The researcher does not state the theoretical context approached in this study therefore i am unable to analyse it. I believe that unintentionally the feminist theory was used; if this is the case then this could have been a biased view from the start. When starting on the feminist theory your initial thought is of the stereotypical roles of the male and female sex. Critical Analysis of Methodological Approach and Methods Used As we have seen, the researcher has used the Positivists approach, using a questionnaire to gain quantifiable data.
This data is then presented in table format with some calculations showing different ratios making the results easier to compare. The table used by the researcher is not very clear, it is very cluttered and the figures are quiet confusing, a better and more structured table would aid in the reading of the results. Using ratios such as ‘time spent on domestic tasks’, the researcher has clearly identified areas that are relevant to the study. The questionnaire used by the researcher is very easy to understand, the questions are clear and concise.
He has also been able to ensure the strictest confidence as name and address have not been recorded. Unfortunately, question d is not very relevant and is open to interpretation. Its irrelevance is evident as none of the answers to this question appear in the results. To answer the question also depends on personal opinion, what one person believes is occasional another person may believe is regular. This kind of question should be avoided to ensure results are as accurate as possible.
I believe that the inclusion of question d was used to maybe highlight the division of labour in the home. Although he hasn’t used the results it could be used to highlight what tasks each partner undertakes the most. For this type of study, quantifiable data is essential; it can clearly display results with little ambiguity. Questionnaires make it easier to do this, with every question requiring a quantitative answer. Having quantitative answers allow for very quick and easy transposition from questionnaire to result table.
Questionnaires are also easy and cheap to produce and the subject can complete it as and when they can. That said, given more time I believe the researcher would have been better using an unstructured interview. I believe that the questionnaire S. Bond sent out was far too structured and gave no room for gathering more information and giving even clearer results. Any confusion on the questions would have been immediately cleared up making sure the data received was accurate. Another problem with this study is the small scale and very limited variety of couples used.
As the researcher says, all of the couples are very well off in monetary terms; if he could have sampled a wider spectrum of class his results could have been more comprehensive. He also doesn’t relate to the kind of work done by the person. Is the job very labour intensive, if so does that affect the results? There are many more factors that can affect the results that have been excluded, does the person take work home or do they carry out other unidentified tasks such as clean the car? Also in the modern home there is such a thing now as a house husband.
Would the results from a wife who worked but her husband didn’t resemble those from this study? Main Findings of the Study Below I have included the tables and ratios that were displayed in the study. As we can see, when both partners work the division of labour is not equal. There is a small increase in time spent on domestic tasks by the male but not enough to show that there is an equal share of tasks in the home. There is only a 2. 4% increase in the amount of time a husband spends on domestic tasks if his wife works. This then supports the argument that there is an unequal share in the upkeep of the house hold.