Jessica Ward

1) The purpose of a physical/hard science is to find constant phenomena that allow you to predict future occurrences with accuracy by way of experiments. Some argue that sociology cannot be defined as a hard science because it’s unable to predict outcomes with consistent accuracy like physics or biology for example. However, that argument doesn’t take into consideration the constant change that happens within societies, not only within the same society but also across cultures. One societal norm that occurs in a culture may very well be rare, unusual or even criminal in another. Unlike hard sciences sociology has to be more localized in its predictions, sometimes localized to a particular country, region or even state. This however doesn’t lessen its ability to predict a particular outcome the theories just have to be adjusted to fit the particular area that it’s being applied to.

The best example for this argument would be the business of advertising. Sociologists are employed by advertising agencies to determine what sort of ad would appeal to the masses or just the demographic that the company is trying to reach. Without the research and predictability of societal reactions to certain ads, companies wouldn’t be anywhere near as successful in getting people to purchase their products. A lot of work goes into advertisement research and the scientific method is applied the same as it would be for a hard science. You observe a phenomenon that occurs naturally within society and theorize why it is that this occurs. So with the example of advertising you have a particular type of candy that’s already being sold but it’s not incredibly popular. There would have to be a reason why it’s not being bought. Is it because the parents don’t like to buy it for their children? Do kids not find it fun to eat? There are a variety of reasons why it may not be consumed. In response the researcher would design an experiment that would determine why the item isn’t being bought. In any experiment you would find a way to isolate and control what it is that you’re studying in hopes of finding out why it does what it does. Sociologists are studying the behaviors of humans as a whole, so they have to isolate and control a group of humans to determine why they’re not, for example, buying the candy. The best way to do that is to bring them into a lab or room and give them the candy and observe how they react to the candy. The one benefit that sociology has over sciences like physics and biology is that the researcher can ask why someone is doing something. A sociologist doesn’t have to just observe the activities of a person they can ask them directly why they’re doing what they are. The ability to ask opinions and thoughts puts sociologists one leg up on biology and physics. A biologist can’t ask a T-cell why it keeps getting killed off by the AIDS virus, they have to sit and watch and see what happens. Through the observed activity and the questions that are asked of the subjects in the research experiment the sociologist can predict what type of ad would be most successful. It’s this prediction ability that puts sociology on the same level as a hard science and actually makes sociology a hard science. The reason why it’s still considered a soft science is because that predictability isn’t static, it can change due to societal norms changing. Overtime society changes and adjusts to create new norms, and every time these changes take place new experiments and predictions have to be made. However, whether or not they want to admit it new predictions and experiments sometimes have to take place in the hard sciences as well, not necessarily because things change but rather something new is discovered.

2) In the case of starting up a midnight basketball league to deter urban crime, a researcher would need to find a way to measure delinquent/anti-social behavior not only for the area but also for individuals participating in the league. The researcher would also need to take into consideration other measures such as academic success, school attendance and peer influences.

When setting up such a program through deductive reasoning, you’re starting off with the theory that this program will deter urban crime. The first step would be to gather information on the current crime and delinquent behavior in the area. You may be able to get this from pulling police records of juveniles in that district, doing self reporting survey’s of local area youth and asking local residents their perception of what crime is like. The next step would be to set up and start the actual program. You would need to find someone that is willing to coach/referee the games. You would need to find a place to hold the basketball games and advertise in hopes of finding individuals who would like to participate. Another thing that the researcher would need to take into consideration well setting up such a league would be curfews. Some cities/states have curfews for juveniles under the age of 18, so the time may have to be adjusted in order to meet those needs or you may have to get special permission from local area officials. For anybody who will be participating that’s over the age of 18 of course you wouldn’t need to worry about getting permission from officials or parents for them to be out past a certain time. Once the league is up and running it would need to continue for an extended period of time in order to insure that the full effects of the league are able to take place and that some outside source isn’t affecting the crime rates and that the league happens to be a spurious relationship. Once a good amount of time passes (at least 6 months) you can repeat the original surveys and gather arrest records for that particular district to see if the behavior has gone down during that sixth month period. You would need to make sure at least for the arrest records that you compare them with similar time periods of prior years. Crime can go in waves, for example the murder rate is higher during the summer then it is during the winter. By comparing to similar time periods in prior years you can make sure that you have a good data to compare against. Once the second round of data is compiled you can compare that to the data you collected at the beginning of the project and determine if there was any significant difference made by starting up the league.

For a descriptive style you would need to locate a similar program that already exists. Once you locate a city that has such leagues already in use you would need to gather crime information prior and post the program starting. The easiest way to do this would be to compile arrest records before and after the program. But you can also do a retrospective survey asking people who did participate in the program if their delinquent behavior decreased after participating. However self-reporting can be some unreliable especially the longer it’s been since they last participated in such a program. Retrospective surveys can also be expensive because you would not only have to pay for the interviewers but you may have to provide some sort of incentive to those participating. Arrest records and crime data would be the easiest to obtain since a lot of areas participate in the Uniform Crime Report or have a similar report set up for themselves. Once the data is retrieved you compare the before and the after and see if there was any significant change in crime in the area the program was provided. But you would also want to check for any outside sources that may have deterred crime. For example new laws, more police enforcement, etc.

An inductive research would be very similar to descriptive. You’ve already got your data and you’re not manipulating any of the variables you’re just looking to see what has already occurred. In this particular case you would locate areas that maybe have had a decrease in crime over the last few years and see if there’s anything in particular that happened during that time period that caused the decrease in delinquent behavior. Since you’re looking at city sponsored sports leagues you’d hope to find that one of those cities that has had a decrease in crime would also have a sports league that was set up shortly before the decrease in crime took place.

3) I think ethical behavior is regulated individually by the morals that are instilled in you from childhood. Some individuals see nothing wrong with voyeurism whether it’s because their perverts or because they’re wanting to research how individuals act in private in opposition with how they act when they’re in public. In situations where you’re observing a behavior that is not overtly done I feel ethically that you need to gain the permission of the individuals that are being observed. In the case where you have individuals that are out in public it would be considered ok to observe and watch them. However I’d be careful in observing people out in public especially if they’re children. You could be misjudged as some sort of pedophile and be caused unnecessary troubles. However overall I feel anything that’s done in the public’s eye is open for observation because typically people won’t perform actions in public that they don’t want other people to see or know about. Behaviors that are done within semi-restricted situations such as an organization that you have to join in order to participate would be slightly different depending on what the organization is. A group like alcoholics anonymous I would feel the need to get the permission of first. Joining that group there is the explicit direction that things that are done within that group are private and not shared, hence the reason why they don’t state their last names and no outsiders are allowed to view. Another group like the Society for Creative Anachronism (SCA.org) is the type of group that anyone can join and participation is open, thus observing them wouldn’t really be breaking any ethical boundaries in my opinion. Overall using judgment to decide if the behavior you’re observing/studying is something that another person is doing under the pretence that it’s private/unseen should determine whether or not it’s ethical to be observing them.

Kenny Byrd

1.) The world is primarily composed of two basic sciences – social and physical. These two sciences are what makes the world function as it does. Social science includes human relationships, behavior, and the roles humans play in society. On the other hand, physical science analyzes nature and properties of inanimate objects. These two sciences encompass the broad spectrum of how scientists and others interpret the world.

Social science is a branch of science that deals with individuals as members of a society and with the interpersonal relationships between the humans in that society. It is commonly known that physical science uses the scientific method, but social science also uses this method to a degree. This is a method of research in which a problem is identified, data is gathered, a hypothesis is formulated from the collected data, and the hypothesis is empirically tested. The scientific method is a test that scientists use because it analyzes the general population off of experience and logic, rather than only from scientific, natural proven data. This uses different variables that can be based from ethnicity, social status, religion, age, sex, and overall upbringing. An example of this is determining that an elderly Mexican woman would be against abortion. The majority, if not all, of the population would agree with this statement. The reasoning behind this is not only through tested data, but from common sense. Initially, the tested subject would agree because of her age. The older generation of women would generically be against abortion to begin with. In addition to this, her race is an indication that she is Catholic. Traditionally, the elderly Mexican population is born into the Catholic religion and faith. This would bring about the idea of the older Catholic Church being pro-life and against abortion. This process of interpreting a statement is the same as the steps used in testing a hypothesis in physical science.

Merriam- Webster’s Medical Dictionary defines physical science as "any of the natural sciences, such as physics, chemistry, and astronomy, which deal primarily with

nonliving materials". As stated above, physical science utilizes the scientific method to its full potential. It gathers information that is already physically presented and from that a hypothesis is created. Through many tests and re-tests of this hypothesis, an answer is generated. The only difference between using the scientific method with social science, compared to physical science, is that people are tested. And in physical science, inanimate objects are the subject. An example of the scientific method being used in physical science can be as basic as formulating at what temperature water freezes. First, the question is posed at what temperature, then gathering data. It is cool outside at 50 degrees, although water does not freeze. So the temperature at which water freezes is less than 50. From this, the hypothesis is formulated that the freezing point of water is below 50 degrees Fahrenheit. From this information, water is tested over and over again until the frozen and a temperature is found. The conclusion is that water freezes at 32 degrees Fahrenheit. This is a simple example of how the scientific method is useful to physical science.

