In the research paper on sexual harassment in public spaces: examining gender differences in perceived seriousness and victimization the research methodology that has been employed in this case study was fine but not effective. To carry out an effective research on such a sensitive issue, the researchers cannot solely rely on surveys and interviews. The author should have first of all collected secondary data from the authorities to get a rough picture of how rampant the sexual harassment occurs in public 0places. Furthermore, this secondary data could have been used to help formulate the hypothesis for the case study and the questions that would have been used during the interviews and questionnaires (Kothari, 2009).
Secondly, the researcher should have employed observational research methodology where they could observe what normally happens in public places. Even though their interviews affirmed that the respondents would participate and voluntarily, observation methodology without informing the respondents prior would have been a more realistic approach. This is because this type of methodology would ensure that the data collected is reliable as it is collected in its own natural setting where the participants do not know they are being observed. Thus ensuring that the likelihood of manipulation of data is minimal since the subjects of the study do not have any idea that they are being observed by the researchers (Kothari, 2009. People are likely to pretend and change their behavior if they know that they will be watched and this can give a wrong data results as the people would pretend to be good unlike when they are operating in their natural setting.
The research hypothesis formulated by the researcher do not do the research topic a lot of justice. In a research paper about sexual harassment in public places hypothesis like Women are likely to report a low feeling of safety in public spaces compared to men do not help the research topic. I think Madan and Nalla should have come up with a more realistic hypothesis to prove. A realistic theory would have helped the researcher to arrive at a definite conclusion about the research case study (Kumar and Kumar, 2014).
The sample size used by Madan and Nalla of interviewing 1387 respondents both male and female from India to New Delhi was sufficient. However, it would have been better if they had chosen just one city and interviewed all these respondents as it would have been more precise. Interviewing such a number within several cities in one of the most populated countries does give a clear representation of the situation around the public places (Kumar and Kumar, 2014). If they had based their research on one city, then we could have at least have a clear picture about the sexual harassment in public places within that city. Using a sample of 1387 in the country with a population of more than 1 billion does not really depict the true picture of the situation on the ground.
In conclusion the research methodology that was used was good, but it could use some adjustments so as to be effective since the research topic is something that requires not only the response of the people involved but also the researcher needs to get a rough picture of what really happens on the ground. The sample size that was used by Nalla and Madan was also sufficient, but it would have been more effective had it been used for a particular city
Kothari, C.R. (2009) Research Methodology: Methods and techniques. 2nd edn. New Delhi: New Age International (P) Ltd., Publishers.
Kumar, R. and Kumar, P.K. (2014) Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners. 3rd edn. London: SAGE Publications.
Cite this page
Sexual Harassment in Public Spaces: Examining Gender Differences in Perceived Seriousness and Victimization. (2019, Dec 10). Retrieved from https://speedypaper.com/essays/sexual-harassment-in-public-spaces-examining-gender-differences-in-perceived-seriousness-and-victimization
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SpeedyPaper website, please click below to request its removal: