GRE writing, interview-centered research versus observational approach

Material:

An interview-centered research showed that children in a society which an observation-centered research had concluded collectively rear children actually spend more time with their biological parents based on the fact that children talk more about their parents than other adult members in the society Tertia. Thus interview-centered research is more effective than observational approach in anthropological studies.

Analysis:

The result of the interview that children talked more about their biological parents would be weak as the evidence of the assumption that the society is not so much involved in raising children as it had been thought unless it is valid in the ways it was conducted such as exactly what questions were asked, how many samples were taken, what age range of children were interviewed, or whether other age range people were also interviewed. As interview-based approach can be arbitral, it cannot be said that it is superior to observational approach.

   First of all, how the interviews were done and exactly what questions were asked in the interview should be clear. If many specific questions were asked in the interview, examination of each question may be required. Questions that are more about the child’s preferences or feelings rather than more objective facts may reduce credibility of the results. For example, question like “Who do you like to be with most?” could induce more talk about parents, while questions like ”Who feeds you? “, “Who do you sleep with?” or “Who taught you how to kemp your hair?” could bring more reliable results. The responses concentrated more on other adults than parents may reveal the higher quantity and quality of the time spent by the child with other adults, and thereby the evidence will weaken the argument, and if the interviewees consistently mentioned their biological parents in response to these questions, probably the assumption is right.

   If interviewees were left free to talk about a vague topic like their favorite people, and the results were a lot of talk about their parents, this may not support the assumption. Basically, a child’s talk in itself is a weak evidence because children are less coherent compared to adults. A child might talk a lot about their parents one time, but at another time other adults, their pet animals, or even something that does not exist (an imaginary entity), whether they spend a lot of time with them or not. If the interviews were done in a large number, and most children talked about their parents most of the time, the argument may be a little credible. However, what age range the interviewed children were can also be a factor to doubt the argument. If they were young children, it is natural for them to talk about their biological parents, especially their mothers, who need to nurse them. Even in the case of older children, biological parents may still have more significance to them than other adult members of the society even if the society plays a great role in child-rearing. If the interviewees include grown-ups, who can find more objectively the adults who had a great influence on their development during their early days, still talk much about their parents, it could strengthen the theory. Also, if the research is about whether a specific society is involved in child-rearing as a whole, asking the adults about their child-rearing system would be necessary. Then how much other adults than parents play roles in it will be made clearer than asking just children questions. However, the research seems to focus on the child talks. Moreover, the result that children spend much more time talking about their parents than about other adults in the village shows that the spectrum of their interests includes other adult members of the society, and this is rare in societies which leave child-rearing basically to the parents. Thus, the result in itself could be the evidence that the society of Tertia actively involves in the early stages of its member’s psychological and physical development.

   In general, research results may vary depending on many factors such as number and choice of subjects and how the research is done. Interview-centered research results may also vary depending on the choice of interviewees and questions as seen above. Observation-centered research results may vary depending on the quantity and kinds of data the researcher collects. These two types of research methods are different in their choices of subjects: the former focuses on the utterances of the subjects and the latter behaviors and artifacts they produce. In this difference, the latter could be less inaccurate since the latter involves more concrete items while the latter uses nothing other than verbal evidences of the subjects. Furthermore, interview-centered researches involve more variants. In addition to the variants examined above, the situation or the interviewers’ expressions or tone of voices could affect the quality of the data. All in all, it would be difficult to say that interview-centered researches are more accurate than observation-centered researches.