Social and physical science are similar in that they both use the scientific method. Historically, physical science is well-known for using the scientific method. Social science, in its own way, uses this method also, although with different variables. Social science uses human behavior and relationships. Both of these sciences also test and use statistics. Social and physical science both go hand in hand with logic and common sense. This is true by a simple example. A young child knows not to put his hand near a flame. Through experience, the flame is hot and hot means negative consequences. This is a proven and logical fact. Knowing the temperature of the flame is not necessary, although it is a given that it is dangerous. Through testing and experience, a child knows not to touch a flame based from the unconscious use of the scientific method.

Social and physical sciences make the world function as it does. These two sciences are collaborative and shape how scientists view and analyze the world, even help to hypothesize what will happen in the future. Both are necessary components for scientists to continue to figure out the mysteries and ponderings of the world.

2.) Inductive researchers examine data looking for patterns and relationships to develop and test their hypothesis in order to generate a theory. We may not always realize it, but using inductive research is what most people do in their everyday lives to try to explain human behavior. Using the example "should you spy on your neighbors private acts to understand them better?" my answer would be "no". I would not spy on my neighbors in order to understand them better because I believe that would be an invasion of privacy and I would not someone to spy on me in order to understand me better. Personally if I wanted to know more about the way my neighbor acts I would ask him/her questions. Therefore, I would have to say I personally regulate my ethical behavior by the way I was raised. I was taught to treat people the way I would like to be treated, and this may be different for other people depending on the morals and values that were instilled in them as they grew up. Growing up I have always been an observer, fascinated with watching people and their actions, wondering why they do the things the do. For example, when I was about 11 years old it was the actions of my parents that caught my eye the most, my dad in particular. Like all kids I was kept in the dark when it came to matters of "adult business". However, I could not but help notice the difference in my dad’s behavior when my mom was around compared to when she was gone. When she was in our presence, especially my dads’, he acted like a "normal dad" meaning he would play with me and my little sister, talk to us, cooked, etc. When my mom wasn’t around which most of the time she was at work during the day, my dad would act like a completely different person. It was almost as if he was a stranger because he would avoid me and my sister as if he was hiding something from us. This behavior gave me reason to believe he was up to no good. In watching his behavior I noticed he made it a habit to go to the bathroom for long periods of time and he would take something in with him. When he would come out of the bathroom him mouth would be closed as if trying to hold something in it he didn’t want me to see. Upon entering the bathroom there would be smoke and a lighter lying on the counter. While washing the dishes I noticed the bottoms of the spoons were black as if someone had held them over a burning flame. Until then I really hadn’t put two and two together, but now it started to make sense. There were other times my dad would be in the kitchen standing over the burner with something in his hand, when he would hear me walking towards him he would ask me to go back in the other room and he would let me know when I could go back into the kitchen. I never tried to see what he was doing and I never asked him either. After putting all the facts together I came to the conclusion he must be doing drugs. However, I never said anything right away, in fact I wasn’t until a few years later I told my mom about what I saw him doing and that is when she finally told me he did do drugs.

5.) The construction of questions and the answers in which these questions produce is a direct result of certain variables, such as culture, ethnic and gender backgrounds. These variables are imperative to obtaining the desired results. An example of constructing a question regarding gender would be when talking to a man about a woman’s menstrual cycle and its span of time, one would be less descriptive. He would know less about the topic than a woman. Whereas, when asking a woman about the length of her menstrual cycle, she would most likely know the exact time frame based off of personal experience. An example of constructing a question in respect to culture would be asking a person from Minnesota what New Mexican food is. A person from the north would be less informed or exposed to what is culturally acceptable in New Mexican food, such as green or red chili. Also, this includes the intensity and spiciness of the chili. And lastly, an example of the construction of questions due to ethnicity can be the racial prejudice against Asian drivers – is it true or not? Based off of who the question is asked, the answer and outcomes will be different. Therefore, the questions have to be formulated in conjunction with the audience that is being asked. The asker has to take into consideration what the desired results of the question are, the audience that will receive the report, and who is being asked the question. The variables – ethnicity, gender, and culture – are vital to not only how the question is posed, but as to how it will be answered.

Jamie Woullard-Padilla

1.) Humans constantly interact with their environment as they go through life. Through interaction with the environment there are different ways in which we gain knowledge about the world we live in. The most common way we gain knowledge about our world is research through both social and physical sciences, both of which use the scientific method to come to conclusions. Therefore, because both physical and social sciences use the scientific method I believe social science can respectively be viewed like physical science.

