The general use of official statistics is highly supported by Positivists as they believe in the application of science into social life. An example of a positivist using official statistics within their research is Emile Durkheim's work on the relationship between religion and number of suicides within a specific area. He found, according to his statistics, that if one were Catholic, they were more likely to commit suicide than if of any other religion. This practice is easily challenged however by the argument presented by many Interpretivists, in saying that official statistics are only of numerical value. In other sense, from official statistics it is highly inaccurate to be able to draw conclusions for what the data does not display are the why's and how's within research, a trait which is much supported by the Interpretivist group. Data and numerical data such as official statistics are closed ended.
Another critical disadvantage of the use of official statistics is that the statistics are produced from the reported cases of the specific topic, hence, a significant amount of similar cases may have not been reported due to a variety of different reasons - confidence issues, most cases which are statistically categorised usually involve sensitive issues and some may feel uncomfortable with coming forth with said information - and therefore creates a "Statistical Iceberg" or 'Iceberg effect.' This is the effect that many statistic collections face in a survey. It is incredibly unlikely that every single case of, for example, knife crime is reported. Sceptics of the use of statistics believe that the very nature of what is being researched – frequently sensitive issues – mean that people simply will not come forward or they will give incorrect information to the researcher thus devaluing the official results. Moreover, it's as if official statistics have become a part of a social contrast in the sense that, in the eyes of Interpretivists at least, official statistics have started to influence the way in which society behaves. For example a statistic released claiming 75% of all vandalism is done by teenagers aged 14-18, more and more people will begin naturally blaming teenagers aged 14-18 for crimes involving vandalism as that is what they are being told and fed by over viewing official statistics; however said statistics are not social fact and therefore should not be used in order to draw conclusions from. This is a flaw as it does not allow a sociologist or researcher to then broaden or take further depth into research.
Furthermore, in response to the previously referred to 'Iceberg effect,' a lack of validity can also arise as of this due to not all cases of a said topic to have been reported, therefore the data could be inaccurate and not valid. This is highly damaging to one's research and it then prevents the researcher from making any conclusions or decisions that can be put forth as true, as in fact they were based on false results. This, on top of the already mentioned disadvantages, display the drawbacks of sociologists using official statistics within their research methods - which is an act supported by Positivists and opposed by Interpretivists.
- Amrik Randhawa 12E
by
fre3za (student)
