Component 2: experiments (laboratory and field experiments, the comparative method) and questionnaires (structured, postal and online), including their practical, ethical and theoretical strengths and limitations and the factors affecting the choice between them.

What this dot point is asking

This statement covers two positivist-friendly primary methods: experiments (laboratory, field and the comparative method) and questionnaires (structured, postal, online). For each you need its strengths and limitations, organised through the PET framework: Practical, Ethical and Theoretical factors. The skill the methods paper rewards is evaluating a method against these factors and linking the choice to positivism or interpretivism.

The answer

Experiments

• The laboratory experiment is highly reliable (it can be repeated and controlled) and detached, which positivists value. But it is artificial, so behaviour may not reflect real life (low validity), and subjects may change behaviour because they know they are studied (the Hawthorne effect). It is also rarely practical or ethical to control human variables, so it is uncommon in sociology.
• The field experiment takes place in a real setting (such as a school or workplace), giving higher validity, but the researcher has less control over variables and may face ethical issues around consent.
• The comparative method, used by Durkheim, compares existing groups (for example suicide rates across regions) to identify causes without conducting a real experiment, sidestepping the practical and ethical problems while keeping a scientific logic.

Questionnaires

Questionnaires are the classic positivist primary method:

• Strengths. They are cheap and quick, reach large and potentially representative samples, and produce reliable, quantitative data that allows comparison and the detection of patterns. They are detached (reducing interviewer bias) and raise few ethical problems.
• Limitations. They tend to have low validity: respondents may lie, misunderstand questions or give socially desirable answers, and there is no chance to probe. The imposition problem means the researcher's pre-set categories shape the answers, so the data reflects the researcher's framework, not necessarily the respondent's reality. Postal and online questionnaires often suffer very low response rates, harming representativeness.

Evaluating with PET

Every method is judged through PET factors:

• Practical: time, money, access, sample size, the skills required.
• Ethical: consent, confidentiality, harm, deception.
• Theoretical: reliability, validity, representativeness, and whether the method fits a positivist (patterns, social facts) or interpretivist (meanings, depth) approach.

Experiments and questionnaires generally score well on reliability and representativeness but poorly on validity, which is why positivists favour them and interpretivists are wary.

Examples in context

A strong answer evaluates each method through PET, names the imposition problem and the Hawthorne effect, and links the method's strengths to positivism.

Try this

Q1. Explain what is meant by the 'imposition problem' in questionnaires. [6 marks]

• What the marker wants. A definition (AO1): the imposition problem is that the researcher's pre-set questions and answer categories shape the responses, so the data reflects the researcher's framework rather than the respondent's own meanings, lowering validity, illustrated with an example.

Q2. Analyse two reasons why positivists favour questionnaires. [12 marks]

• Cue. Two developed points: questionnaires produce reliable data that can be repeated and compared (matching the search for social facts and patterns), and they reach large representative samples allowing generalisation, each explained and linked to the positivist preference for quantitative, scientific data.