select inputs and outputs more than the full process by which a program affects people's lives. In addition, policymakers can selectively use or ignore evaluation reports.
20 世纪 60 年代，美国制定了许多新的联邦社会计划，评估研究也随之大大扩展。大多数研究人员采用实证主义方法（见第 4 章），并使用成本效益分析。到 20 世纪 70 年代，大多数联邦社会项目都要求进行评估研究。然而，评估研究也有局限性。研究报告很少经过同行评审程序，原始数据很少公开，关注的重点也仅限于选择投入和产出，而不是项目影响人们生活的整个过程。此外，决策者可以选择性地使用或忽视评估报告。

The 1996 welfare reform law in the United States was based on evaluation research. The research focused on amounts of income eamed and costs of administering programs, but failed to measure family obligations not fulfilled or harm to children because mothers were forced to work. Policymakers and politicians selectly used the evidence that showed some positive benefits on family income to justify new laws.
美国 1996 年的福利改革法是以评估研究为基础的。研究的重点是获得的收入数额和管理计划的成本，但没有衡量由于母亲被迫工作而没有履行的家庭义务或对儿童造成的伤害。政策制定者和政治家们选择性地使用了那些显示出对家庭收入有一些积极好处的证据来证明新法律的合理性。

Wysong, Aniskiewicz, and Wright (1994) evaluated the effectiveness of the D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) program found in 10,000 schools in the United States and 42 other countries. The authors note that the program is widely used, well funded, and very popular with police departments, school officials, parent groups, and others. By having police officers deliver talks in early grades, D.A.R.E. tries to reduce illicit drug use among teens by increasing knowledge of drugs, developing antidrug coping skills, and raising self- esteem. The authors examined two groups of students who were seniors in a high school in Indiana. One group had participated in the D.A.R.E. program in seventh grade and the other group had not. Consistent with past research, the authors found no lasting differences among the groups regarding age of first drug use, frequency of drug use, or selfesteem. The authors suggest that the program's popularity may be due to its political symbolic impact. The program may be effective for latent goals (i.e., helping politicians, school officials, and others feel morally good and involved in antidrug actions) but ineffective for official goals (i.e., reducing illegal drug use by teenagers).
Wysong、Aniskiewicz 和 Wright（1994 年）评估了在美国和其他 42 个国家的 10,000 所学校开展的 D.A.R.E.（抵制药物滥用教育）计划的有效性。作者指出，该计划应用广泛，资金充足，深受警察部门、学校官员、家长团体等的欢迎。D.A.R.E.试图通过让警官在低年级开展讲座，增加青少年对毒品的了解，培养他们的抗毒技能，提高他们的自尊心，从而减少青少年非法使用毒品。作者对印第安纳州一所高中的两组高三学生进行了调查。其中一组在七年级时参加过 D.A.R.E.项目，另一组没有参加过。与以往的研究结果一致，作者发现两组学生在首次吸毒年龄、吸毒频率或自尊心方面没有持久的差异。作者认为，该计划之所以受欢迎，可能是因为其政治象征意义。该计划可能对潜在目标（即帮助政治家、学校官员和其他人在道德上感觉良好并参与禁毒行动）有效，但对正式目标（即减少青少年非法使用毒品）无效。

Two types of evaluation research are formative and summative. Formative evaluation is built-in monitoring or continuous feedback on a program used for program management. Summative evaluation looks at final program outcomes. Both are usually necessary.
评价研究分为形成性评价和总结性评价两类。形成性评估是对计划的内在监测或持续反馈，用于计划管理。总结性评估则关注项目的最终成果。这两种评价通常都是必要的。

Evaluation research is a part of the administration of many organizations (e.g., schools, govemment agencies, businesses, etc.). One example is the Planning, Programming, and Budgeting System (PPBS), first used by the U.S. Department of Defense in the 1960s. The PPBS is based on the idea that researchers can evaluate a program by measuring its accomplishments on the basis of its stated goals and objectives. An evaluator divides a program into components and analyzes each component with regard to its costs (staff, supplies, etc.) and accomplishments in achieving program objectives. For example, a women's health center offers pregnancy education. The program components are outreach, education, counseling, and referrals. The program objectives are to reach out to women who believe they are pregnant, provide education about pregnancy, counsel women about their health risks and concerns, and refer pregnant women to health care providers or family planning agencies. An evaluation researcher will examine the cost of each part of the program and measure how well the program meets its objectives. The researcher may ask how much staff time and how many supplies are used for outreach, how many calls or inquiries have resulted from those efforts, and whether the efforts increased
评估研究是许多组织（如学校、政府机构、企业等）行政管理的一部分。其中一个例子是美国国防部在 20 世纪 60 年代首次使用的规划、计划和预算系统 (PPBS)。PPBS 所基于的理念是，研究人员可以根据既定目标和目的来衡量计划的完成情况，从而对其进行评估。评估人员将一项计划划分为若干部分，并分析每个部分的成本（人员、用品等）和在实现计划目标方面取得的成绩。例如，一个妇女健康中心提供怀孕教育。该计划的组成部分包括外联、教育、咨询和转介。该计划的目标是接触认为自己怀孕的妇女，提供有关怀孕的教育，就妇女的健康风险和担忧提供咨询，并将孕妇转介给医疗保健提供者或计划生育机构。评估研究人员将检查该计划每个部分的成本，并衡量该计划在多大程度上实现了其目标。研究人员可能会问，有多少员工时间和多少用品用于外联工作，这些工作带来了多少电话或咨询，以及这些工作是否增加了怀孕率。
the number of women from targeted groups coming to the center.
来中心的目标群体妇女人数。
2. Action research. Action research is applied research that treats knowledge as a form of power and abolishes the line between research and social action. There are several types of action research, but most share common characteristics: Those who are being studied participate in the research process; research incorporates ordinary or popular knowledge; research focuses on power with a goal of empowerment; research seeks to raise consciousness or increase awareness; and research is tied directly to political action.
2.行动研究。行动研究是一种应用研究，它将知识视为一种权力，取消了研究与社会行动之间的界限。行动研究有多种类型，但大多数都有共同的特点：被研究者参与研究过程；研究纳入普通或大众知识；研究关注权力，目标是增强权力；研究寻求提高觉悟或增强意识；研究与政治行动直接挂钩。

Action researchers try to equalize power relations between themselves and research subjects, and they avoid having more control, status, and authority than those they study. These researchers try to advance a cause or improve conditions by expanding public awareness. They are explicitly political, not value neutral. Because the goal is to improve the conditions and lives of research participants, publishing in formal reports, articles, or books becomes secondary. Action researchers assume that knowledge develops from experience, particularly the experience of sociopolitical action. They also assume that ordinary people can become aware of conditions and learn to take actions that can bring about improvement.
行动研究人员努力使自己与研究对象之间的权力关系平等，他们避免比研究对象拥有更多的控制权、地位和权力。这些研究人员试图通过扩大公众意识来推进某项事业或改善条件。他们具有明确的政治性，而不是价值中立。因为他们的目标是改善研究参与者的条件和生活，所以在正式报告、文章或书籍中发表研究成果是次要的。行动研究者认为，知识是从经验中发展起来的，尤其是社会政治行动的经验。他们还认为，普通人也能意识到自身的状况，并学会采取能够带来改善的行动。

Action research is associated with the critical social science approach discussed in Chapter 4. It attracts researchers who hold specific perspectives (e.g., environmental, radical, African American, feminist, etc.). For example, most feminist research has a dual mission: to create social change by transforming gender relations and to contribute to the advancement of knowledge. A feminist researcher who studies sexual harassment might recommend policy changes both to reduce it as well as to inform potential victims so they can protect themselves and defend their rights. In one situation, action research
行动研究与第 4 章讨论的批判性社会科学方法有关。它吸引了持有特定观点（如环保、激进、非裔美国人、女权主义者等）的研究人员。例如，大多数女权主义研究都有双重使命：通过改变性别关系来创造社会变革，以及促进知识进步。 研究性骚扰问题的女权主义研究者可能会建议修改政策，既减少性骚扰，又让潜在受害者了解情况，从而保护自己，维护自己的权利。在一种情况下，行动研究

Action research Applied research in which the primary goal is to facilitate social change or bring about a value-oriented political-social goal. involved working to preserve a town that was to be destroyed by a dam project. An action researcher worked together with union officials and management to redesign work to prevent layoffs. In developing nations, action researchers work among illiterate, impoverished peasants to teach literacy, study local conditions, and spread an awareness of conditions, and to attempt to improve them.
行动研究 应用研究的主要目标是促进社会变革或实现以价值为导向的政治-社会目标。一名行动研究人员与工会官员和管理层合作，重新设计工作，防止裁员。在发展中国家，行动研究人员在不识字的贫困农民中间开展工作，教他们识字，研究当地情况，传播对当地情况的认识，并试图改善这些情况。

Randy Stoecker (1999) argued the ultimate goal of participatory action research is to democratize the knowledge-creation process, reveal injustices, highlight the centrality of social conflict, and emphasize the importance of engaging in collection action to alter social structures. This means that the local research participants assume an active role in formulating, designing, and carrying out the research. Professional researchers and local participants cogenerate knowledge in collaborative processes that continuously incorporate the diverse experiences of local groups (Greenwood and Levin, 2003:149). While fully involving participants in problem definition and study implementation, a trained researcher often has to assist and provide expertise that guides participants in the study design, data gathering, and data analysis/interpretation stages. The researcher takes the role of a consultant or collaborator who assists with, but who does not have complete control over, the research process. The researcher has to balance upholding professional standards with adapting to local conditions, involving participants, and addressing their concerns.
兰迪-斯托克（Randy Stoecker，1999 年）认为，参与式行动研究的最终目标是使知识创造过程民主化，揭示不公正现象，突出社会冲突的中心地位，并强调参与集合行动以改变社会结构的重要性。这意味着当地的研究参与者在制定、设计和实施研究过程中发挥积极作用。专业研究人员和当地参与者在合作过程中共同创造知识，不断吸收当地群体的各种经验（Greenwood 和 Levin，2003:149）。在让参与者充分参与问题定义和研究实施的同时，训练有素的研究人员往往还需要在研究设计、数据收集和数据分析/解释阶段为参与者提供协助和专业知识指导。研究人员扮演顾问或合作者的角色，协助但不能完全控制研究过程。研究人员必须在坚持专业标准与适应当地条件、让参与者参与进来以及解决他们所关心的问题之间取得平衡。

Based on his personal experience in several community-based organizations, Stoecker discovered that study success requires research to be community initiated and have substantial community control. This means that the researcher and local participants jointly control and have ownership over research findings (Kemmis and McTaggart, 2003). Stoecker noted that grassroots participants often fear that professional researchers will use findings only to enhance their own careers. He warns (1999:851), "Do not try to publish an article from the research without the community's permission." This can create a dilemma; not only do researchers face career pressures like others, but also scientific norms require a full disclosure of study details and the dissemination of findings.
根据他在几个社区组织中的个人经验，Stoecker 发现，研究的成功需要研究由社区发起，并有大量的社区控制。这意味着研究人员和当地参与者共同控制研究成果，并对研究成果拥有所有权（Kemmis 和 McTaggart，2003 年）。Stoecker 指出，基层参与者往往担心专业研究人员只会利用研究成果来提升自己的职业生涯。他警告说（1999:851），"未经社区许可，不要试图发表研究文章"。这可能会造成一种两难局面：研究人员不仅要像其他人一样面临职业压力，而且科学规范也要求全面披露研究细节和传播研究结果。

B Community service (e.g, school enrollments, speed of police responses)
B 社区服务（如学校入学率、警方的反应速度）
II Social conditions (e.g, the races of friends that children are likely to make based on play areas; crime rates; the ability of elderly people to feel that they can care for themselves)
II 社会条件（例如，根据游戏场所，儿童可能交到的朋友的类型；犯罪率；老年人认为他们能够照顾自己的能力）
E Economic impact (e.g. changes in income levels, business failure rate)
经济影响（如收入水平的变化、企业失败率）
E. Demographic consequences (e.g. changes in the mix of old and young people, population movement into or out of an area)
E.人口后果（如老年人和年轻人组合的变化、人口迁入或迁出某一地区）
(5. Environment (e.g. Changes in air quality, noise levels, commuting time)
(5. 环境（如空气质量、噪音水平、通勤时间的变化）
E Health outcomes (e.g., changes in occurrence of diseases or presence of harmful substances)
健康结果（如疾病发生或有害物质存在的变化）

Sharing knowledge with professional peers and in publications also helps to ensure quality control over the research and give it legitimacy.
与专业同行和出版物分享知识也有助于确保对研究的质量控制，并赋予其合法性。
3. Social impact assessment research. Social impact assessment may be part of a larger environmental impact statement required by government agencies. Its purpose is to estimate the likely consequences of a planned change. Such an assessment can be used for planning and making choices among alternative policies-for example, to estimate the ability of a local hospital to respond to an earthquake; to determine changes in housing if a major new highway is built; or to assess the impact on college admissions and long-term debt if all college students received interest-free loans to be paid back over 20 years, with payments based on the size of their incomes. Researchers conducting social impact assessment examine many outcomes and often work in an interdisciplinary research team. The impact on several areas can be measured or assessed (see Box 2.1).
3.社会影响评估研究。社会影响评估 可能是政府机构要求的更大范围的环境影响声明的一部分。其目的是估计计划中的变化可能带来的后果。这种评估可用于规划和在备选政策中做出选择--例如，估算当地医院应对地震的能力；确定新建一条主要高速公路后住房的变化；或者评估如果所有大学生都获得免息贷款，并在 20 年内按收入多少偿还，那么对大学入学率和长期债务的影响。进行社会影响评估的研究人员会对许多结果进行研究，他们通常会组成一个跨学科研究小组。可以衡量或评估对多个领域的影响（见方框 2.1）。

Various forms of gambling have expanded rapidly in the United States. In 1980, gambling was legal in only a few states and yielded under billion in profits. Some 20 years later, it was legal in 48 states and profits exceeded billion a year. The reason is simple. Lawmakers sought new sources of revenue without raising taxes and wanted to promote economic development. The gambling industry promised them new jobs, economic revitalization, and a "cut" in the huge flow of money from gambling. This looked ideal to the lawmakers: They could help create jobs, strengthen the local economy, and get revenue without raising taxes.
各种形式的赌博在美国迅速发展。1980 年，赌博只在少数几个州合法，利润不到 亿美元。大约 20 年后，赌博在 48 个州合法化，每年的利润超过 亿美元。原因很简单。立法者们在不增加税收的情况下寻求新的收入来源，并希望促进经济发展。博彩业向他们承诺提供新的就业机会，振兴经济，并从博彩业的巨额资金流中 "分一杯羹"。这在立法者看来是非常理想的：他们可以帮助创造就业机会，加强地方经济，并在不增加税收的情况下获得收入。

Today, most promises have gone unrealized and there is widespread disappointment. Job growth has been limited and most has been in the category of low-wage, unskilled jobs. The very high revenue estimates were not reached, because as more areas offered gambling, the supply grew faster than demand. Also, money was diverted from other businesses. As people spent money on gambling, they had less for clothing and other consumer goods. In addition, few public officials anticipated extra costs for law enforcement, social services, street cleaning, and similar areas that accompanied gambling. Gambling hit lower-income people the worst, and the social problem of compulsive gambling has increased. Although only 2 to 4 percent of the population, compulsive gamblers have low work productivity, devastate their families, and often turn to crime.
如今，大多数承诺都已落空，人们普遍感到失望。就业岗位增长有限，而且大多属于低工资、非技术性岗位。由于越来越多的地区提供赌博服务，供应的增长速度超过了需求的增长速度，因此没有达到很高的收入预期。此外，其他行业的资金也被挪用。当人们把钱花在赌博上时，他们用于购买服装和其他消费品的钱就少了。此外，很少有政府官员预料到赌博会带来执法、社会服务、街道清洁等方面的额外费用。赌博对低收入人群的打击最大，强迫性赌博的社会问题也日益严重。强迫性赌博者虽然只占总人口的 2%至 4%，但他们的工作效率低下，对家庭造成严重破坏，而且往往会走上犯罪道路。

