As mentioned previously the two studies took very different approaches. This is also true when in correlation with the research methods that were used. Bigelow and La Gaipa’s approach was to ask children to think about a best friend of the same sex and with this the children were then asked to produce an essay consisting of what they sought after and expected from a best friend. They were also asked to include within the essay, how they might differ their expectations of less closer friends (Brownlow, 2010 p. 242). This approach could produce more varied answers and results from that of observations and experiments. On the other hand, Corsaro took the approach of taking detailed notes and video recordings of children’s interactions in their own environment (Brownlow, 2010 p. 250). With this Corsaro encountered results on a more personal level.
Bigelow and La Gaipa collected information consisting of 480 individually written essays. A compiled list of twenty-one preselected characteristics was used against these essays in order to analyse what had been written by the children (Brownlow, 2010 p. 242-245). This content analysis approach enabled researchers to look for patterns in the data and create comparisons between the ages and gender of the children used. William Corsaro used a very different method. He used an Ethnographic approach which included watching and observing the children from a distance. He did not interact with the children until they approached him and invited him to be a part of their social circle (Brownlow, 2010 p. 251). This gave insight as to how children go about dealing with friendship and how they may or may not act as a friend towards another. Corsaro mentioned, “I think a key here is, to be seen not as a typical adult, is to let children bring you in” (Interview with William Corsaro (2010). Through this method being used, Corsaro was able to produce rich and complex data as he was interacting with the children on their level so that they would feel relaxed and hopefully reduce the chance of the children not acting as they normally would around each other.
The type of research method used determines what sort of evidence is collected. Looking back at Bigelow and La Gaipa’s method, where written evidence was collected and then analysed, it would be said that the data collected was qualitative as it contained very detailed an personal thoughts on the research matter however the data then changed into quantitative as all the personal information wasn’t used by the researchers only the words that had been pre-selected were counted (Brownlow, 2010 p. 242). This is different from the data that Corsaro collected. He used the information and evidence that he gained from talking as one of the children. With this in mind the evidence collected was of quantitative nature; he analysed each individual perspective that the data preserved.
With both studies focusing on different methods, each study found different things from their research. Bigelow and La Gaipa (1974) discovered from the data that was collected that expectations of a best friend alter at different ages. This suggests that a child’s image of a best friend must change as they grow older as they develop new thoughts and feelings that create complex needs and wants (Brownlow, 2010 p. 243). Differences were found in the results of this study in relation to activities listed as part of children expectations. These included things such as organised play. It has been explained that, “this was largely oweing to competitive group sport being more of a male activity in their particular sample” (Brownlow, 2010 p. 244). The study created a three stage model of development of children’s friendship expectations that shows transition into different ages and the expectations that our important to a child at that time (Brownlow, 2010 p. 244). Bigelow and La Gaipa used a large sample of data during their study and with this have been able to provide generalisations in regard to children and friendships (Brownlow, 2010 p. 246). This is something that was not covered by Corsaro.
William Corsaro discovered and brought to life a number of interesting factors as to how children understand friendships; this included how friendships may be developed (Brownlow, 2010 p. 252). Brownlow stated that, “Corsaro also found that children referred to themselves as friends because they were playing together” (Brownlow, 2010 p. 253). Children discussing friendship at younger ages was highlighted as something that research hadn’t previously suggested (Brownlow, 2010 p. 253). Corsaro made a number of observations of children within their own environment. With being able to get so close to children on a personal level and by understanding how children themselves understand friendships, Corsaro states “we are going to better prepare them to face the challenges of adult life when they do become adults” (Interview with William Corsaro (2010).
Naturally, with many studies there are criticisms related to the methods and research that may have been used. When comparing the study conducted by Bigelow and La Gaipa and the study by William Corsaro it is clear that there are potential criticisms. Possible criticisms or issues with Bigelow and La Gaipa’s methods include things such as difference in writing and descriptive ability; some children may not be as able and may not have the skills to provide evidence for the study in a way that could be easily understood (Brownlow, 2010 p. 245). As previously mentioned as part of this study the data was collected and analysed using a list of preselected expectations. The issue related to this could be that the expectations of the children asked to participate may be worlds apart from the expectations that Bigelow and La Gaipa expected to be important and with this points that may of been of importance could easily be passed by and go unnoticed (Brownlow, 2010 p. 246).
There are a similar number of criticisms linked to Corsaro’s study that applies to different aspects of the study. Corsaro himself noted that it can be hard to ‘blend in’ and if the adult is not accepted into the children’s social world there is a chance that small but very important details may be missed so it is crucial that the transition from observer to being invited as part of a child’s group is done correctly in order to obtain true evidence (Brownlow, 2010 p. 251). When taking these slow steps to gain acceptance, it is possible that the research period could take a long time, sometimes years (Brownlow, 2010 p. 250). This could create a criticism about the length of time needed to complete the study.
It is apparent that the two studies have a varied amount of similarities and differences. The approach taken in each provided completely different information and varied results. With very little previous research into this area both studies have a similarity in the way that they have provided a basis for further investigation. Both studies with their different choices of research methods introduced interesting findings and scope to investigate further.
Word Count - 1448
References
Brownlow, C. (2010) ‘Making friends’ in Brace, N. and Byford, J. (eds) Discovering Psychology, Milton Keynes, The Open University.
Interview with William Corsaro (2010) (audio), DSE141 Discovering psychology, Milton Keynes, The Open University
Self Reflection
This TMA has been very interesting as child psychology is something that I would consider a career in. The only difficult things have been personal time and also getting reused to writing compare and contrast essays.