Social science is the use of scientific methods to investigate societies, individual, and social processes; the knowledge provided by the investigations. (Schutt p.8) Physical science is defined, by Webster’s dictionary, as any of the sciences, such as physics, chemistry, astronomy, and geology that analyze the nature and properties of energy and nonliving matter. (Webster’s dictionary p

An example of social science being applied in the same way as physical is in the form of a quantitative research. When using a quantitative approach social science is like physical science because it is experimental, meaning you have to use the steps of the scientific method in order to test the findings of your research. Like physical science you start by stating the problem. Next is the research question, which is what you are trying/hoping to find by researching the topic you have chosen. The hypothesis is a tentative statement about empirical reality involving a relationship between two or more variable (Schutt p.45) is the following step. Also the hypothesis will either prove or disprove the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis is a term statistions often use to indicate the statistical hypothesis tested. It is the process of most statistical tests to determine whether or not the results provide a reason for rejecting the hypothesis because the results are a mean of chance factors. As in physical science, social sciences need a way of testing their hypothesis. The use of scales, surveys, tests, and questionnaires when collecting data in a quantitative research make it possible for social sciences to test their findings. The focus of quantitative research looks at quantity (how much and how many) using large representative and random samples in order to have a sample size that reflects the representative number of the population. Following the hypothesis are the review of literature, methodology, result section, and last the conclusion. These steps are the same for physical science because they both clearly state the problem and how they arrive at their conclusions. Furthermore, the subject matter in both physical and social science is ever changing. In addition to an ever changing world we not only have to rely on science to gain knowledge, but our own common sense. Common sense allows us to make predictions about certain outcomes based on our experience. For example we learn that a green light means to "go" and a red light means "stop" based on kid games like Simon Says and our experience with street lights. Common sense enlightens our awareness that if we notice a particular patter has occurred in the past, then we are confident it will continue to occur in the future. These are some of the ways in which social and physical sciences are alike.

However, there are a few ways in which social science differs from physical science. One way in which they differ is that social science does not have precise answers, the same way in which physical science does. Both of these sciences may use the scientific method, but the difference between using this method in sociology is that people are tested, compared to physical science which test inanimate objects or nonliving things. As a result of running tests on human social science can only conclude a correlation between to variable, meaning they cannot say one thing causes another. Even though social scientists can re-test the research of another they may come up with different results depending on the sample they obtained. This is different in physical science because when using nonliving or inanimate objects one can say the effect of one variable causes a particular outcome of another. For example the speed of light has a specific formula and not matter how many times it is re-test the same answer will always be reproduced. In physical science we can conclude that one thing causes another.

In comparing both the similarities and the non-similarities of physical and social science I would say that social science is a science. They both use the scientific method as a guideline to test their hypothesis by using experiments and observation. Although the results in social science tend to be more correlation based than causation based does not make it any less of science. In time physical sciences, like astronomy and biology, may have to rely on more correlation conclusions than causation because the world is constantly changing and evolving. Furthermore both social and physical sciences rely on common sense as an extension of what we naturally do which is make predictions. Patterns allow us to make predictions which are an expression of "causal law" setting up rules in which certain patterns must follow.