Were such results predictable? Could anyone have anticipated the outcome? Yes, if the officials had first conducted high-quality social impact assessment research and followed results of the research. This rarely occurs. Most officials accept extravagant claims made by industry advocates and cling to the illusion of getting something for next to nothing. Many remain ignorant or distrustful of social science research. The few social impact studies that were conducted made accurate predictions, and the outcome was no surprise.
这种结果是可以预料的吗？有人能预料到结果吗？是的，如果官员们首先进行了高质量的社会影响评估研究，并跟踪研究结果的话。这种情况很少发生。大多数官员都接受了行业鼓吹者的奢望，并抱着不劳而获的幻想。许多人仍然对社会科学研究一无所知或持不信任态度。为数不多的社会影响研究做出了准确的预测，其结果并不令人意外。

Sodal Impact assessment Applied research that documents the likely consequences for various areas of social life if a major new change is introduced into a community.
Sodal Impact Assessment（社会影响评估） 应用研究，记录社区引入重大新变革可能对社会生活各领域造成的后果。

Two Tools in Applied Research. Applied researchers use two tools: needs assessment and costbenefit analysis.
应用研究中的两种工具。应用研究人员使用两种工具：需求评估和成本效益分析。

In a needs assessment, a researcher collects data to determine major needs and their severity. It is often a preliminary step before a government agency or charity decides on a strategy to help people. Yet, it often becomes tangled in the complex relations within a community. A researcher may confront dilemmas or difficult issues.
在需求评估中，研究人员收集数据以确定主要需求及其严重程度。这通常是政府机构或慈善机构决定帮助人们的战略之前的一个初步步骤。然而，它往往会被社区内部的复杂关系所纠缠。研究人员可能会遇到两难或棘手的问题。

One issue is to decide on the group to target for the assessment. Should the researcher focus on the needs of homeless people sleeping in a park, working people who lose large amounts of money betting at a racetrack, or executives who drink too much at the country club? The most visible need may not be the most serious one. Whom does the researcher ask or observe? Should he or she ask the business owners about the needs of the homeless?
问题之一是确定评估的目标群体。研究人员应该重点关注露宿公园的无家可归者、在赛马场赌博输掉大笔钱的上班族，还是在乡村俱乐部酗酒的高管？最明显的需求可能不是最严重的需求。研究人员会询问或观察谁？是否应该向企业主询问无家可归者的需求？

A second issue is that people may not express a need in a way that links it directly to policies or long-term solutions. A researcher may find that homeless people say they need housing. After examining the situation, however, he or she may determine that housing would be available if the homeless had jobs. The housing need is caused by a need for jobs. The need for jobs, in turn, may be caused by a need for skills, a "living wage," and certain types of businesses. Thus, to address the housing need, it may be necessary to attract specific types of businesses, enact a new minimum wage, and provide job training. The apparent need may be linked to a deeper problem or condition. People may not be aware of the causes. For example, a need for health care may be caused by drinking polluted water, poor diet, and a lack of exercise.
第二个问题是，人们表达需求的方式可能无法将其与政策或长期解决方案直接联系起来。研究人员可能会发现，无家可归者说他们需要住房。然而，在对情况进行研究之后，他或她可能会确定，如果无家可归者有工作，就会有住房。住房需求是由工作需求引起的。而对工作的需求又可能是对技能、"生活工资 "和某些类型的企业的需求造成的。因此，为了满足住房需求，可能需要吸引特定类型的企业，颁布新的最低工资标准，并提供就业培训。表面上的需求可能与更深层次的问题或状况有关。人们可能没有意识到其中的原因。例如，对医疗保健的需求可能是由饮用污染的水、不良饮食习惯和缺乏锻炼造成的。

Needs assessment An applied research tool in which one gathers descriptive information about a need, issue, or concem, induding its magnitude, scope, and severity.
需求评估 一种应用研究工具，用于收集有关需求、问题或构想的描述性信 息，包括其规模、范围和严重性。
Cost-benefit analysis An applied research tool economists developed in which monetary value is assigned to the inputs and outcomes of a process, and then the researcher examines the balance between them.
成本效益分析 经济学家开发的一种应用研究工具，为一个过程的投入和结果分配货币价值，然后研究人员审查它们之间的平衡。
Is this a need for more health care or is it a need for better water treatment and a public health education program?
这究竟是需要更多的医疗保健，还是需要更好的水处理和公共卫生教育计划？

A third issue is that people often have multiple needs. If a researcher finds that people need to reduce pollution, eliminate gangs, and improve transport services, which is most important? A good needs assessment identifies both the expressed and the less visible needs of a target group, as well as the more serious or widespread needs. A researcher must trace links among related needs to identify those of highest priority.
第三个问题是，人们往往有多种需求。如果研究人员发现人们需要减少污染、消除帮派和改善交通服务，那么哪种需求最重要呢？一个好的需求评估既要确定目标群体的明确需求和不太明显的需求，也要确定较为严重或普遍的需求。研究人员必须追踪相关需求之间的联系，以确定最优先的需求。

A fourth issue is that a needs assessment may generate political controversy or suggest solutions beyond local control. Powerful groups may not want some needs documented or publicized. The researcher who finds that a city has a lot of unreported crime may tarnish the image of a safe, wellrun city promoted by the Chamber of Commerce and the city government. A needs assessment that documents racial discrimination may embarrass civic leaders who prefer to present themselves in public as unprejudiced. The needs of one group, such as people who bet too much at the racetrack, may be linked to the actions of another group that benefits by creating that need, such as the racetrack's owners and employees. Once a researcher documents needs and offers a resolution to them, he or she may be caught between opposing groups.
第四个问题是，需求评估可能会引发政治争议，或提出超出当地控制范围的解决 方案。有权势的团体可能不希望某些需求被记录或公布。研究人员如果发现一个城市有很多未报告的犯罪，可能会损害商会和市政府所宣传的安全、管理良好的城市形象。记录种族歧视的需求评估可能会让那些喜欢在公众面前表现自己没有偏见的公民领袖感到尴尬。一个群体的需求，如在赛马场投注过多的人的需求，可能与另一个群体的行为有关，而这个群体通过创造这种需求而获益，如赛马场的业主和雇员。一旦研究人员记录了需求并提出了解决方法，他或她就可能陷入对立群体之间。

The second tool is a cost-benefit analysis. Economists developed cost-benefit analysis, in which the researcher estimates the future costs and benefits of one or several proposed actions and gives them monetary values. In brief, it works like this: A researcher identifies all the consequences of a proposed action. Next, he or she assigns each consequence a monetary value. The consequences may include intangibles, such as clean air, low crime rates, political freedom, scenic beauty, low stress levels, and even human life itself. Often, the researcher assigns a probability or likelihood to the occurrence of various consequences. Next, policymakers or others identify negative consequences (costs) and positive ones (benefits). Finally, costs are compared to benefits, and policymakers decide whether they balance.
第二个工具是成本效益分析。经济学家提出了成本效益分析法，研究人员通过这种方法估算一项或几项拟议行动的未来成本和效益，并赋予其货币价值。简而言之，它是这样工作的：研究人员确定一项拟议行动的所有后果。然后，他或她为每个后果赋予货币价值。这些后果可能包括无形资产，如清新的空气、低犯罪率、政治自由、风景优美、压力小，甚至人的生命本身。通常情况下，研究人员会对各种后果发生的概率或可能性进行分配。接下来，决策者或其他人会确定负面影响（成本）和正面影响（效益）。最后，将成本与效益进行比较，由决策者决定两者是否平衡。

