Can anyone give me some ideas about the best suited methodology to compare and contrast 2 opposing conjectures in criminological research? I am going to use my own self-collected data (which I have still have not completed collecting) in addition to scrutinizing the output of both researchers. I guess what I want to learn is what types of data collection work for this type of project? Thank you.
It might help if you specify why you want to compare 2 opposing conjectures in criminology research. For example, is one better than the other? Are you just capturing descriptive accounts? How can you quantify or capture descriptive accounts of these 2 views? What do you hope to show from the research?
Thank you so much for replying. Yes, I want to compare conjectures because I think one is more empirically sound than the other. I am not just capturing descriptive accounts. I also want to do field research to substantiate the points I make about the conjecture that I think is better than the other. I want to show from the research that whereas one conjecture applies to a locality, the other one is wider. I don’t know if I make sense!
If you want to investigate whether one conjecture is better than another with regard to locality, in addition to capturing descriptive accounts, you might consider a mixed method design. There are established mixed method designs. The choice of design will depend on which element you want to emphasize (the quantitative or the qualitative), and when you want to mix the results. There are a few good books on this subject. For instance, a book by Creswell and Plano-Clark discusses mixed method designs.
Your field research sounds interesting. What kind of data will you collect to hopefully show that there is a difference between conjectures?