'Corpus Construction' as an alternative logic of sampling INFO 272. Qualitative Research Methods 'Corpus Construction' as an alternative logic of sampling

Project Bamboo Join a qualitative research team to talk to humanities scholars to inform the design of “shared, interoperable tools, services, and content to meet the real needs of humanities researchers.” Please e-mail me if interested: jenna@ischool.berkeley.edu

‘Corpus Construction’

‘Corpus Construction’ Defining the sites and subjects of field-based research Making decisions about your field site(s) – how a social phenomenon of interest is mapped out onto spatial terrain Selecting people to follow, observe and/or interview Selecting media / artifacts from the setting for further analysis

Competence and Innovation Competence (Bauer and Gaskell) Systematic Issues of public accountability Innovation (Becker) Challenge conventional thinking

Doing Innovative Research Starting Where You Are (Lofland and Lofland) Commitment and Curiosity Access and ‘getting in’ Willingness to go where others won’t The inconvenient and uncomfortable The illegitimate

Approaches Total enumeration (i.e. census) Statistical random sample Snowball sample (iteration again) Convenience sample (bad)

Random vs. Systematic ‘Corpus Construction’ Typifies unknown attributes Systematic selection to some alternative rationale (not a convenience sample) Random Statistical Sampling Distribution of already known attributes What can be said about the sample generalizes to the whole population Popular misconception – the greater the # in the sample, the more accurate

Unknowable Populations Many populations of ‘individuals’ are knowable, however… What about ‘actions?’ What about ‘situations?’ Open systems (i.e. language) = infinite populations

Mapping the Unknowable Social strata, functions and categories (known) Representations (unknown) Varieties of: Belief Attitudes Opinions Stereotypes Ideologies Worldviews Habits Practices [Bauer and Gaskell]

Mapping the Unknowable Iteration until Saturation Don’t collect too much data [logistical limits]

Problems of Social Strata in Cross-Cultural Research

Demographic Form

Extending Selection Strategies: Sampling for ‘Innovation’ Identify the case that is likely to upset your thinking and look for it – (the counter-example) e.g. addicts of opiate drugs If someone says it has already been studied, its probably time to study it again. Studying the non-serious and the ‘boring’

Selection from Observation Description (in field notes) is a selection from what is observed – we do this implicitly [Becker] done well creates new categories and ideas that ‘get around conventional thinking’

Selecting Field Sites Some work is clearly ‘sited’ Some is not (amorphous social settings) – and therefore locating such work will be more involved Sites may be ‘open’ or ‘closed’

Selecting text, images Text produced in the process of research vs. texts produced for other purposes Bauer and Gaskell’s simplified treatment of newspapers, etc. – newspapers as… vs. Becker’s concern with the ‘sociology of record keeping’ in media studies, the ‘active audience’

In Conclusion - Representativeness? The problem of unknowable populations Rather than ‘representativeness’ we are seeking ‘range’ and variation in the social phenomenon under study For what purpose? Challenging notions of what is ‘natural’ or ‘universal’ about a phenomenon – theory building rather than theory testing/refinement

To Review Population and the problem of unknowable populations Selection for range/diversity of the social phenomenon rather than representativeness Selection for innovation Stopping criterion

For Tuesday Read Lofland and Lofland section on logging data Read UC guidelines for protection of human subjects We will discuss your first activity – a participant-observation exercise