Manitoba’s Open Textbooks

Q: Content is accurate, error-free and unbiased

Content was largely accurate throughout with one exception—qualitative research.

Throughout the book, qualitative research was largely discussed, alongside quantitative research, as one side of the same coin. While I do appreciate the approach where readers should not be dragged into the debate about which one is best or more preferable, the diversity and richness of the qualitative research field was not adequately captured. Among qualitative researchers, there are varying epistemological and ontological positions that affect what kinds of research questions can be asked and how research is ultimately conducted. While more advanced qualitative textbooks address this more fully, readers should at minimum be informed of several key aspects beyond what was presented: (1) qualitative research is substantially more diverse than presented in the book (additional suggestions for resources could be provided for those interested); (2) the language used by some qualitative researchers differs from that used by researchers who subscribe to the positivist paradigm; and (3) qualitative research is largely interested in experience (i.e., phenomenology) and meaning-making rather than simply differing from quantitative research because visual and/or textual data are collected (rather than quantities and measurements).

In following, how and in what way qualitative methodology is presented in the text alongside quantitative methodology needs to be reconsidered in some instances to reflect the above. For example, Chapter 6 (Defining and Measuring Concepts) does not mention qualitative research once and its absence is not explained to readers. Thus, readers may assume that the same measurement principles used in quantitative research applies to qualitative research. This is simply not accurate in many forms of qualitative research.

The diagrams and photos were accurate and helpful for clarifying content. The videos and links were helpful when they would play and/or when links were not broken.

Content Accuracy Rating: 4 out of 5

Q: Content is up-to-date, but not in a way that will quickly make the text obsolete within a short period of time. The text is written and/or arranged in such a way that necessary updates will be relatively easy and straightforward to implement

The material was relevant and addressed more recent events like the election of Barack Obama and studies as recent as 2011. An updated version is already warranted, however, given how quickly new research accumulates in the field and the changing global landscape.

A concern for longevity is the number of internet links provided within the text itself and at the end of some sections. There are quite a few links that no longer work (e.g., nearly all of the links to cartoons). Keeping links up to date would be important in order to ensure the text remains relevant and up to date over time. Similarly, the videos provided in the online version would not play and thus the ability to view those would need to be monitored over time as well.

Relevance Rating: 4 out of 5

Q: The text is written in lucid, accessible prose, and provides adequate context for any jargon/technical terminology used

The textbook is well-written, easy to read, and does a good job of clearly explaining various stages in the research process. Many examples are used to demonstrate the breadth of sociological research and to provide context for methodological content provided throughout the book. At the same time, some of the more difficult concepts (e.g., epistemology, ontology, paradigm, etc) would benefit from additional explanation early on and, subsequently, be more clearly interwoven throughout the book to allow readers to make connections between key concepts and research methodology.

Clarity Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The text is internally consistent in terms of terminology and framework

While more connections could be made between concepts throughout the book (particularly the more philosophical concepts presented in the first few chapters), the textbook is consistent throughout in terms of what is being communicated to readers about the research process. There were no significant content related inconsistencies that were apparent in my view.

Consistency Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The text is easily and readily divisible into smaller reading sections that can be assigned at different points within the course (i.e., enormous blocks of text without subheadings should be avoided). The text should not be overly self-referential, and should be easily reorganized and realigned with various subunits of a course without presenting much disruption to the reader.

The book is well organized in terms of the consistent use of chapter sub-sections throughout that would allow instructors to assign certain sections at a time rather than an entire chapter. The use of sub-sections also ensures that readers feel like they are progressing through the material at a relatively quick pace. In some cases, however, the sub-sections within a chapter are quite short and result in the content being presented in a piecemeal way. As a consequence, readers may not make necessary connections between content provided in an earlier sub-section with material presented later on.

The inclusion of learning objectives, key takeaways, and exercises for each sub-section are helpful for ensuring that readers grasp concepts prior to moving on. Because these tools are reliably presented throughout the text in the same format, they would be helpful in the event that select sub-sections were to be assigned or discussed in the classroom.

Modularity Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The topics in the text are presented in a logical, clear fashion

The topics are presented in the order of the research process which is expected for a research methods textbook at this level. This could have been more clearly identified, however, in section 1.4 where the layout of the book was presented (though it did seem strange that the layout of the book was discussed at the end of the first chapter rather than in the preface).

It would be helpful to split survey research into two chapters—one qualitative and one quantitative—rather than one chapter that addresses both. More content could then be added, and it would be easier to assign in a classroom depending on how instructors intended to present survey research.

The inclusion of a chapter on reading and evaluating sociological research (Chapter 14) near the end of the book was helpful whereby readers learn about the research process prior to being introduced to evaluating research. This strategy is not always the case in other research methods texts (if it is discussed at all).

