Jump to a key chapter
Sociologists, just like us, have biases and agendas and make assumptions. But if this happens in sociological research, we could encounter a wealth of problems. This is where value neutrality comes in!
- First, we’ll start by looking at the definition of value neutrality before studying how it is used in sociology.
- We’ll move on to consider the difference between value neutrality and value relevance.
- Next, we’ll look at some examples of value neutrality to see how it can affect sociological research.
- Lastly, we will learn more about the debate on whether value neutrality is possible in sociology.
Let's get started!
Value Neutrality: Definition
Of course, as with all new terms, we’ll look at a definition of value neutrality before considering why it’s important to sociology.
Value neutrality is the ethical duty and practice of maintaining impartiality and remaining unbiased and judgment-free during the interpretation and publishing of research findings.
What is the Importance of Value Neutrality?
According to German sociologist and symbolic interactionist Max Weber (1864-1920), value neutrality is deeply significant. Weber identified an ethical concern, namely that sociologists may allow their personal values to influence their research.
In particular, he was concerned that researchers' own views would affect the interpretation and analysis of research findings.
While Weber accepts that personal values can, at times, affect the research process (such as choosing which area of sociology to study), this should absolutely not be the case when it comes to studying and presenting data.
As a result, Weber stated that sociologists should practice value neutrality and retain objectivity. This means that they should not omit, skew or distort research findings in order to fit a particular agenda. Ethically, sociologists should report whatever they find, even if it goes against their personal values and even if they don’t agree with or like the findings.
Value neutrality does not mean having zero personal opinions on the research, but those opinions should not affect the research findings!
Value Neutrality vs. Value Relevance
It’s important to understand value neutrality vs. value relevance, as you may also come across the latter term. If you do, don’t mix it up with value neutrality, as they talk about different things!
Value relevance is quite the opposite of value neutrality; in fact, value relevance refers to the selection of sociological research based on what the sociologist cares about. They can choose what to study (value relevance) but must not inflict their personal values onto the interpretation of the study (value neutrality).
Examples of Value Neutrality
We can look at some examples of value neutrality to see how it could work in practice. As mentioned above, value neutrality means to (in simple words) ‘ignore’ personal values when interpreting research. What are some examples of personal values?
Moral standpoints/values
Political agenda
Financial agenda
Biases against a person or social group
Personal beliefs and/or practices
Predictions
Commonly/widely accepted beliefs
Durkheim’s Suicide Study as an Example of Value Neutrality
Émile Durkheim’s study of suicide (1897) found that social and not supernatural factors played a large part in the rates of suicide. At the time, this challenged a commonly held belief about the role of supernatural forces in behavior.
Let’s look at a few hypothetical scenarios with ethical concerns about biased research.
Political Agenda as a Personal Value in Research
Jonathan is a sociologist with an affiliation with a major political party (let’s call it Party A). He decides to conduct research to find out how the public feels about some recent policies implemented by Party A. He hopes that Party A can use a sizeable amount of the findings to garner support ahead of their next political campaign.
However, in his findings, he discovers that there is little general support for Party A’s policies; in fact, only a quarter of the participants he surveyed would like to see Party A win the next election.
So, what happens next? According to the practice of value neutrality, Jonathan should disclose the full extent of his findings, even though they don’t align with his personal beliefs (his support for Party A) and Party A’s political agenda.
Subconscious Biases as a Personal Value in Research
Lisa, a sociologist, wants to research the experiences of doctors in public hospitals. Due to a lack of funding and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the healthcare system is struggling, and Lisa believes that the doctors’ insight can help the government improve it.
She interviews 200 senior residents across the country. 85 of them came from a diversity scheme to improve access to the medical profession for women and ethnic minorities.
When she reaches the stage of interpreting her findings, she omits large parts of the answers from the diversity scheme interviewees. Lisa wants to focus more on the other doctors, as she believes they earned their place because of merit and not because of their identities. As a result, she feels that they are better qualified to help participate in this research. Can she do this?
I’m sure by now you know the answer. Ethically speaking, Lisa can’t omit what she found just because she questions the credibility of those 85 doctors due to personal beliefs or biases.
Is it Possible to Have Value Neutrality in Sociology?
Although Weber identified it as an important ethical concern, not everyone agrees that it is possible to truly have value neutrality in sociology. The other side of the debate claims that it is impossible to overlook personal values and maintain total objectivity. As a result, some sociologists state it is better to caution readers that there may be some bias in sociological research.
Other sociologists argue that Weber’s insistence on value neutrality might cause the public to accept sociological research findings without considering the possibility of researcher bias.
There is also the concern that the premise of value neutrality may be misinterpreted. From a conflict theory perspective, Alvin Gouldner (1970) claims that value neutrality may be used to justify a lack of criticism for institutional corruption.
Do you think it's possible to practice value neutrality in sociology?
Value Neutrality - Key takeaways
- Value neutrality is the ethical duty and practice of maintaining impartiality and remaining unbiased and judgment-free during the interpretation and publishing of research findings.
- Value neutrality was identified as an ethical concern by German sociologist and symbolic interactionist Max Weber.
- Sociologists must not let their personal values influence sociological findings; examples of personal values include moral standpoints, values, and political agendas.
- Value relevance is quite the opposite of value neutrality; in fact, value relevance refers to the selection of sociological research based on what the sociologist cares about.
- Not everyone agrees that it is possible to truly have value neutrality in sociology.
Learn faster with the 1 flashcards about Value Neutrality
Sign up for free to gain access to all our flashcards.
Frequently Asked Questions about Value Neutrality
What is value neutrality?
Value neutrality is the ethical duty and practice of maintaining impartiality and remaining bias and judgement-free during the interpretation and publishing of research findings.
What is value neutrality and how is it used in research?
Value neutrality refers to an ethical duty and practice of maintaining impartiality and remaining bias and judgement-free during the interpretation and publishing of research findings. This means that researchers should not omit, skew or distort research findings in order to fit a particular agenda.
Why is value neutrality not appropriate for scientists?
Although Weber identified it as an important ethical concern, not everyone agrees that it is possible to truly have value neutrality in sociology. The other side of the debate claims that it is impossible to overlook personal values and maintain total objectivity.
How is objectivity different from value neutrality?
In sociology, objectivity is not different from value neutrality. To practice value neutrality means to maintain objectivity from personal values in the interpretation of research findings.
Is value neutrality an undisputed factor in sociological research?
No, it is not an undisputed factor in sociological research - some sociologists state it is better to caution readers that there may be some amount of bias in sociological research.
About StudySmarter
StudySmarter is a globally recognized educational technology company, offering a holistic learning platform designed for students of all ages and educational levels. Our platform provides learning support for a wide range of subjects, including STEM, Social Sciences, and Languages and also helps students to successfully master various tests and exams worldwide, such as GCSE, A Level, SAT, ACT, Abitur, and more. We offer an extensive library of learning materials, including interactive flashcards, comprehensive textbook solutions, and detailed explanations. The cutting-edge technology and tools we provide help students create their own learning materials. StudySmarter’s content is not only expert-verified but also regularly updated to ensure accuracy and relevance.
Learn more