Question 1(c) · 474 words written
Opening · a definition
Q.1(c)
Body · points and prose
→ Validity refers to the correctness of data, i-e, the researcher's data does indeed justify what he is studying. On the other hand reliability refers to ability of other researcher to get to the same conclusion when following the same methodology.
Is all valid data, reliable?
Alan Bryman says, valid data showcase the truthness of study, but since human have different perspectives one set of data can lead to 2 conclusion. For example, Presence of sects is used as example of both secularisation and religious revivalism by Steve Bruce. Though valid data may also produce reliable data too.
Similarly validity are of 4 kinds → (i) External, Internal, measurement and ecological validity.
Since human is in real life situation, it becomes very hard to achieve external validity, i.e., to apply same conclusion to others as different people have different conscience.
On the other hand reliability too does not ensure validity, as people can follow the same qualitative method and get same results, but that result may not measure what they wanted too.
Eg. we can ask everyone if they liked Pizza or not. But if we wanted to generalise the result, if people in general wanted to be healthy it will have internal validity and measurement validity error.
So, it Both validity and reliability are different goals, and as per Hammersley both must be pursued separately using triangulation of method.
Q.1(e)
→ Society which tends to justify social mobility (movement from one social position to others) are called as Open societies. eg. U.S, British meritocracy, achievement based.
Close · a summary
On the other hand, societies which tends to block or even discourages social mobility are called as close societies. Eg. Caste system, Old China, ascriptive.
But in reality in both types, there is only relatively more or less mobility, and not absolutely full or absolutely zero.
Peter Saunders, liberalist, says even in meritocracy of U.K, there are barriers due to economic and structural, which discourage mobility. Pierre Bourdieu says, due to different level of Capital, different class have different ability for improvement.
Goldthrope and Oxford study also showed children with their father in class 7, were less likely to enter class 1. Similarly, feminist like Sylvia Walby says due to pay gap, it is evident women have less chance of mobility in democracy as there is also glass ceiling effect. On the other hand, as M.N. Srinivas's concept of sanskritisation shows even in closed caste society, many castes like Teli in Orissa (F.G. Baily), Koli in Gujarat improved their social position. Not just sanskritisation, their also used to happen fission and fusion of caste to improve their chances of social mobility. Caste associations also played a role.
So it can be said in both types of society the difference is only the relative rate of mobility and the value system if mobility is legitimised or not.