Milestone Two
Science Department,
University
SCS-285-H2895 Research Literacy in Soc Sci
November 20, 2022
Multiple scholars have researched the rehabilitation of offenders and their entry into the community. The scholars employ different methodologies in their research that dictate the data collection techniques used. These techniques often influence the quality of the data and the choice of analysis method. Researchers must determine the optimal data collection technique depending on the subject matter. Data collection methods include surveys, interviews, observations, focus groups, forms, online monitoring, etc. The choice of a method depends on the researcher’s objectives. This paper analyzes the different data collection methods used in research papers written by authors on the rehabilitation of offenders and their reentry into society.
In their paper on the limits of rehabilitation, van der Meulen and Omstead analyze the impact of art programs on the carceral populace (2021). In particular, the duo analyzes the effectiveness of art programs in promoting social and emotional connections. The researchers use meeting notes and evaluation sessions to collect data from the inmates (van der Meulen & Omstead, 2021). van der Meulen and Omstead use qualitative techniques to perform their evaluations and note the impact of the art sessions on individual well-being (2021). The researchers establish that the art sessions increase the emotional connection between inmates, especially when projects are done communally (van der Meulen & Omstead, 2021). The art programs promoted the growth of their self-expression and self-determination, key aspects that improved their rehabilitation process.
Another research article by Williams implements autoethnography as a data collection technique to analyze the rehabilitation process among prisoners (Williams, 2006). According to Williams, autoethnography should be utilized more as a research technique (Williams, 2006). Williams argues that the non-quantitative nature of the technique does not disqualify it from providing credible data to researchers (Williams, 2006). In the study, Williams encourages incarcerated persons to share their hurtful experiences with him, aiming to cultivate empathy (Williams, 2006). He uses these stories to build client relationships as a therapeutic technique rather than employing traditional interventions. Williams asserts that autoethnography promotes rehabilitation since prisoners can finally understand their pain and empathize with others’ pain (Williams, 2006). The practice improves a prisoner’s ability to interact healthily with society.
In the above studies, qualitative data is primarily implemented in concluding the research. Rather than hardcore quantitative data that can be analyzed in multiple ways, qualitative data is analyzed by social scientists when assessing an individual’s emotional intelligence. The primary advantages of this approach are the ability to collect otherwise unquantifiable data (Williams, 2006). Due to their nature, quantitatively mapping empathy and other social skills are impossible. Nevertheless, collecting data via non-traditional scientific methods enables the researcher to determine the overall mental state of a prisoner and the impact of rehabilitation on their personal growth and development. Traditional quantitative techniques fail to accurately assess the impact of rehabilitation, instead using metrics such as recidivism as an indicator of reforms.
Despite the advantages of the above data collection techniques, qualitative data collection is not scalable. Researchers need vast resources to collect qualitative data on the personal level observed above on a larger sample. This limitation undermines the quality of the data used. Quantitative techniques applied in the same subject matter can yield results faster at a lower cost. Additionally, the data’s interpretation depends on the researcher’s acumen. Different researchers may draw different conclusions from the same dataset. The conclusions are highly personal (van der Meulen & Omstead, 2021). Despite the perceived benefits of the data collection methods, the above limitations discourage the adoption of qualitative data techniques at scale.
References
Van der Meulen, E., & Omstead, J. (2020). The limits of rehabilitation and recidivism reduction: Rethinking the evaluation of arts programming in prisons. The Prison Journal, 101(1), 102-122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885520978477
Williams, D. (2006). Autoethnography in offender rehabilitation research and practice: Addressing the “Us vs. them” problem. Contemporary Justice Review, 9(1), 23-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10282580600564818