Cost-benefit unalysis appears to be a neutral, rational, and technical decision-making strategy, but it can be controversial. People do not necessarily agree on what are positive and negative consequences. For example, I may see widening a nearby road as a benefit becnuse it will let me travel to work much more rapidly. But the homeowner who lives along the road may see the same action as a cost because it will remove some of his or her lot and he or she will then experience more noise, pollution, and congestion.
不分析成本效益似乎是一种中立、理性和技术性的决策策略，但它也可能引起争议。人们并不一定同意什么是积极和消极后果。例如，我可能会认为拓宽附近的一条道路是一件好事，因为它可以让我更快地去上班。但住在路边的房主可能会认为同样的行动是一种代价，因为这将移走他或她的部分地段，他或她将因此承受更多的噪音、污染和拥堵。

There are two ways to assign monetary values to costs and benefits. Contingency evaluation asks people how much something is worth to them. For example, I may want to estimate the cost of air pollution that has health consequences for the average person. I might ask people: How much is it worth to you not to cough a lot and miss work two days a year due to asthma? If the average value assigned by people is in a town of 20,000 , then the contingency evaluation or subjective benefit of health would be per year million. I might balance this against higher profits for a company or more jobs created by allowing the pollution. A problem with this estimation is that people rarely give accurate estimates and different people may assign very different values. To an impoverished person, coughing and missing work may be worth , but for a wealthy person, it may be . In this example, polluting companies would tend to move to towns with low-income people, worsening their living conditions.
为成本和效益分配货币价值有两种方法。权变评估询问人们某样东西对他们来说值多少钱。例如，我可能想估算空气污染对普通人健康造成影响的成本。我可能会问人们：对你来说，每年不因哮喘而经常咳嗽和旷工两天值多少钱？如果在一个 2 万人的小镇上，人们给出的平均值是 ，那么应急评估或健康的主观效益将是 每年 百万。我可能会将其与公司的更高利润或因允许污染而创造的更多就业机会进行权衡。这种估算的一个问题是，人们很少给出准确的估算，而且不同的人可能会赋予截然不同的价值。对一个贫困的人来说，咳嗽和旷工可能值 ，但对一个富裕的人来说，可能是 。在这个例子中，污染企业会倾向于迁往有低收入人群的城镇，从而恶化他们的生活条件。

Using the same example, actual cost evaluation estimates the actual medical and job loss costs. I would estimate the health impact and then add up medical bills and costs for employers to get replacement workers. For example, if medical treatment averages per person and a replacement worker costs an extra , the cost of treating 10,000 people each year and hiring 5,000 replacement workers for two days would be people plus workers , for a total of million. This method ignores pain and suffering, inconvenience, and indirect costs (e.g., a parent stays home with a sick child, a child is unable to play sports because of asthma). To balance the costs with benefits by this method, the polluting factory would need to earn an extra million in profits.
以同样的例子为例，实际成本评估估算的是实际医疗和失业成本。我会估算对健康的影响，然后将医疗费用和雇主雇用替代工人的费用加在一起。例如，如果平均每人的医疗费用为 ，而替代工人的额外费用为 ，那么每年治疗 10,000 人和雇用 5,000 名替代工人两天的费用为 人 加上 工人 ，共计 万。这种方法忽略了疼痛和痛苦、不便和间接成本（例如，父母在家陪伴生病的孩子，孩子因哮喘无法参加体育运动）。要通过这种方法平衡成本与收益，污染工厂需要额外获得 百万美元的利润。

A significant issue for cost-benefit analysis is the assumption that everything has a price (learning, health, love, happiness, human dignity, chastity, etc.) and that people assign similar valuations. It also raises moral and political concerns. Costbenefit calculations usually favor upper-income people over low-income or poor people. This occurs because the relative value of a cost or benefit depends on one's wealth and income. Saving 15 minutes in a commute to work is assigned a greater value or benefit for high-income people than for the same 15 -minute time savings for low-income people; 15 minutes of a high-income person's time is monetarily worth more. Likewise, cutting a road through an impoverished neighborhood has a lower cost, because of lower property values, than putting the road through an area of high-cost homes.
成本效益分析的一个重要问题是假定任何事物都有价格（学习、健康、爱、幸福、人的尊严、贞操等），而且人们赋予的价值是相似的。这也引起了道德和政治方面的关注。成本效益计算通常有利于高收入人群，而不利于低收入或贫困人群。这是因为成本或效益的相对价值取决于个人的财富和收入。对高收入人群来说，上下班节省 15 分钟的价值或收益要高于低收入人群节省 15 分钟的价值或收益；高收入人群 15 分钟的时间在金钱上更有价值。同样，在贫困社区修建一条道路的成本要比在高价住宅区修建一条道路的成本低，因为后者的房产价值较低。

Cost-benefit analysis tends to conceal the moral-political aspect of questions. For instance, the balance between the human cost of "pulling the plug" on a life-support machine for a very ill person and the benefit of saving large expenses to keep the machine operating has both moral and economic aspects. The moral aspect stands out in decisions that involve a single identifiable person with whom the decision maker has an emotional attachment. Few of us solely look at this issue in terms of economic costs and benefits. The moral aspect can get lost in a decision that involves people who are not easily identified as individuals among a large group and for whom decision makers lack direct, personal contact. A moral aspect remains, even if the focus is on the economic costs and benefits.
成本效益分析往往会掩盖问题的道德政治方面。例如，"拔掉 "重病患者生命维持机的人力成本与节省大笔费用以维持机器运行的利益之间的平衡，既有道德方面的问题，也有经济方面的问题。在涉及决策者对其有情感依恋的单个可识别的人的决策中，道德问题尤为突出。我们很少有人只从经济成本和效益的角度来看待这个问题。如果决策涉及的人是一个大群体中不容易识别的个体，而且决策者与他们缺乏直接的个人接触，那么道德因素就会被忽略。即使关注的重点是经济成本和效益，道德层面依然存在。

Beyond the Basic-Applied Dichotomy. The basic versus applied research dichotomy is simplistic and ignores three related features: (1) the form of knowledge created, (2) various audiences that use research findings, and (3) whether a study is initiated, designed, and controlled by an independent researcher or others who may be nonresearchers. Next, we look at these three factors and an expanded set of research types.
超越基础与应用的二分法。基础研究与应用研究的二分法过于简单，忽略了三个相关特征：(1) 创造知识的形式；(2) 使用研究成果的各种受众；(3) 一项研究是由独立研究人员发起、设计和控制，还是由其他非研究人员发起、设计和控制。接下来，我们将探讨这三个因素和一系列扩展的研究类型。

Two Forms of Knowledge. Basic and applied researchers produce two forms of knowledge, instrumental and reflexive. The forms mirror a distinction between neutral, impartial, task-oriented instrumental behavior and principled, value-engaged, reflexive behavior. Most studies published in scholarly journals and conducted by practitioners build and expand instrumental knowledge. Researchers create instrumental knowledge as they (1) extend old or invent new research techniques;
两种形式的知识。基础研究人员和应用研究人员生产两种形式的知识，即工具性知识和反思性知识。这两种形式反映了中立、公正、以任务为导向的工具性行为与原则性、价值性、反思性行为之间的区别。大多数发表在学术期刊上和由从业人员进行的研究都是在构建和扩展工具性知识。研究人员在以下方面创造工具性知识：(1) 扩展旧的或发明新的研究技术；
(2) gather, verify, connect, and accumulate new factual information; and (3) advance, innovate, and elaborate the frontiers of understanding.
(2) 收集、核实、连接和积累新的事实信息；以及 (3) 推进、创新和阐述理解的前沿。