Organization Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The text is free of significant interface issues, including navigation problems, distortion of images/charts, and any other display features that may distract or confuse the reader

This was the most notable concern in reviewing this book. Unlike a number of other open access textbooks, this book is only available in two electronic formats (PDF and online). After attempting to convert the PDF into an e-reader friendly format, I found that the text was choppy and navigation was quite problematic. It would be helpful if multiple formats were available to readers (e.g., .epub, .mobi).

Another concern regarding the two formats is that both versions are not the same in terms of content. The PDF, for instance, does not include the table of contents to aid in navigation (despite having bookmarks that can help if you know they exist). In addition, the images presented in the online version were not present in the PDF version. As well, the links provided when another section was referred to were only provided in the online version, while the same text in the PDF version was merely presented in a larger font size.

The referencing also differs between the two versions. In the PDF format, references are numbered and presented at the end of each sub-section, which is adequate though a reference list at the end of the textbook would be preferable. In the online version, however, full references follow the citation directly in the text itself. This is very confusing and made reading online unnecessarily frustrating.

Lastly, it would be nice if there were a book cover provided (at least in the PDF version), so it felt like a textbook one might buy from a publisher. This would help lend credibility to the book, if simply on the basis of appearance.

Interface Rating: 2 out of 5

Q: The text contains no grammatical errors

Aside from the confusion with referencing that impacted the text in the online version, the content itself provided by the author is reasonably error-free (i.e., no substantial errors were noted).

Grammar Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The text is not culturally insensitive or offensive in any way. It should make use of examples that are inclusive of a variety of races, ethnicities, and backgrounds

The textbook was culturally sensitive and examples were drawn from diverse areas of sociology, which resulted in the inclusion of a wide variety and diversity of research topics (e.g., gender, LGBTQ, class, etc).

Cultural Relevance Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: Are there any other comments you would like to make about this book, for example, its appropriateness in a Canadian context or specific updates you think need to be made?

The textbook is American in orientation and a Canadian version is always preferable when possible. While Canadian examples would be helpful, what is most pressing is the need for an ethics chapter that reflects Tri-Council policies and Canadian guidelines.

The most pertinent improvement needed in my view is in terms of the interface. The issues pertaining to the inconsistencies in formatting between the PDF and online version need to be sorted out. In addition, multiple formats should be provided for the book.

Overall, I most appreciated the non-divisive approach presented in this book in terms of qualitative versus quantitative research. While more nuances could be introduced to the reader in regards to the diversity within the qualitative field, the textbook is still a great starting point and encourages students to consider methodology in light of what they want to know (rather than which orientation to research one prefers).

Additionally, this book is a helpful course resource since it does not provide so much detail that it strips instructors of the ability to supplement in the classroom. Instead, instructors can focus on various methods or concepts to a greater or lesser degree depending on their preferences.

Q: Content is accurate, error-free and unbiased

Chapter 4 - Beginning a Research Project - under Choosing a Topic - the text states "how many know that Barack Obama is our president..." which sadly and unfortunately is not accurate.

Other than this bit of wishful thinking (sigh), I find this text to be very accurate, as well as error and bias free.

Content Accuracy Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: Content is up-to-date, but not in a way that will quickly make the text obsolete within a short period of time. The text is written and/or arranged in such a way that necessary updates will be relatively easy and straightforward to implement

I think the author has done an impressive job of combining classical research with modern studies, as well as avoiding any information that will quickly become obsolete or with which students will be unable to relate in a few years. She sticks to the basics while providing excellent yet timeless examples of research that will continue to be relevant for some time to come, and could easily be updated in future editions if need be. i also think she does a admirable job of demonstrating that some methods that may seem out-dated may still be relevant and effective due to population characteristics and shouldn't be dismissed simply because there may be newer methods available.

Relevance Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The text is written in lucid, accessible prose, and provides adequate context for any jargon/technical terminology used

I really enjoy and admire this author's writing style, as well as her sense of humour. Anyone who uses the "she's a witch" sketch from Monty Python's Search for the Holy Grail as an example of the inductive vs. the deductive approach to research (Chapter 2 Exercises) is someone who captures my attention and convinces me to keep reading. She does a good job of providing in-text definitions for concepts (rather than having students jump around in the text to try and find them), as well as providing strong examples and applications for these concepts that are relevant and effective. The writing is not boring, pedantic, or overly academic (in other words, alienating to students). It is engaging and interesting and written a a perfect level for a second year student with some knowledge of sociology but little to none regarding methods. Sections are short, unnecessary jargon kept to a bare minimum, and humour displayed at regular intervals.

