Think of the times when you were a child and wanted to try new things by asking 'what if?'. We all loved our fun science projects in school - mixing baking soda with a clementine to make orange fizz, for example.
The 'what if?' question followed by an action to trace cause and effect is classified as an experiment.
'What if I pour water on the sand?' would be an experiment question for a young natural scientist. 'What if I disobeyed my teacher?' would be an experiment question to a young social scientist.
In the Research Design article, we briefly touched upon the nature of the experimental research design. Researchers begin their investigations with a hypothesis that must be tested.
Once we have a hypothesis, we can test it using an experiment. Therefore, we will be looking at:
- The definition of experiments, what they are and the types of experiments there are
- Laboratory experiments, famous examples and their advantages and disadvantages
- Field experiments, famous examples and their advantages and disadvantages
- The differences between laboratory and field experiments
- Ethnographic research
There's a lot to get through, so let's start!
Experiments in Sociology: examples and types
An experiment is a research method used in experimental research design. It uses the scientific method and seeks to establish a cause-effect relationship between two variables by testing a hypothesis. In sociology, we test the relationship between social phenomena.
Experiments typically produce quantitative results. However, if it is a social experiment, it could also yield qualitative data.
One of the key factors that affect experiments is location. An experiment can either occur in controlled laboratory conditions or the field.
Norman Triplett conducted one of the first known experiments in 1895, focusing on social facilitation. He observed that cyclists tend to perform better when cycling in the presence of someone else, as opposed to cycling alone. He recreated this effect in his laboratory experiment, where he demonstrated how children complete a task faster when working in pairs than when working individually.
However, before we consider the differences in experiment locations, we need to assess the extent to which researchers exercise control over them. Researchers distinguish between natural and controlled experiments.
A natural experiment is an empirical or observational study in which researchers do not artificially manipulate the variables of interest. Instead, they can be influenced by nature or factors outside the researchers' control.
On the other hand, a controlled experiment is one in which the independent variable is manually manipulated to see if it will influence the dependent variable and cause it to change. This eliminates any alternative explanations of observed relationships and traces a direct cause-effect.
We will now look at two types of experiments: laboratory and field experiments.
Laboratory Experiments in Sociology
These are experiments that take place in controlled environments and aim to use the scientific method to test a specific hypothesis. This is then used to find a cause-and-effect relationship between two variables.
Proponents of the positivist research philosophy advocate controlled laboratory experiments because that is the only way to ensure that the relationship being tested is not affected by any external factors.
They define the relationship between factors using mathematical terms: dependent and independent variables.
A variable is a factor in an experiment that may be subject to change.
- A dependent variable is the subject of the study, for example, fluency in Spanish.
- An independent variable is being manipulated to see the effect on the dependent variable. For example, using a native Spanish speaker and a native English speaker to teach Spanish to ascertain if there is a difference between Spanish language attainment under different teachers.
Randomised controlled trials
The most well-known example of lab experiments is randomised controlled trials (RCTs), which are commonly used to test the effectiveness of drugs. Participants are randomly selected and divided into those who received the drug (the treatment/intervention group) and those who got a placebo (the control group).
Researchers record participants' health conditions before and after the experiment to see whether there is any difference in outcome between the two groups. This allows a high degree of confidence in determining if there is a causal relationship between taking the drug and getting better or worse (for instance, if the drug does not work and produces side effects).
Laboratory experiments in social research
It is difficult to use laboratory experiments in social research to conduct experiments. Social experiments differ because they study social rather than biological phenomena. The nature and context of social experiments are also different from natural science experiments like the drug test described above.
There is an ongoing debate in the scientific community about the extent to which it is possible to recreate authentic social scenarios in controlled environments. Therefore, social scientists frequently lean towards field experiments.
Famous sociology experiments in the lab
We will go through some famous sociological experiments.
Milgram (1963) and obedience
Milgram's obedience experiment (1963) is a famous example of laboratory conditions in social research. The experiment divided participants into 'learner' and 'teacher' groups, where the 'learners' were Milgram's confederates and purposely gave wrong answers. The test was to see how far the 'teachers' (the participants) would go to be obedient - even if it involved punishing the learners by subjecting them to (fake) electric shocks.
The result of the initial experiment was that 65 percent of participants (i.e. teachers) went on to administer the highest level of electric shock - 450 volts. All of the participants continued to 300 volts. This experiment took place in Milgram's lab at Yale University.
Fig. 1 - Milgram's experiment (1963) was a lab experiment testing a social phenomenon (obedience)
Asch (1951) and conformity
Another illustration of a sociological experiment conducted in a lab is Solomon Asch's conformity experiment (1951). He was interested in the extent to which the social pressure of a majority could make a person conform. He invited 50 people to take part in his vision test, demonstrated in the image below, and asked them to assess in groups whether the line on the left is the same length as line A, line B or line C.
The participants did not know that Asch's associates were purposefully giving wrong answers among them. Asch wanted to see if the actual participants would change their opinion in line with others. 75 percent of the participants conformed to the popular opinion once or more, even though they knew that the answers were incorrect. This experiment took place in Asch's lab at Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania.