The creation of instrumental knowledge often sidesteps or avoids directly engaging moral or valuedirected concerns. By contrast, reflexive knowledge is self-aware, value-oriented knowledge. Researchers creating reflexive knowledge (1) build on specific moral commitments, (2) consciously reflect on the context and processes of knowledge creation, and (3) emphasize the implications and uses of new knowledge. They ask questions such as, Why and how is this knowledge being created? What is its importance or value? What are its implications for other knowledge, humanity, or moral-value principles?
工具性知识的创造往往回避或避免直接涉及道德或价值导向的问题。相比之下，反思性知识是自我意识、以价值为导向的知识。创造反思性知识的研究人员（1）以具体的道德承诺为基础，（2）有意识地反思知识创造的背景和过程，（3）强调新知识的意义和用途。他们提出的问题包括：为什么以及如何创造这些知识？它的重要性或价值是什么？它对其他知识、人性或道德价值原则有什么影响？

pant in action research. Members of this audience may have personally facilitated, collaborated in, os worked with researchers to carry out a study and have direct, immediate interest in results. A third type of audience is the general practitioner who combines a range of practical, relevant knowledge that may be applicable to an applied issue area or is closely connected to related issues. They may be policy specialists in govemment or large organizations (e.g., businesses, hospitals, police departments). Last, is the narrowly targeted practitioner audience. This practictioner wants research findings that can help him or her immediately address a specific practical problem or issue that is directly at hand.
对行动研究的兴趣。这类受众可能亲自协助、参与或与研究人员合作开展研究，并对研究结果有直接的切身利益。第三类受众是综合了一系列实用、相关知识的普通从业人员，这些知识可能适用于某个应用问题领域，或与相关问题密切相关。他们可能是政府或大型组织（如企业、医院、警察部门）的政策专家。最后是目标狭窄的从业人员受众。这类实践者希望研究成果能够帮助他们立即解决手头的具体实际问题或议题。

Researcher Autonomy and Commissioned Social Research. An idealized and romantic image of a social researcher is someone with total freedom to pursue knowledge without any impediments. The idealized researcher is independent, has sufficient funds for a study, and maintains complete control over what to study and how to study it. A contrast to this image of the autonomous researcher is the reality of commissioned or sponsored research. Researchers often depend on others for employment and research funds or conduct research at the behest of someone else.
研究人员的自主权与委托社会研究。理想化和浪漫化的社会研究人员形象是拥有完全自由、不受任何阻碍地追求知识的人。理想中的研究人员是独立的，有足够的研究资金，并能完全控制研究内容和研究方式。与这种自主研究者形象形成鲜明对比的是现实中的委托或赞助研究。研究人员往往依赖他人提供工作和研究经费，或者按照他人的要求开展研究。

Most commissioned studies involve some kind of limitation on researcher autonomy. Someone other than the actively involved researcher provides the funds and directions as to the topic and scope of the research question. Other "strings" with funding may include restrictions to examine certain issues but not others, limits on the time to complete a study, specification of the techniques to be used or people to be contacted in a study, and directions about how to disseminate findings.
大多数委托研究都会对研究人员的自主性造成某种限制。除了积极参与的研究人员之外，还有其他人提供资金，并就研究问题的主题和范围提供指导。资金的其他 "附加条件 "可能包括限制研究某些问题而不是其他问题、限制完成研究的时 间、规定研究中使用的技术或接触的人员，以及指示如何传播研究结果。

Expanded Set of Basic and Applied Research Types. Combining form of knowledge, audience, and whether the study is commissioned gives us an expanded set of basic and applied research and roles of the social researcher (see Chart 2.3). Basic research for the scientific community can be reflexive or instrumental. Burawoy and colleagues (2004) call these critical and professional. Sometimes a large private foundation or government agency commissions researchers to conduct studies; this is basic contract
扩展的基础研究和应用研究类型。将知识形式、受众和研究是否受委托结合起来，我们就可以得出一套扩展的基础研究和应用研究以及社会研究人员的角色（见图 2.3）。科学界的基础研究可以是反思性的，也可以是工具性的。Burawoy 及其同事（2004 年）称之为批判性和专业性研究。有时，大型私人基金会或政府机构会委托研究人员开展研究；这就是基本合同研究。

CHART 2.3 Expanded Set of Basic and Applied Research Types
图表 2.3 基础研究和应用研究类型扩展集

research. Sometimes researchers assume a public intellectual role, in which autonomous researchers produce reflexive knowledge to advance public discussion and debate. At other times, the knowledge for the public is instrumental. It may be commissioned and dedicated to a specific policy or autonomous and a democratic contribution to policy discussion. Research shared with and for participants in a study places the researcher in a public educator role when the knowledge is reflexive. When it is instrumental, the researcher may act as a consultant to the participants or a participatory researcher who is more of an equal with the participants. On some occasions, generalist and targeted practitioners create and apply reflexive knowledge in debates and deliberations over issues or decision options. More often practitioners are focused on instrumental knowledge. Hammersley (2000) outlined a distinction between the generalist who creates and uses knowledge as contributions to open, democratic decisions and the narrow practitioner focused on a particular targeted issue with results that have little wider application or distribution. The research may be commissioned by an outside group or employer or created autonomously, giving us contract or applied uses by the two types of practitioners.
研究。有时，研究人员承担着公共知识分子的角色，自主研究人员提供反思性知识，推动公众讨论和辩论。有时，为公众提供的知识是工具性的。它可能是受委托的，专门针对某项具体政策，也可能是自主的，是对政策讨论的民主贡献。当知识具有反思性时，与研究参与者分享研究成果并为其服务的研究者就扮演了公共教育者的角色。当知识是工具性的，研究者可以充当参与者的顾问，或者是与参与者平等的参与式研究者。在某些情况下，通才和有针对性的从业人员会在有关问题或决策方案的辩论和讨论中创造和应用反思性知识。更多的时候，实践者关注的是工具性知识。Hammersley (2000)概述了通才与狭隘从业者之间的区别，前者创造并使用知识，为公开、民主的决策做出贡献，而后者则专注于特定的目标问题，其成果几乎没有更广泛的应用或传播。研究可能是受外部团体或雇主委托进行的，也可能是自主进行的，这就为我们提供了这两类实践者的合同或应用用途。

If you ask someone why he or she is conducting a study, you might get a range of responses: "My boss told me to"; "It was a class assignment"; "I was curious"; "My roommate thought it would be a good idea" There are almost as many reasons to do rescarch as there are researchers. Yet, the purposes of social research may be organized into three groups based on what the researcher is trying to accomplish-explore a new topic, describe a social phenomenon, or explain why something occurs. Studies may have multiple purposes (e.g., both to explore and to describe), but one purpose is usually dominant (see Box 2.2).
如果你问某人为什么要进行一项研究，你可能会得到各种各样的回答："我的老板让我这么做"；"这是课堂作业"；"我很好奇"；"我的室友认为这是个好主意"。然而，根据研究者试图完成的任务，社会研究的目的可以分为三类--探索一个新课题、描述一种社会现象或解释某些事情发生的原因。 研究可能有多种目的（例如，既要探索，又要描述），但通常以一种目的为主（见方框 2.2）。

Exploration. Perhaps you have explored a new topic or issue in order to learn about it. If the issue was new or no researchers had written about it, you began at the beginning. This is called exploratory research. The researcher's goal is to formulate more precise questions that future research can answer. Exploratory research may be the first stage in a sequence of studies. A researcher may need to conduct an exploratory study in order to know enough to design and execute a second, more systematic and extensive study.
探索。也许您为了了解一个新的主题或问题而进行了探索。如果问题是新的，或者没有研究人员对此进行过研究，您就从头开始。这就是所谓的探索性研究。研究人员的目标是提出更精确的问题，以便将来的研究能够回答。探索性研究可能是一系列研究的第一阶段。研究人员可能需要进行一项探索性研究，以便有足够的知识来设计和执行第二项更系统、更广泛的研究。