Clarity Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The text is internally consistent in terms of terminology and framework

I see no issues with internal consistency in this text in terms of terminology and framework.

Consistency Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The text is easily and readily divisible into smaller reading sections that can be assigned at different points within the course (i.e., enormous blocks of text without subheadings should be avoided). The text should not be overly self-referential, and should be easily reorganized and realigned with various subunits of a course without presenting much disruption to the reader.

I find this text to be very intelligently organized in terms of sections and sub-sections which are well-labeled and clearly descriptive. They are written in such a way as would allow them to be stand alone if necessary but also work very well together as a whole. The sections are not overly long and are well punctuated with pictures, charts, tables, and colourful boxes such as Key Takeaways, Exercises, and Learning Objectives which break up the black and white of the text and keep the eye engaged. It is both easy to skim to pick up the most important points as well as give a more in-depth reading that is not overly taxing in terms of attention and focus (both important for busy students). While I do find that the author does refer to her own life, work, and experience a fair amount, given the subject matter, I think this is both allowable and useful, as she establishes her strong knowledge of the subject matter as well as her experiences (the good, the bad, and the ugly) with social research in interesting and relevant ways to which students can relate. She also provides a good balance of other research and references so it does not appear that she is relying too much on her own work and experience.

Modularity Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The topics in the text are presented in a logical, clear fashion

Other than the missing topics I discussed earlier, I do find that the presentation of the topics in the text is both logical and well-organized. As this text is intended for a student with little knowledge of social research methods, I think it does a very good job of building that knowledge in a very logical way, with each section building on the one before and following the sociological research method from start to finish the way it would be conducted in a social research project. Although I would like to see more on data analysis and report writing, I do very much appreciate Chapters 14 and 15 as these are important parts of the research equation that are often ignored in methods texts.

Organization Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The text is free of significant interface issues, including navigation problems, distortion of images/charts, and any other display features that may distract or confuse the reader

I don't know if this has something to do with the version of the text that I had access to (https://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/sociological-inquiry-principles-qualitative-and-quantitative-methods) but less than half of the internal links that I clicked on actually worked, including the ones that referred back to earlier chapters. (I was really excited to watch the clip from Monty Python's Search for the Holy Grail in Section 2.3, long one of my favourites, but alas, no). I saw a lot of Page Not Found, or Hmmm. We're having trouble finding that site, or just a blank page, so that was definitely frustrating and confusing. In addition, the author refers from time to time to New Yorker cartoons but the links do not take you to the specific cartoon but rather to the Cartoon Bank, which is less than helpful - I am not sure why the specific cartoons are not just used in the text rather than using a link to refer to them? As such, this text does not currently operate the way it should in terms of working links so this needs to be reviewed and addressed.

In addition, many of the Figures display very tiny text and as such are quite hard to read. Simple enlargement would solve this problem quite well.

Interface Rating: 3 out of 5

Q: The text contains no grammatical errors

While this text is for the most part very well-written, there are a few formatting issues here and there, such as in Section 9.1 in the following paragraph:

Knowing how to create and conduct a good interview is one of those skills you just can’t go wrong having. Interviews are used by market researchers to learn how to sell their products, journalists use interviews to get information from a whole host of people from VIPs to random people on the street. Regis Philbin (a sociology major in collegeThis information comes from the following list of famous sociology majors provided by the American Sociological Association on their website: http://www.asanet.org/students/famous.cfm.) used interviews to help television viewers get to know guests on his show, employers use them to make decisions about job offers, and even Ruth Westheimer (the famous sex doctor who has an MA in sociologyRead more about Dr. Ruth, her background, and her credentials at her website: http://www.drruth.com.) used interviews to elicit details from call-in participants on her radio show.Interested in hearing Dr. Ruth’s interview style? There are a number of audio clips from her radio show, Sexually Speaking, linked from the following site: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~chuck/ruthpg. Warning: some of the images and audio clips on this page may be offensive to some readers. It seems everyone who’s anyone knows how to conduct an interview.

There are two formatting errors just in this paragraph alone. Also, the last link is incorrect.

I think a close proof read as well as a check of all links would be in order.

Grammar Rating: 4 out of 5

Q: The text is not culturally insensitive or offensive in any way. It should make use of examples that are inclusive of a variety of races, ethnicities, and backgrounds

I didn't notice any insensitive or offensive language in this text, but I did notice that the pictures weren't as inclusive as they could have been; although I can see that an attempt was made at diversity, I think it could have gone a bit further in representation of minorities. Keeping in mind that a methods text is not exactly the appropriate forum for discussing and debating minority issues, I think the author did a good job in balancing the research and studies that she presented in order to make them representative of the work that is available in the various fields.

