Against a Divisive Drift. The Functions of Big Data in the Integrated Strategies of Social Research

Author/s Sergio Mauceri
Publishing Year 2016 Issue 2016/109 Language Italian
Pages 13 P. 70-82 File size 85 KB
DOI 10.3280/SR2016-109007
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Despite the undoubted benefits of Big Data, it may also pose the risk of a new divisive drift within social sciences. In the long term, the Big Data revolution could in fact lead to an eclipse of primary data collection procedures, with inevitable damage to the productivity of social research. This paper reconstructs a typology of strategies to integrate Big Data with conventional research pathways, re-evaluating the forgotten lessons of the American Schools of Chicago and Columbia. The typology is constructed by combining two criteria: the function of Big Data and the time order.

  1. F. Aureli, S. Mauceri (2015), Media, élite simboliche e omofobia: tra agire comunicativo e pratico, in S. Mauceri (2015b), pp. 151-80.
  2. A.H. Barton (1968), «Bringing Society Back in: Survey Research and Macro-Methodology», American Behavioral Society, XII, 2, pp. 1-9, DOI: 10.1177/000276426801200201
  3. E. Campelli (2004), «Per una spiegazione di medio raggio. Ancora sul problema della spiegazione », Sociologia e ricerca sociale, XXV, 75, pp. 113-56, DOI: 10.1400/69475
  4. J.S. Coleman (1958), «Relational Analysis: The Study of Social Organization with Survey Methods», Human Organization, XVII, 4, pp. 28-36, DOI: 10.17730/humo.17.4.q5604m676260q8n7
  5. G. Gobo, S. Mauceri (2014), Constructing Survey Data. An Interactional Approach, Los Angeles, Sage.
  6. J.J. Hox (2010), Multilevel Analysis. Techniques and Applications, New York, Routledge.
  7. J.J. Hox, J.K. Roberts (eds.) (2011), Handbook of Advanced Multilevel Analysis, New York, Routledge.
  8. H.J. Hummel (1972), Probleme der Mehrebeneanalyse, Stuttgart, Teubner.
  9. P.F. Lazarsfeld (1958), «Evidence and Inference in Social Research», Daedalus, LXXXVII, 4, pp. 99-130; tr. it. parz., Dai concetti agli indici empirici, in R. Boudon, P.F. Lazarsfeld (a c. di), L’analisi empirica nelle scienze sociali, Bologna, il Mulino, 1965, vol. I.
  10. P.F. Lazarsfeld (1967), Metodologia e ricerca sociologica, Bologna, il Mulino (a c. di e con introduzione di V. Capecchi).
  11. P.F. Lazarsfeld, H. Menzel (1961), On the Relation between Individual and Collective Properties, in A. Etzioni, A Sociological Reader on Complex Organizations, New York, Rinehart &Winston; tr. it., Relazioni tra proprietà individuali e proprietà collettive, in Lazarsfeld (1967).
  12. P.F. Lazarsfeld, B. Berelson, H. Gaudet (1944), The People’s Choice. How, the Voter makes up his Mind in a Presidential Campaign, New York, Columbia University Press; tr. it.
  13. parz., La partecipazione alle elezioni e l’effetto di pressioni contrastanti, in Lazarsfeld (1967).
  14. N.L. Leech, A.J. Onwuegbuzie (2009), «A Typology of Mixed Methods Research Designs», Quality & Quantity, 43, pp. 265-75, DOI: 10.1007/s11135-007-9105-3
  15. S. Mauceri (2012), «Per una survey integrata e multilivello. Le lezioni dimenticate della Columbia School», Sociologia e ricerca sociale, XXXIII, 99, pp. 22-65, DOI: 10.3280/SR2012-099003
  16. S. Mauceri (2015a), «Integrating Quality into Quantity. Survey Research in the Era of Mixed Methods», Quality & Quantity, DOI: 10.1007/s11135-015-0199-8(onlinefirst)
  17. S. Mauceri (2015b), Omofobia come costruzione sociale. Processi generativi del pregiudizio in età adolescenziale, Milano, FrancoAngeli.
  18. S. Mauceri, A. Taddei (2015) «Il pregiudizio omofobico come forma di normatività sociale? Analisi integrata e multilivello degli atteggiamenti nei confronti di gay e lesbiche in ambito scolastico», Polis, XXIX, 1, pp. 93-126, DOI: 10.1424/79274.D.L.Morgan(2007),«CombiningQualitativeandQuantitativeMethods.ParadigmsLostandPragmatismRegained.MethodologicalImplicationsofCombiningQualitativeandQuantitativeMethods»,JournalofMixedMethodsResearch,I,1,pp.48-76,doi:10.1177/2345678906292462
  19. R.E. Park, E. Burgess, R.D. McKenzie (1925), The City: Suggestions for the Study of Human Nature in the Urban Environment, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, tr. it., La città, Torino, Edizioni di Comunità, 1979.
  20. K. Ringdal (1992), «Recent Developments in: Methods for Multilevel Analysis», Acta Sociologica, XXXV, 3, pp. 235-43, DOI: 10.1177/000169939203500305
  21. M.R. Steenbergen, B. Jones (2002), «Modeling Multilevel Data Structures», American Journal of Political Science, XLVI, 1, pp. 218-23, DOI: 10.2307/3088424
  22. A. Tashakkori, J. Creswell (2007), «Exploring the Nature of Research Questions in Mixed Methods Research», Journal of Mixed Methods Research, I, 3, 207-11, DOI: 10.1177/1558689807302814
  23. A. Tashakkori, C. Teddlie (1998), Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Thousand Oaks (CA), Sage.

  • Handbook of Research on Advanced Research Methodologies for a Digital Society Costantino Cipolla, pp.42 (ISBN:9781799884736)

Sergio Mauceri, Contro la deriva scissoria. Le funzioni dei big data nelle strategie integrate di ricerca sociale in "SOCIOLOGIA E RICERCA SOCIALE " 109/2016, pp 70-82, DOI: 10.3280/SR2016-109007