Analyze the methodological strengths of case studies (such like those described by Skuse), versus studies using comparison groups (such as the English Adoptee study) to research the consequences of early severe poverty.
Your answer can be illustrated using specific case studies or studies that used comparison groups to study severe deprivation.
In essence, severe poverty refers to persistent, compounded, or acute economic hardship.
Primarily, severe economic hardship involves living below the poverty level, meaning that there is low availability of critical resources. Compounded hardship means that there are psychological, social, and material disadvantages.
A persistent economic hardship means that you are in a constant disadvantageous situation.
Persistent hardships could be caused by trauma in childhood, long-term struggles or economic hardships that continue over time.
There are also ethnographic approaches to social work.
Studying severe deprivation can reveal the long-lasting effects, such as mental illnesses and affectionless psychopathy. This study will help to identify ways to prevent such effects from happening in the future.
There is no doubt that the study of severe poverty has shown connections between child development and severe inequality.
It is important to note that case studies are more effective than comparison using groups in investigating different issues, such as severe poverty.
Case studies typically involve data collection and analysis of a subject.
Case studies are often observational. This allows researchers to conduct extensive research into the topic of interest and produce conclusive results.
A case study provides a step by step evaluation and observation process that is impossible with comparison groups or other methods of data collection.
Furthermore, case studies allow for a comprehensive analysis of the topic being studied using different data collection methods.
It is important to note that case studies can include both empirical data and non-empirical information. Participants, researchers, and others will be able to better understand the case study process.
In case studies, both empirical and inferential data can be included in the study findings.
Case studies are also efficient for investigating rare conditions like those that have a long latency period. Simply put, case studies allow researchers to take their time and observe their subject step-by-step. Every step is documented and critical to the findings of each case study.
Case studies make it easier to address complex theories and concepts because of the particular nature of the case. This makes case study an excellent option for investigating severe deprivation.
Case studies can stimulate new research, which in turn helps to advance the original study.
It is easier to do research in various scientific disciplines, including psychology.
Furthermore, it is much easier to challenge existing theories and ideas by using case studies.
Case studies can be used to prove or disprove certain beliefs and concepts.
Successive case studies can lead to simpler truths.
Although case studies can be a useful tool for investigating severe poverty, there are several drawbacks.
Others argue that case study data eliminates absolute risks.
Case studies cannot calculate incidence, so absolute risk would imply that there is no way to calculate it.
It is possible to gather inconclusive data through case studies due to the Hawthorne Effects.
The Hawthorne Effects imply that behavioral changes may be observed in individuals who are subject to case study because they are aware of their observation (Universal Class, 2017).
Case studies allow for flexibility in data collection, allowing them to be used with a variety of date collection methods. This has allowed them to collect more information and provide conclusive findings.
Because the case study requires that the researcher observe the object of the study for a long time, it can make the process time-consuming.
It is important to gather as many data as possible to be able to understand concepts. Case studies can help you do this.
Furthermore, case studies are able to rely upon human memory and interpretation which can lead to errors and misinterpretations.
Because case studies depend on the interpretations and perceptions made by the researcher, it raises questions of objectivity as well as bias.
It is evident that case studies can be misinterpreted and erroneously interpreted by researchers based on their personal views, perceptions, and interpretations.
Comparison groups are evaluated for their ability to provide generalized results, which is advantageous over case studies.
Comparison groups are less advantageous than case studies. This makes case studies an effective investigative method.
Comparison groups are more effective than case studies because it’s easier to overcome prepost designs, unlike other methodological approaches (Orr, N. D). It’s also easier to conduct the same experiment with a large number people, as opposed to case study which only involves one subject.
The effectiveness of comparison groups (also known as control groups) is significant. They can be used to experiment single variables at a time, which is critical for any scientific research, such as severe deprivation.
The effectiveness of comparison groups depends on the similarity of the participants to whom the research is applied.
You need to choose the group participants according to a set of criteria. This is different from random selections or testing criteria.
(Pithon 2013,). This makes it impossible, if not impossible, to conduct follow-up sessions unlike in case studies.
It is a major setback for those involved in research.
Research is essential in all fields, including psychology.
The study of severe deprivation has included comparison groups and case studies.
Due to its numerous advantages over comparisons groups, case studies can be more effective than other methods in order to study severe deprivation.
Because case studies include detailed findings and can be considered authoritative, they are more effective than comparison groups.
Connolly E. (2011). Case studies in psychology.
(2011). Case study Approach. NCBI.
Faculty of Business and Economics.
Hodell M. (2016). What strengths and weaknesses are case studies?Quora.Com.
Hseih C.(N.d).Strengths & Weaknesses of Qualitative Research Case Study Research.
W.W. Lamorte (2016). The Advantages and Disadvantages in Case-Control studies.
Murphy, M. (2014). What are some of the drawbacks and benefits of case Study Research?
To understand Impact, we use Comparative Group Approaches.
().Social experiments: Evaluation of public programs using experimental methods.
Pithon M. M. (2013). The Importance Of Control Groups In Scientific Research.
(2012). Advantages & Disadvantages in Case Studies.
Reis R. (2009). Strengths & Limitations of Case Studies.
(2017). Case studies: Strengths and Weaknesses.