Research on AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome) illustrates exploratory research. When AIDS first appeared, around 1980, no one
艾滋病（获得性免疫缺陷综合症）研究是一项探索性研究。当艾滋病在 1980 年左右首次出现时，没有人

[ Provide a detailed, highly accurate picture.
[提供详细、高度准确的信息。
e Locate new data that contradict past data.
e 找出与过去数据相矛盾的新数据。
a. Create a set of categories or classify types.
a.创建一套类别或划分类型。

Exploratory studies often go unpublished. Instead, researchers incorporate them into more systematic research that they publish later.
探索性研究通常不会发表。相反，研究人员会将其纳入更系统的研究中，然后再发表。

Lavoie, Robitaille, and Martine (2000) conducted an exploratory study that they published in a scholarly journal, Violence Against Women. The researchers wanted to learn what teens thought about violence in interpersonal relations. They gathered qualitative data from discussion groups with 24 Canadian teenagers, ages 14 to 19 , in Quebec . The researchers found that the teens experienced many forms of violence in their social relations. The teenagers explained the violence and nonconsensual sexual relations by emphasizing individual, couple, and social factors (e.g., the influence of peers or pornography). The teens often blamed the victim and placed the responsibility for violent acts on the victims of violence. The authors suggest that studies of abuse and methods of violence prevention need to be tailored to how teens understand and explain violence.
Lavoie、Robitaille 和 Martine（2000 年）进行了一项探索性研究，并发表在学术期刊《对妇女的暴力》上。研究人员希望了解青少年对人际关系中暴力的看法。他们从魁北克省 24 名 14 至 19 岁加拿大青少年的讨论小组中收集了定性数据。研究人员发现，这些青少年在社会关系中经历了多种形式的暴力。青少年通过强调个人、情侣和社会因素（如同龄人或色情制品的影响）来解释暴力和未经同意的性关系。青少年经常指责受害者，并将暴力行为的责任归咎于暴力受害者。作者建议，有关虐待的研究和预防暴力的方法需要根据青少年对暴力的理解和解释进行调整。
Exploratory research rarely yields definitive answers. It addresses the "what" question: "What is this social activity really about?" It is difficult to conduct because there are few guidelines to follow. Everything is potentially important, steps are not well defined, and the direction of inquiry changes frequently. This can be frustrating for researchers, who may feel adrift or that they are "spinning their wheels."
探索性研究很少能得出明确的答案。它解决的是 "是什么 "的问题："这项社会活动到底是关于什么的？探索性研究很难进行，因为几乎没有什么准则可循。每件事都可能很重要，步骤没有明确规定，而且调查方向经常变化。这可能会让研究人员感到沮丧，因为他们可能会感到漂泊不定或 "在原地打转"。

Exploratory researchers must be creative, open minded, and flexible; adopt an investigative stance; and explore all sources of information. They ask creative questions and take advantage of serendipity, those unexpected or chance factors that have larger implications. For example, researchers expected to find that the younger a child was at immigration to a new nation, the less the negative impact on that child when going on to college. Instead, they unexpectedly discovered that children who immigrated in a specific age group (between ages 6 and 11) were especially vulnerable to the disruption of immigration, more so than either older or younger children." 

Exploratory researchers frequently use qualitative techniques for gathering data and they are less wedded to a specific theory or research question. Qualitative research tends to be more open to using a range of evidence and discovering new issues. 

Description. You may have a more highly developed idea about a social phenomenon and want to 
describe it. Descriptive research presents a picture of the specific details-of a-sluation, social setting, or relationship. Much of the social research found in scholarly journals or used for making policy decisions is descriptive. 

Descriptive and exploratory research have many similarities. They blur together in practice. In descriptive research, the researcher begins with a well-defined subject and conducts research to describe it accurately. The outcome of a descriptive study is a detailed picture of the subject. For example, results may indicate the percentage of people who hold a particular view or engage in specific behaviors-for example, that 10 percent of parents physically or sexually abuse their children. 

A descriptive study presents a picture of types of people or of social activities. For example, Donald McCabe (1992) studied cheating among U.S. college students. He was interested in how people rationalize deviance. He thought that they developed justifications that neutralized or turned back moral disapproval, in order to protect their selfimages and deflect self-blame. He conducted a survey of over 6,000 students and found that twothirds admitted to cheating on a major test or assignment at least once. Six major types of cheating appeared to be common. When McCabe asked the students why they cheated, he discovered that they justified their behavior using four major neutralization strategies. The most common strategy, cited by over half of the cheaters, was a denial of responsibility. In this strategy, people claim that forces beyond their control, such as a heavy workload or peer behavior, justify the deviance. Other rationalizations given by cheating students included a denial that anyone is hurt, condemnation of the teacher, or an appeal to higher loyalties such as friendship. 

Descriptive research focuses on "how" and "who" questions ("How did it happen?" "Who is involved?"). Exploring new issues or explaining why something happens (e.g., why students neutralize cheating or why students hold specific religious beliefs) is less of a concern for descriptive researchers than describing how things are. 

A great deal of social research is descriptive. Descriptive researchers use most data-gathering techniques--surveys, field research, content analysis, und historical-comparative rescarch. Only experimental research is infrequent. 

Explanation. When you encounter an issue that is already known and have a description of it, you might begin to wonder why things are the way they are. The desire to know "why," to explain, is the purpose of explanatory research. It builds on exploratory and descriptive research and goes on to identify the reason something occurs. Going beyond focusing on a topic or providing a picture of it, explanatory research looks for causes and reasons. For example, a descriptive researcher may discover that 10 percent of parents abuse their children, whereas the explanatory researcher is more interested in learning why parents abuse their children. 

Researchers use multiple strategies when doing explanatory research. Some explanatory studies develop a novel explanation and then provide empirical evidence to support it or against it. Other studies outline two or more competing explanations and then present evidence for each, in a type of a "head-tohead" comparison to see which is the strongest. Still others take an existing explanation, often derived from social theory or previous research, and extend it to explain a new issue, setting, or group of people. The goal is to learn how well the explanation holds up and see whether it needs to be modified or is limited to operating in only certain conditions. 

For example, Lee, Farrell, and Link (2004) extended the "contact hypothesis" to explain a new area, homeless people in U.S. cities. Social researchers have studied the contact hypothesis since the 1950s, primarily with regard to interracial relations. It explains the degree of prejudice and negative attitudes by saying people tend to hold negative views toward an "outgroup" because of ignorance and negative 

stereotypes. Once people have contact with and get to know outgroup members, they replace their ignorance and negative stereotypes with more positive views. It answers the question, Why do people hold negative feelings toward outgroups?, with "a lack of contact." Many studies examined the hypothesis, looking at specific conditions of contact and the degree to which an outgroup is perceived as threatening. 

Lee, Farrell, and Link (2004) expanded the idea of contact by including 14 measures of exposure to homeless people. These range from having information (e.g., articles, television), personal observation, personal interaction, to having been homeless oneself or having a homeless family member. They also developed comprehensive measures of views on the homeless. These included beliefs about why people become homeless, positive emotions, seeing the homeless as dangerous, feeling empathy, and supporting homeless people's rights. Using telephone survey data from a random sample of 1,388 adults in 200 U.S. metropolitan areas in 1990, they found clear evidence supporting the contact hypothesis. People who had greater contact, and more intimate types of contact, with homeless people held more favorable views and were more likely to support helping the homeless than people who had little or no contact. They also found some variation in views about the homeless based on a person's race, age, education level, and political ideology. 

