Controversial Issues in Social Research Methods

It is often said that one of the key determinants of a book's wmth is the extent to which it fulfills the reader's expectations. As such, we welcome this oppor tunity to help formulate the expectations of our readers, to express our view of what this book is and what it is not. We believe that fully appreciating this volume requires understanding its mission and how it differs from that of other books on research methodology. We have not prepared a primer on research techniques. We offer no "how to" guides for researchers-nothing on how to conduct interviews, how to design studies, or how to analyze data. We also have not prepared a partisan platform documenting "our way" of thinking about research. Very few, if any, attempts at proselytizing may be found in these pages. What we have done, we believe, is to bring together a number of recurring controversial issues about social psychological research-issues that have divided profes sionals, puzzled students, and filled the pages of our journals. Few scholars have missed reports arguing the sides of various methodological contro versies, such as those surrounding the merits or shortcomings of field research in comparison to laboratory research, the use of role playing as an alternative for studies involving deception, or the value of informed consent procedures, to name only a few examples. Our aim in preparing this volume has been to organize and summarize the salient aspects of these and other impmtant controversial issues.