1. Three Types of Unobtrusive Research 1.Content analysis - examine written documents such as editorials. 2.Analyses of existing statistics. 3.Historical/comparative analysis - historical records.

2. What is Unobtrusive Research No direct contact with subjects –data was collected by someone else GSS, census data, etc. –observing social artifacts Books, documents, etc. –Looking at historical information Example democratic peace thesis: democracies generally don’t go to war with each other

3. What is Content Analysis? Study of recorded human communication Topics Appropriate for CA –“who says what, to whom, how, and with what” –Saliency (importance) –Changes in meaning and interpretation –How issues are defined

4. Example Examining media coverage of the national deficit and/or debt Media is pretty broad, could narrow to TV. Still broad, narrow to major evening news programs. Transcripts are available from various sources. For example we could search LexisNexis and the Vanderbilt Television Archives for all transcripts pertaining to the issue. Once we identify news reports that discuss the issue, what next?

5. Coding, Counting and Record Keeping Unit of Analysis –TV transcripts of major nightly news shows –Time period CODING: Manifest vs. Latent Content –Counting (objective) –Qualitative evaluation (subjective)

6. Coding: what are we looking for Manifest: –We could count how often the news mentions the deficit or debt – measures saliency. Latent: –How does the media frame the debt/deficit Too much spending Overpaid bureaucrats Partisan politics Not enough taxes What solutions are identified?

7. Strengths of Content Analysis Economy of time and money. Easy to repeat a portion of the study if necessary. Permits study of processes over time. Researcher seldom has any effect on the subject being studied. Reliability.

8. Weaknesses of Content Analysis Limited to the examination of recorded communications. Problems of validity are likely, especially when simply counting Problems with reliability with subjective (latent) coding can be solved with two separate sets of coders coding a proportion of material and examining “intercoder reliability”

9. Analyzing Existing Statistics Can be the main source of data or a supplemental source of data. Often existing data doesn't cover the exact question. Reliability is dependent on the quality of the statistics. Examples: GSS, Census data, Crime Stats

10. Weaknesses Problems with Validity –What’s available v. what is needed Assessing quality of data my be difficult Data may be dated Strengths Cheap (may need to buy data) Scholars can verify your findings if they want since data is available to multiple users

11. Comparative & Historical Analysis The examination of societies, processes, phenomenon over time and in comparison with one another Historically grounded explanations of large-scale and substantively important outcomes Sources of Data: Newspapers, Literature Review, Govt. Docs., biographies, diaries, letters, etc.

13. Historical Events Research: an auto manufacturing plant that produces SUVs closes Oil embargo Political crisis Foreign produced fuel efficient cars increase in popularity SUV sales decrease Gas prices increase Another corporation buys the plant New owner decreases wages Workers strike New owner decides it’s more cost effective to close the plant and move to a less developed country © Pine Forge Press, an imprint of Sage Publications, 2006

14. Cross-Sectional Comparative

15. Comparative Historical: Lipset (1959)

16. Comparative and Historical Analysis Cautions: Can't trust the accuracy of records - official or unofficial, primary or secondary. Must be wary of bias in data sources. Hard to be systematic (or random) in data collection

17. The End All three methods are broad methods with a lot of flexibility and choices that need to be made by the research. What existing data to use; how to code, what case to examine, for how long of a time period to examine, and so on and so on. None of these methods have a map to follow, but rather provide general ideas on how to approach a question.