Christian and Lapinski (2003) also conducted explanatory research using the contact hypothesis in a study of high school students' attitudes toward Muslims after the September 11, 2001, New York World Trade Center terrorist attack. The authors surveyed 132 students in two high schools in the Midwest, none themselves Muslim, six months after the terrorist attack. They measured personal contact with Muslims, knowledge of Islam and various religions, and mass media use as well as attitudes toward Muslims and endorsing negative stereotypes of Muslims. Consistent with the contact hypothesis, the authors found that the students who knew 

Cross-sectional research Any research that examines information on many cases at one point in time. the most about Islam and had personal contacts with Muslims or Muslim friends were least likely to hold hostile attitudes or endorse negative stereotypes. A]. though students with higher media use (especially television) and who discussed issues with their parents had slightly lower negative attitudes, the impact of media and parents was weak. By contrast, direct personal contact had a very strong effect. The contact hypothesis illustrates a powerful explanation extended to many new situations. In yet another study of the contact hypothesis, McLaren (2003) conducted a secondary analysis (discussed in Chapter 11) by statistically examining previously collected data in 1997 Eurobarometer surveys. He found that in 17 European nations having contact with immigrants reduced anti-immigrant prejudice. These and many other studies on the contact hypothesis that examined it with different groups, issues, locations, and situations have strengthened its generalizability as an explanation of the sources of (and ways to reduce) hostile attitudes and negative stereotypes about outgroup members. 

Another dimension of social research is the treatment of time. An awareness of the time dimension will help you read or conduct research because different research questions or issues incorporate time in different ways. 

Some studies give a snapshot of a single, fixed time point and allow you to analyze it in detail. Other studies provide a moving picture that lets you follow events, people, or social relations over periods of time. Quantitative research is divided into two groups: a single point in time (cross-sectional research) versus multiple time points (longitudinal research). Quantitative research looks at a large group of cases, people, or units and measures a limited number of features. By contrast, a case study involves qualitative methods and focuses on one or a few cases during a limited time period. 

Cross-Sectional Research. Most sociological research takes a snapshot approach to the social world. In cross-sectional research, researchers ob- 

FIG URE 2.1 United States Birth Rate (births per 1,000 women ages 15-44) 1910 to 2000 
Source: Calculated by author from U.S. census data. 
serve at one point in time. Cross-sectional research is usually the simplest and least costly alternative. Its disadvantage is that it cannot capture social processes or change. Cross-sectional research can be exploratory, descriptive, or explanatory but it is most consistent with a descriptive approach to research. An example of cross-sectional research is the descriptive study by McCabe (1992) on cheating by college students. 

Longitudinal Research. Researchers using longitudinal research examine features of people or other units at more than one time. It is usually more complex and costly than cross-sectional research, but it is also more powerful, especially when researchers seek answers to questions about social change. Descriptive and explanatory researchers use longitudinal approaches. We will now consider three types of longitudinal research: time series, panel, and cohort. 

Information from time-series data can be very revealing. For example, time-series data on the 
U.S. birth rate since 1910 (Figure 2.1) shows how the number of births per woman declined steadily in the 1920s, continued to drop in the 1930s and early 1940 s, but sharply reversed direction after World War II ended (1945). It began the dramatic upsurge called the baby boom of the 1950s to 1960s before declining and becoming stable in the 1970s. Time series can reveal changes not easily seen otherwise. For example, since 1967 the Higher Education Research Institute (2004) has gathered annual survey data on large samples of students entering American colleges for use in applied research by colleges. Time-series results on the percentage of students answering which value was very important for them (Figure 2.2) show a clear reversal of priorities between the 1960s and 1970s. The students ceased to value developing a meaningful philosophy of life and instead sought material-financial success. 

Longitudinal research Any research that examines information from many units or cases across more than one point in time. 
Time-series research Longitudinal research in which information can be about different cases or people in each of several time periods. 

FIGURE 2.2 Value Priorities of U.S. College Freshmen, 1967-2003 
Source: From Higher Education Research Institute. (2004). Recent findings, Figure 4. Retrieved September 25, 2004, from www.gseis.ucla.edu/heri/findings.html. 

Time series is used for many topics. For example, Skog (2003) documented that the level of alcohol consumption in Canada since 1950 has been associated with numbers of fatal accidents such as falls or auto accidents. Davis (1992) used timeseries data to show a shift in American politicalsocial attitudes in 1972-1987 on 42 items (e.g., crime, free speech, politics, race, religion, and gender/sexuality), with a general move toward more liberal positions. A time-series study by Pettit and Western (2004) on imprisonment rates among Black and White men in the United States in 1964-1997 found that during a major rise in incarceration rates in the 1980s (up by 300 percent), African American men were six to eight times more likely than White men to go to jail. Young Black men who did not attend college were more likely to be incarcerated, with nearly one in three spending some time behind bars, and these rates doubled for Black men who failed to complete high school. 
2. The panel study is a powerful type of longitudinal research. It is more difficult to conduct 

Panel study Longitudinal research in which information is about the identical cases or people in each of several time periods. than time-series research. In a panel study, the researcher observes exactly the same people, group, or organization across time periods. Panel research is formidable to conduct and very costly. Tracking people over time is often difficult because some people die or cannot be located. Nevertheless, the results of a well-designed panel study are very valuable. Even short-term panel studies can clearly show the impact of a particular life event. 

Three examples illustrate the value of panel studies. Muriel Egerton (2002) examined the relationship between civic engagement (i.e., volunteering and participating in churches, labor unions, environmental groups, political parties, women's groups, parent-teacher associations, and sports clubs) and higher education among young people in Great Britain. She used the theoretical concept of social capital (i.e., having social connections with other people), which is strengthened by education, such that having more education expands a person's social network and tends to makes him or her more central in it. Data for the study came from nine years of the British Household Panel Study (1991-1999), a survey of a national sample of the same people gathered annually that includes questions on memberships and activity in organizations. Egerton looked at people in the year before they entered 
higher or tertiary education, at age 17 or 18 , and at its completion, about age 22 or 23 . She also compared levels of social engagement before and after higher education, and with young people who had not gone into higher education. By tracking information on the same people over six to eight years, she could look at their memberships and activity levels over time. Few people were active in more than one organization, so she focused on being in none or one or more organizations, and for those with an organization, being a member or active participant. She found that young people who entered higher education tended to have been active in an organization before higher education than did those who did not continue with schooling. She also noticed a slight drop-off immediately after completing higher education, because it is a transitional year with new social groups, geographical mobility, and occupational change, but after a year or two it picked up. She found that education has little effect on activity in sports and social clubs, but it increases activity in civic and religious organizations and overall activity. People who were active prior to higher education tended to be from professional families and their activity changed less, whereas those from nonprofessional families showed larger increases. They apparently acquired new values or social networks while in higher education. In general, youth from professional families were more active compared to those from blue-collar families or from the families of business managers. Apparently managers tend to rely on informal social networks within their business, whereas professionals develop wider social networks that include formal civic organizations that are involved in promoting public service or assisting in the community. 
M. Kent Jennings and Vicki Zeitner (2003) also looked at civic engagement but focused on how Internet usage among Americans has affected it. They noted that cross-sectional data showed that Internet users have higher levels of civic engagement. Yet, more educated people tend to use the Internet more and to be more engaged in civic organizations. Past studies could not tell us whether over time increasing usage of the Internet affected the level of a person's civic engagement. By using panel data collected from a survey of high school seniors in 
1965 who were again studied in 1973, 1982, and 1997 (by which time they were in their fifties), the researchers could measure levels of civic engagement before and after Internet use. The Internet was not available until after 1982 but was in wide use by 1997. Both people previously interviewed and their offspring were surveyed. The measure of civic engagement included a wide range of behaviors and attitudes. In general, the authors found that those who were more engaged prior to the availability of the Internet were more likely to use the Intemet, and people who used the Internet also increased their civic engagement once they started using the Internet. Whereas Internet users among people in the panels since 1965, who are now in their fifties, increased all forms of civic engagement as they adopted the Internet, their offspring who use the Internet are less likely to be volunteers or become engaged in their local community. Internet versus non-Internet use increases levels of civic engagement for the older more than the younger generation, especially younger generation Internet users who use the Internet for purposes other than following public affairs. 