Cultural Relevance Rating: 4 out of 5

Q: Are there any other comments you would like to make about this book, for example, its appropriateness in a Canadian context or specific updates you think need to be made?

Overall, I really like this textbook. I appreciate the way it is written and organized, the inclusion of humour (so very rare in methods texts), the useful and relevant links (if they all worked...), the good mix of pictures, and tables, and figures, the use of colour to keep the eye engaged, and the practical and interesting exercises at the end of each section.

My two main critiques, and the reason I would recommend it to others but not use it myself, are the missing topics I delineated at the beginning of this review (regarding the research proposal, data entry, and report writing) which would require further resources for students (which I try to avoid) and the strong American focus as I am a Canadian sociology instructor and would prefer a text with more Canadian research and examples. Otherwise, this is one of the better methods texts that I have seen (and I have reviewed quite a few in trying to find one for my methods course) and I quite enjoyed the opportunity to review it.

Q: Content is accurate, error-free and unbiased

Aside from the President of the USA not being Obama anymore, all of the content is accurate, error-free, and unbiased. My only other suggestion is that some of the weblinks (eg. cartoon bank link does not take the reader to the specific mentioned cartoon, but a searchable database of cartoons)

Content Accuracy Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: Content is up-to-date, but not in a way that will quickly make the text obsolete within a short period of time. The text is written and/or arranged in such a way that necessary updates will be relatively easy and straightforward to implement

Any research text must balance the history and classic approaches to research, while bringing in modern approaches to research. I would have liked to see more emphasis on the use of technology for collecting data and conducting research, as well as further discussion of qualitative approaches.


More practically, any of the online/web links would have to be closely monitored and constantly updated, since several of them already do not work.

Relevance Rating: 4 out of 5

Q: The text is written in lucid, accessible prose, and provides adequate context for any jargon/technical terminology used

The text was written in a clear, approachable way that would make it palatable and approachable for first and second year college/university students. One of the major issues with being introduced to research methods for the first time is tackling the mountain of new terminology and definitions. The author writes in such a way where the important points are communicated clearly, with humour, and with "real world" examples. I enjoyed her writing style and approach to discussing methods.

Clarity Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The text is internally consistent in terms of terminology and framework

I see no major issues regarding terminology and framework of the text.

Consistency Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The text is easily and readily divisible into smaller reading sections that can be assigned at different points within the course (i.e., enormous blocks of text without subheadings should be avoided). The text should not be overly self-referential, and should be easily reorganized and realigned with various subunits of a course without presenting much disruption to the reader.

Each chapter was not overly long and each chapter was divided in to smaller sub-sections. I particularly enjoyed that at the end of each sections, the author provided learning objectives, key takeaways, and exercises for each to help in understanding concepts prior to moving on.

While the author does write about her own work, research, and experiences, I think this is important in making the information approachable, relatable, and real!

Modularity Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The topics in the text are presented in a logical, clear fashion

The organization of the topics in the text is logical and works well. As discussed earlier in the review, there could have been some information added in regarding proposal writing and report writing. Chapter 12 on "other methods" felt like a rushed add-on and those topics could have easily been interspersed in other chapters.

Organization Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The text is free of significant interface issues, including navigation problems, distortion of images/charts, and any other display features that may distract or confuse the reader

The two versions (online and PDF) vary greatly in their presentation, function, and appearance. Prior to reading the text, I looked at both options and felt that the PDF version was severely lacking in its presentation and functionality (no images, links, organization was different). The online version did not have a list of references at the end of each section or chapter (which was present in the PDF version). There was no complete works cited/reference page for the text, nor was there a glossary included.

Interface Rating: 3 out of 5

Q: The text contains no grammatical errors

No substantial errors were noted in the text, though I think a careful proof and formatting assessment would be useful.

Grammar Rating: 5 out of 5

Q: The text is not culturally insensitive or offensive in any way. It should make use of examples that are inclusive of a variety of races, ethnicities, and backgrounds

I did not notice any insensitive or offensive language in the text and it was clear the author made an attempt to use a variety of examples, pictures, and research topics. My main concern about the text, as an instructor in a Canadian college, is the text's American focus. There are specific examples, policies and protocols, cases, legal history, etc. that differ in Canada that I would have to supplement.

I think it is also important for research methods texts to include, at minimum, a discussion of "other ways of knowing", specifically Indigenous research methods and ways of knowing.

Cultural Relevance Rating: 4 out of 5

Q: Are there any other comments you would like to make about this book, for example, its appropriateness in a Canadian context or specific updates you think need to be made?

Yes, but with reservations.

Overall, I enjoyed this text, its approachability and readability. If the text had a Canadian focus, I would definitely consider adopting it.