OxfordAQA A Level Sociology: Introducing Sociology — Revision Notes

Condensed for the final weeks. For the full explanation, use the Introducing Sociology study guide.

Culture and socialisation

Culture — the whole way of life of a group: norms, values, roles, beliefs, language.

Primary socialisation in the family; secondary through education, peers, media, religion and workplace.

Nature versus nurture: the sociological evidence is cross-cultural variation in norms and gender roles, and feral children cases where individuals raised without human contact fail to develop language or normal social behaviour. Both show that behaviour assumed natural is learnt.

Ascribed status is fixed at birth; achieved status is earned. Subculture — distinct norms within a wider society; counter-culture — actively opposed to the mainstream.

Structure and action

The organising debate of the whole subject.

	Structuralist (macro)	Social action (micro)
View	Society shapes individuals	Individuals create society
Perspectives	Functionalism, Marxism, feminism	Interactionism

• Functionalism — society as interdependent parts held by value consensus.
• Marxism — class conflict; the superstructure serves the economic base; false class consciousness conceals exploitation.
• Feminism — patriarchy. Liberal (reform), Marxist (linked to capitalism), radical (patriarchy as fundamental).
• Interactionism — meanings, labelling, the self-fulfilling prophecy.
• Postmodernism — grand narratives no longer explain society; identity is fluid and chosen.

Giddens’s structuration is the synthesis: structure and action shape each other continuously, since people act within structures that their actions then reproduce or change. Top-band answers resolve the opposition rather than describing it.

Research methods

Positivism wants objective, quantitative, reliable data and causal patterns. Interpretivism wants verstehen — understanding meanings — and prefers qualitative, valid data.

Concept	Meaning
Reliability	Repeating gives the same result
Validity	Gives a true picture
Representativeness	Sample reflects the population

Quantitative methods are high in reliability and low in validity; qualitative the reverse. That trade-off answers most methods questions.

Method	Strength	Weakness
Questionnaire	Cheap, large, reliable	Low response, low validity
Structured interview	Comparable	Interviewer effect
Unstructured interview	Valid, detailed	Slow, unreliable
Participant observation	Very valid	Hawthorne effect, going native, ethical issues
Official statistics	Cheap, large-scale	Socially constructed by the state

Evaluate with PET — Practical, Ethical, Theoretical — and within the theoretical, RVR: reliability, validity, representativeness. Always evaluate for the specific research topic, not in the abstract.

Triangulation combines methods so each offsets the other’s weaknesses.

Worked example. Assess the usefulness of participant observation for studying a criminal gang.

STRENGTHS   high validity - behaviour observed in its natural setting
            access to a group that would refuse a questionnaire
            reveals meanings members attach to their own actions

WEAKNESSES  not reliable - cannot be replicated
            small, unrepresentative sample
            researcher may 'go native', losing objectivity
            covert work raises consent and safety issues

The conclusion should turn on purpose: for understanding meaning it is the strongest method available; for measuring prevalence it is the wrong tool.

Social inequality

Class predicts life chances more strongly than any other single factor. Intergenerational mobility compares a person with their parents; intragenerational compares stages of their own career.

Absolute poverty is lacking necessities for survival; relative poverty is falling below the standard considered acceptable in that society — which is why relative poverty exists in wealthy countries.

The cycle of deprivation: poor housing and diet → poor health and education → low-paid work → poverty reproduced.

Gender — the glass ceiling, horizontal and vertical segregation, the dual burden and triple shift.

Ethnicity — discrimination, institutional racism, media representation. Ethnic and class disadvantage overlap heavily, and much of the apparent ethnic effect narrows once class is controlled for.

Exam traps

• Confusing reliability with validity.
• Describing a perspective without applying it.
• Treating structure and action as a simple either/or.
• Evaluating a method in the abstract.
• Confusing absolute with relative poverty.
• One-sided answers — both sides plus a judgement are required.
• Evaluating participant observation only on validity, without weighing it against reliability, representativeness and ethical issues.

Self-test

1. What two kinds of evidence support the nurture side of the debate?
2. Distinguish structuralist from social action perspectives, and name the synthesis.
3. Distinguish reliability from validity, and say which methods favour each.
4. What does PET stand for, and what are the three theoretical criteria?
5. Why is relative poverty found in wealthy countries?
6. Give one strength and one weakness of participant observation for studying a criminal gang.

Answers: 1. Cross-cultural variation in norms and gender roles, and feral children cases where individuals raised without human contact fail to develop language or normal social behaviour. 2. Structuralist approaches see society as shaping individuals from above; social action approaches see individuals as creating society through interaction; Giddens’s structuration synthesises the two. 3. Reliability is getting the same result on repetition, favoured by quantitative methods; validity is giving a true picture, favoured by qualitative methods. 4. Practical, Ethical, Theoretical; the theoretical criteria are reliability, validity and representativeness. 5. Because it is defined relative to the standard of living considered acceptable in that particular society, so it measures inequality rather than absolute deprivation. 6. Strength: high validity, since behaviour is observed in its natural setting and the method gives access to a group that would refuse a questionnaire. Weakness: it is not reliable, since it cannot be replicated, and the researcher may ‘go native’, losing objectivity.