Susan Mayer (2002) also used a panel design to examine the impact of economic inequality among neighborhoods on schooling: She observed that while economic inequality and residential segregation by income grew in the United States between 1970 and 1990, overall schooling rates remained the same. She wondered whether the schooling might differ in the increasingly separate upper- and lower-income neighborhoods and noted that different theories predicted a rise or fall in schooling as interneighborhood inequality grew. She analyzed U.S. census and other data to track neighborhoods (not individual people) across time and looked at the similarity of levels of family income as well as school attendance rates in each neighborhood. She studied inequality by comparing one neighborhood with other neighborhoods around it at three time points: 1970, 1980, and 1990. Using the neighborhood as the unit, she found that increasing between-neighborhood inequality resulted in schooling improvements for the children in the higher-income neighborhoods, but declines for the children in the lower-income neighborhoods. 

Thus, the rise in economic inequality among neighborhoods over time produced opposite effects for the children in higher-income and in lower-income neighborhoods; the children in higher-income neighborhoods were likely to get more schooling, and those in lower-income ones tended to get less schooling. 
3. A cohort study is similar to the panel study, but rather than observing the exact same people, a category of people who share a similar life experience in a specified time period is studied. Cohort analysis is "explicitly macroanalytic," which means researchers examine the category as a whole for important features (Ryder, 1992:230). The focus is on the cohort, or category, not on specific individuals. Commonly used cohorts include all people born in the same year (called birth cohorts), all people hired at the same time, all people who retire in a one- or two-year time frame, and all people who graduate in a given year. Unlike panel studies, researchers do not have to locate the exact same people for cohort studies. They need only identify those who experienced a common life event. 

Two examples illustrate the value of cohort studies. Morgan (1998) wanted to find out whether a "glass ceiling" of blocked career advancement or cohort caused an earnings gap between men and women engineers. She examined earnings data for male and female engineers in several college graduation cohorts, from 1971 or earlier to 1988-1992. Women's earnings were lower in past cohorts and women in recent cohorts earn less because they have little seniority. The author found no gender gap in recent cohorts and argued that pay is affected according to when the women started working rather than their career length. A main finding is that an overall gender gap in earnings is caused more by 

Cohort study Longitudinal research in which information about a category of cases or people that shared a common experience at one time period is traced across subsequent time periods. 
Case-study research Research that is an in-depth examination of an extensive amount of information about very few units or cases for one period or across multiple periods of time. cohort, or many female engineers in recent years, than a glass ceiling. 

Wilhelm (1998) looked at pattems of cohabitation among Americans of different cohorts. She used survey data for 1,187 adult U.S. citizens borm between 1943 and 1964 and looked at three birth cohorts: 1943-1950, 1951-1957, and 1958-1964. She found three predictors of cohabitation: political activism, nonreligious beliefs, and being in recent birth cohorts. Certain factors (e.g., nonreligious and politically active) were important predictors in early cohorts, but people in later cohorts were more likely to cohabit independent of the factors. Her main conclusion was that what was once a relatively rare behavior among a few parts of early cohorts has diffused and become a lifestyle option for most sectors of the population in later cohorts. 

Case-Study Research. In cross-sectional and longitudinal research, a researcher examines features on many people or units, either at one time period or across time periods. In both, a researcher examines a common set of features on many cases, usually expressed in numbers. In case-study research, he or she examines, in depth, many features of a few cases over a duration of time. Cases can be individuals, groups, organizations, movements, events, or geographic units. The data are usually more detailed, varied, and extensive. Most involve qualitative data about a few cases. Qualitative and case-study research are not identical, but "almost all qualitative research seeks to construct representations based on in-depth, detailed knowledge of cases" (Ragin, 1994a:92).  

In a case study, a researcher may intensively investigate one or two cases or compare a limited set of cases, focusing on several factors. Case study uses the logic of analytic instead of enumerative induction. In it, the researcher carefully selects one or a few key cases to illustrate an issue and analytically study it (or them) in detail. He or she considers the specific context of the case and examines how its parts are configured. This contrasts with longitudinal studies in which the researcher collects data on many units or cases, then looks for patterns in the mass of numbers. The researcher looks more for averages or patterns across many units or cases.  

Case studies help researchers conneet the miero level, or the netions of ladividual people, to the macro level, or large-seale socinl struetures and processes (Vaughan, 1992), "The logle of the caso study is to demonstrate a causal argument about how general social forces shape und produce results in particular settings" (Wulton, 1992b;122), Casestudy research raises questions about the boundaries and defining characteristies of i case. Sueh questions help in the generation of new thinking and the ory. "Case studies are likely to produce the best theory" (Wulton, 1992b:129). 

Researchers guther case-study data for a period of time. Data may be collected over months, years, or across many decades. Wulton's (1992a) Western Times and Water Wars is a case study of one community, Owens Valley, Californin. Walton stated, "I have tried . . . to tell a big story through the lens of a small case" (p. xviii). The community engaged in social protest as it attempted to control its key resource (water) and destiny. The protest took different forms, on and off, for over 100 years. Walton used diverse forms of data, including direct observation, formal and informal interviews, census statistics, maps, old photos and newspapers, various historical documents, and official records. 

Most case studies use a qualitative appronch, and the example study given in Chapter 1 of Mexican women by Sofia Villenas (2001) on 21 Latino community members in one small town in North Carolina is an example of a case study. 

Perhaps you have seen the prize-winning 2002 movie, The Pianist, about Wladyslaw Szpilman and the 1943 Jewish uprising in Warsaw, Poland. Einwohner (2003) conducted a historical case study of the 1943 Jewish uprising to examine social movement theory. A major idea in social movement theory is a political opportunity structure (POS), stating that when the POS "opens" the chances of a movement developing or being successful increases and several factors can cause an opening. Yet, this did not happen in the 1943 Jewish uprising. 

Social movement theory also recognizes threat, defined as increased costs to a movement for taking certain actions or not taking certain actions. Einwohner also used a third concept from the theory, "motivational frame." A movement "frame" refers to tho ways people in a movement thitak about and percelve somethingia "motivational frame" is what people pereelve as acceptable reasous or moral justiffeatous for takling action. 

In the npeelfle case of the Warnaw Jewish ghetto In 1943, there were no opportunities. By studyling diaries and historical reports, Binwolner documented that it was a a siluation will great threat. The uprising occurred only after the people realbzed thalr deathe were Inevitable because they faced overwhelming power and a systematic Nazl policy of exterminution. They formed a new motlvational frume that redefined death in struggle an the only honorable option. In brief, people's thlaking silfied to see being killed in a hopeless uprising as the most dignified, honorable action-both for themselves and for the entire Jewish people. Thun, the uprising movement did not arise from an opportunity, but from a total lack of opportunity and great threat. It turned on mass redefintion of the best action to pursue in a totally hopeless situation. See Figure 2.3 for an illustration of how researchers use time. 

This section is a brief overview of the main data collection techniques. In later chapters, you will read about these techniques in detail and learn how to use them. The techniques may be grouped into two categories: quantitative, collecting data in the form of numbers, and qualitative, collecting data in the form of words or pictures. Some techniques are more effective when addressing specific kinds of questions or topics. It takes skill, practice, and creativity to match a research question to an appropriate data collection technique. 

Experiments. Experimental research uses the logic and principles found in natural science research (see Chapter 9 on experimental research). 

Experimental research Research in which the researchermanipulates conditions for some research participants but not others, then compares group responses to see whether it made a difference. 

CROSS SECTIONAL: Observe a collection of people at one time. 

February 2006 
纵TME SERIES: Observe different people at multiple times. 跢经济学的时间序列不一样寀 
研 

究 

PANEL: Observe the exact same people at two or more times. 

COHORT: Observe people who shared an experience at two or more times. 

CASE STUDY: Observe a small set intensely across time. 

FIGURE 2.3 The Time Dimension in Social Research