Fig. 2 - Asch's lab experiment tested conformity, another social phenomenon
Laboratory experiments in Sociology: Advantages and Disadvantages
It is important to understand not only the strengths of a research method but also its shortcomings. Read below for an outline of the advantages and disadvantages of laboratory experiments in sociology.
Advantages of laboratory experiments in Sociology
There is control over the experiment and the ability to isolate the targeted variables.
Researchers can trace 'cause and effect' relationships.
They have high degrees of reliability as the lab conditions can be replicated.
Positivist sociologists favour them as they use the scientific method.
Disadvantages of laboratory experiments in Sociology
The lab environment is not conducive to people acting authentically; they could put on a facade if they know they are being studied. This is called a 'demand characteristic' and could render the results invalid.
Participants could give answers they think the researcher wants to hear because they fear being ridiculed or “letting the researcher down” by producing “incorrect” answers. This is also an example of a demand characteristic.
Behaviour is rarely caused by a single factor, so isolating one variable may not be possible or useful.
Some lab experiments are morally and ethically questionable. For example, the method and results of Milgram's obedience experiment were controversial due to the distress caused to the participants.
In social research, some sociologists prefer conducting field experiments. We will now consider these.
Field Experiments in Sociology
Field experiments are conducted in real-world social scenarios. They emerged due to the interpretivism critique of lab experiments, which argues that authentic social interaction cannot be reproduced in a lab.
Field experiments in social research
Let's look at examples of sociological field experiments.
Zimbardo (1971)
A great example of a social experiment conducted in the field was one we touched upon briefly in the Research Considerations article - Zimbardo's Stanford prison experiment (1971). Zimbardo invited volunteers to be prisoners and guards in the mock prison he created. Participants were randomly assigned roles of 'prisoner' and 'guard' and studied to test why prison guards can be brutal with prisoners - namely, whether they are naturally sadistic or are influenced by the environment.
Zimbardo found that even though the participants were thoroughly vetted for behaviour/anger issues, the 'guards' started to treat the 'prisoners' aggressively and abusively from early on. The experiment showed how easily people would conform to the roles they are expected to play in society.
Fig. 3 - Zimbardo’s prison experiment (1971) was a field experiment
UK DWP (2010)
A more recent example was commissioned by the UK's Department for Work and Pension (DWP) and conducted by a team of researchers from the National Centre for Social Research in 2010. The experiment's objective was to figure out if employers are biased against vacancy candidates with ethnic minority names.
They sent applications for 987 real job vacancies across the UK under names commonly associated with ethnic minorities. For each job, they sent three applications with equivalent background and qualifications: one used a 'white' name and the other two had names from different ethnic origins.
The results were that ethnic minorities faced considerable name discrimination in the hiring process - despite having identical CVs and cover letters to the majority white candidates, they needed to send 74 percent more applications to secure an interview.
Field Experiments in Sociology: Advantages and Disadvantages
Field experiments have their benefits but are not always suitable. Read below for an outline of the advantages and disadvantages of field experiments in sociology.
Advantages of field experiments in Sociology
The researcher is more likely to see the 'real deal' instead of an act as the scenarios are authentic.
Social interactions show genuine behaviours, which can help researchers consider other factors that would not have been discovered in a controlled lab setting.
They are favoured by interpretivist sociologists.
Disadvantages of field experiments in Sociology
Researchers cannot control the environment where their experiment occurs, which could mean that there are other influencing factors.
It is ethically questionable to conduct field experiments if the subjects are unaware that they are being studied.
Ethnographic Research
We will briefly consider ethnographic research and how it may be helpful in sociological research.
Ethnographic research is an immersive methodology whereby a researcher collects data whilst being part of the community under investigation. They do so with the goal of producing a narrative account of that particular community, against a theoretical backdrop.
One could argue that ethnographic research is a form of a natural experiment.
The first ethnographic researchers were anthropologists - they joined the community, learned the language, and noted their observations. Some researchers such as Margaret Mead also conducted interviews and psychological tests.
Characteristics of ethnographic research:
produces qualitative data
includes primary data from observations, case studies or focus groups
includes secondary data from diaries, documents or letters
Evaluation of ethnographic research
The immersion of the research process allows for in-depth insights from an 'insider' perspective. Research subjects may be more inclined to open up or behave naturally if they do not perceive the researcher as an outsider force.
The high validity of findings stems from studying behaviour in natural settings.
However, the quality of such research can be called into question due to the findings being subject to the researchers' interpretation, which is likely to bring bias into the investigation. More importantly, the findings may not always accurately reflect the authenticity of social interactions.
At the beginning of the article, we pointed out that experiments are typically considered as primary sources of data. However, if you are using someone else's raw data from their experiment, you are using it as a secondary source.
Experiments - Key Takeaways
- Experiments test the researchers' hypotheses by trying to establish a causal relationship between the independent and dependent variables.
- Milgram's obedience and Aschs' conformity experiments are famous examples of social experiments in controlled conditions.
- Zimbardo's Stanford Prison experiment and research into discrimination in the job application process by the National Centre for Social Research show how social experiments can occur naturally in the field.
- There are advantages and disadvantages of using both lab and field experiments. A researcher should be able to assess which would be most suitable for their research needs.
- Ethnographic research could also be a form of a natural experiment as it involves immersive fieldwork.
Explanations 
Exams 
Magazine 
