|
|
American Sociological Review
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummarySociology is the scientific study of the structure of social life. Sociologists use the scientific method to learn how human groups are put together and how they function. All human beings have to interact with other human beings in order to survive. People, in other words, are social; they live in groups. The focus of sociology is on this socialness, on group life. To develop generalizations or principles about what happens when people live in groups, the sociologist applies the scientific method—that is, he uses his own sense experience. He listens to what people are saying; he sniffs the ointment they are putting on their hair; he tastes the foods which they consider delicious and those which they reject; he feels the texture of their clothing; and, above all, he watches them. He notes the ways they greet one another and their rituals in parting; he sees the overt and the subtle ways in which they express approval and disapproval; he observes them at work, at worship, and at play; and he pays special heed to those situations in which what they really do differs from what they say they would do. But there is more to the scientific method than observation. The observer must apply logic to what he has seen or heard or tasted or touched or smelled; his facts have no meaning until he interprets them. And, ideally, other observers must use their sense experience on similar information, interpret it, and arrive at the same conclusions. Jackson Toby’s paper "Undermining the Student’s Faith in the Validity of Personal Experience" illustrates the hazards of relying on one’s sense experience without filtering the information through a logical analysis. Social scientists are often unable to set up an experimental design for their work because our cultural values prohibit us from manipulating our fellow human beings in experiments as we would white mice. As a substitute for laboratory precision, we can use statistics to help us decide whether or not we should believe what our sense experience tells us. Had Toby’s students followed the procedures recommended by Frederick F. Stephan in "Sampling," they would have been less likely to reach erroneous conclusions. Like a slide rule, a rolling pin, or any other tool, statistics can be misused. Numerical analysis is not a guarantee of salvation. William Bruce Cameron’s "The Elements of Statistical Confusion" offers valuable warnings against the careless misinterpretation of commonly used statistical terms.
PART I
Introduction
1
Sociology and Social Science
Jacksonn/aTobyn/an/an/an/a
Undermining the Student’s Faith in the Validity
of Personal Experience1
After listening to me talk for a half-hour on research in the field of
child socialization, a freshman raised his hand to comment, "In all of my
eighteen years, I never came across any of those things you were talking
about." The class laughed, but I found that other students are also
unwilling to believe anything that they cannot confirm by their own
experience. It does no good to point out that they get to meet in a
lifetime only an insignificant proportion of the human race and that,
moreover, a white Protestant New Yorker has little chance of knowing
Southern Negroes, European priests, or even American farmers. Personal
experience is so convincing that they discourse with assurance on topics
about which I dare to make only the most tentative observations. At first I
was non-plussed. Then I got an idea. If I could shake their confidence in
the validity of personal experience, perhaps they would prefer the
cautious, pedestrian conclusions of social science.
My program of subversion includes the following illustration of the
limitations of "experience": I ask the class whether anyone has noticed, in
traveling by bus or streetcar, that there are more public conveyances going
by in the wrong direction. A few students agree that this is so.
"You mean that, no matter which way you wish to go, more buses come by
going in the opposite direction?" The class begins to mumble that you see
the same number in both directions, that it only seems there are
more buses coming the other way. The handful of students who spoke up first
feel trapped and hasten to disavow their original position.
"No, it is not an illusion," I assure them, "you actually have observed
more buses going in the wrong direction!" No matter which direction you
want to go in? How can that be? Disbelief is writ large on their faces.
"Suppose you want to travel east. A bus comes heading west.
Do you take it?" Of course not, they snort. "You wait five minutes
more, and another bus comes heading west. Do you take it?" No. "How
many buses do you see heading west that day?" It depends on how long it
takes for my bus to come. "As many as five?" Possibly. "How many do
you see heading east?" They begin to catch on. Only one because, as
soon as a bus comes going in my direction, I take it!
"Over the years you can accumulate quite a bit of experience testifying
that public transportation companies are engaged in a conspiracy to
frustrate your travel plans. Of course, it is neither the bus company nor a
malevolent deity. You observe the comings and goings of buses while waiting
for one, and this biases your conclusions. When buses go by in the wrong
direction, you may fume, curse the bus company, or spend your time counting
them. But no matter how many there are, you do not board any of them. Let
one bus come on your side of the street, and you get on. This is your
mistake. If you want to prove to yourself that paranoid conclusions are
unjustified, you have to restrain the impulse to get someplace. Station
yourself at the bus stop at 6 a.m. and stay there until sunset, counting
the buses as they go by in both directions. This is the only
scientific way to mobilize the testimony of experience on this
problem."
So far, none of my students has been scientist enough to accept my
challenge.
1 From ,
1955, 20:717–718. By permission.
Contents:
Chicago: "Undermining the Student’s Faith in the Validity of Personal Experience," American Sociological Review in Principles of Sociology: A Reader in Theory and Research, ed. Young, Kimball, and Mack, Raymond W. (New York: American Book Company, 1962), Original Sources, accessed December 4, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=78GBJIGG5PX769T.
MLA: . "Undermining the Student’s Faith in the Validity of Personal Experience." American Sociological Review, Vol. 20, in Principles of Sociology: A Reader in Theory and Research, edited by Young, Kimball, and Mack, Raymond W., New York, American Book Company, 1962, Original Sources. 4 Dec. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=78GBJIGG5PX769T.
Harvard: , 'Undermining the Student’s Faith in the Validity of Personal Experience' in American Sociological Review. cited in 1962, Principles of Sociology: A Reader in Theory and Research, ed. , American Book Company, New York. Original Sources, retrieved 4 December 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=78GBJIGG5PX769T.
|