3.) Inductive researchers examine data looking for patterns and relationships to develop and test their hypothesis in order to generate a theory. We may not always realize it, but using inductive research is what most people do in their everyday lives to try to explain human behavior. Using the example "should you spy on your neighbors private acts to understand them better?" my answer would be "no". I would not spy on my neighbors in order to understand them better because I believe that would be an invasion of privacy and I would not someone to spy on me in order to understand me better. Personally if I wanted to know more about the way my neighbor acts I would ask him/her questions. Therefore, I would have to say I personally regulate my ethical behavior by the way I was raised. I was taught to treat people the way I would like to be treated, and this may be different for other people depending on the morals and values that were instilled in them as they grew up. Growing up I have always been an observer, fascinated with watching people and their actions, wondering why they do the things the do. For example, when I was about 11 years old it was the actions of my parents that caught my eye the most, my dad in particular. Like all kids I was kept in the dark when it came to matters of "adult business". However, I could not but help notice the difference in my dad’s behavior when my mom was around compared to when she was gone. When she was in our presence, especially my dads’, he acted like a "normal dad" meaning he would play with me and my little sister, talk to us, cooked, etc. When my mom wasn’t around which most of the time she was at work during the day, my dad would act like a completely different person. It was almost as if he was a stranger because he would avoid me and my sister as if he was hiding something from us. This behavior gave me reason to believe he was up to no good. In watching his behavior I noticed he made it a habit to go to the bathroom for long periods of time and he would take something in with him. When he would come out of the bathroom him mouth would be closed as if trying to hold something in it he didn’t want me to see. Upon entering the bathroom there would be smoke and a lighter lying on the counter. While washing the dishes I noticed the bottoms of the spoons were black as if someone had held them over a burning flame. Until then I really hadn’t put two and two together, but now it started to make sense. There were other times my dad would be in the kitchen standing over the burner with something in his hand, when he would hear me walking towards him he would ask me to go back in the other room and he would let me know when I could go back into the kitchen. I never tried to see what he was doing and I never asked him either. After putting all the facts together I came to the conclusion he must be doing drugs. However, I never said anything right away or invaded his privacy, in fact I wasn’t until a few years later I told my mom about what I observed him doing and that is when she finally told me he did do drugs. Another example of how we use inductive research is how we find out the truth about Santa Clause. Like all little kids I was brought believing in Santa Clause, never questioning his existence until I became a little older. I started to notice the hand writing on the packages my mom gave to us had the same kind of hand writing on the packages we received form "Santa". It also occurred to me that my parents always went to bed later than my sister and I on Christmas Eve, when any other night they would be in bed before us. I had asked my mom one time if there was really a "Santa" and of course she said no because she enjoyed being him. I believed her and continued making my observation each Christmas. Then by accident my mom asked me to get her something from one of her drawers not realized she had hidden some of our presents there. When I brought her back what she had asked for she asked me if I had seen anything while I was going through her drawer. I said yes and the look on her face indicated she was upset because she had forgot she put some of the presents in there. Her facial expression was an indicator that I wasn’t suppose to have seen the presents because they were from her, but because they were the presents I had asked Santa to bring me. At this point I still believed in Santa, but I had a feeling there was a connection between him and my mom. Finally, when I was around 10 years old I was cleaning out my closet, which happened to be my parent’s room before it was mine, when I felt something on the ledge I was using to pull myself up onto a higher shelf. I picked it up to see what it was and to my shock it was a stack of letters me and my sister had written to "Santa" every year. Despite finding these letters I still wasn’t able say for certain if my mom had any association with Santa. It was until Christmas Eve that year I finally put the connection of "Santa Clause" and my mom together. On Christmas Eve that year both me and my sister had been sent to bed because it was getting late. My room was by the garage door. It hadn’t been but an hour after we were sent to bed that I heard some commotion coming from outside my door. My door was slightly cracked so I took a peak to see where the noise was coming from. When I looked through the crack I saw my mom and dad carrying in a bike from the garage. A bike I had asked Santa for and never told my mom about because she had told me I couldn’t have one this year because they were too expensive. From that moment on I knew there was no such thing as "Santa Clause".

In both of my examples I never pried into my parents business to understand their behavior better. I treated them and their privacy with respect, the same way in which I would expect them to treat me. There was no reason for me to result to unethical behavior, like invading their privacy, in order to understand their behavior better because I obtain the same information through means of ethical behavior.

5.) Cultural, ethnic, and gender backgrounds may affect the construction of questions and the results obtained from those questions if we are not careful in how we both construct and ask questions. For example the construction of questions developed by a male researcher may be different compared from the construction of a female researcher. This can lead to false representation of a society as a whole. In the past large amount of medical and psychological studies had been conducted on white males, including studies about the effects of Asprin. It had been found that Asprin was beneficial in regards to one’s heart. Little did the public know when the results of this study were generalized women were left out of this study. Therefore, in recent studies done about the effects of Asprin on women we are finding out it has a negative effect on women. In terms of questions asked it is important a researcher is not biased when constructing the question because it may result in different answers than anticipated. For example a wealthy person is going to answer a question different than a poor person, as is a black person is going to answer a question differently than an Asian, based on their different backgrounds. Also if a white research is conducting a survey in person about how one feels towards a person of a different race, they are going to receive different answers based on the race of the person they are asking the question to. A white person answering this question may answer it honestly because they feel the researcher is more likely to agree because they are the same race. However, if the person answering the question is Hispanic they may lie because they feel they cannot honestly answer a question of this nature to someone who is a different race because they may not understand where they are coming from.

It is evident different cultural, ethnic, and gender backgrounds influence the way in which we both construct and answer questions. Not taking into account these factors can increase the risk of misinterpretation of information we have gathered. Last we need to construct questions that are relevant to the target group we are trying to study, therefore when the information is gathered we will not believing false ideas to be true.