Published March 14, 2018 | Version v1
Journal article Open

Lies of the reader: Disadvantages of the sociological research methods for the study of the reading

Authors/Creators

  • 1. Sofia University

Description

The research problems of this study are the difficulties in the explanation of the phenomenon of reading in its accelerated transformations by quantitative sociological methods, because of failure to comply with a number of factors: first, the social aspects of the purchase, consumption and possession of reading materials have not yet been reading; second, reading is both asocial and social activity; third, the reader is not social status, social class, social group or social role. Author's hypothesis: the most accessible and authoritative audience methods for study of the reading – sociological research methods, are unable to disclose the specifics of the reader and reading, they provide limited data only on the outer side of the reading activity, for its quantitative indicators but do not reach to the knowledge about the nature and the reasons both for the reading and not reading. The object of this study is the use of sociological research methods in the study of the reader and the reading. The purpose is to reveal the problems generated by the classical sociological research methods, which fed up the mainstream negativity towards the contemporary reading and hinder his objective knowledge. Methodology/approach: The study was conducted by critical analytical and synthetic approach, which involves a systematic review, comparative analysis of terminology and concepts and educational integrated research on the topic „Does my microgroup read?” among Bulgarians over 14 years (2003–2017). Findings: There have been found 15 disadvantages of the sociological methods of the study of reading, as a result of which, science can get a false picture of the reading situation of local and global level. These disadvantages are as follows: 1) research vs. survey, 2) sociological propaganda, 3) the effect of the crowd, 4) fear from the reader, 5) unrecognition of snobbery towards reading and the books, 6) connotations of the word „reading”, 7) literature vs. book, 8) the index „free time”, 9) reading in the consumer modality, 10) reading as demonstrative consumption, 11) undefined „reader”, 12) the respondent lie, 13) the respondent resistance, 14) the prejudice „compulsory for reading”, 15) absence of axiological balance. As an alternative to the sociological methods for obtaining of objective results in the study of the reading and the readers is proposed the integrated approach between qualitative sociological methods and the methods of cognitive neuroscience and bibliopsychology.

Keywords: reading research methodology, reading statistics, education statistics, sociological methods, sociological propaganda, linguistic substitutions, truth and falsehood in surveys, response bias, crowd.

Notes

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The author is thankful to the Sofia University Science Fund for the support under the Grant (contract No80-10-223/24.04.2017) for the project "Scientific publications management".

Files

Lies of the Reader.pdf

Files (857.1 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:358d4d6a2a1952ca332ab69c4c8753e8
857.1 kB Preview Download

Additional details

References

  • UNESCO (1964). Recommendation concerning the International Standardization of Statistics Relating to Book Production and Periodicals. Classification 9-1. UNESCO, 19 November 1964.
  • Tsvetkova, Milena (2016). The Paradoxes of the Reading = Die Paradoxien im heutigen Leseverhalten an Beispielen aus Bulgarien: Presentation. ResearchGate, Jun 30, 2016. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2857.6243
  • The Economist (2007). The importance of not reading (Closed books). The Economist, 15.11.2007. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/books/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10130740
  • Swaim, Michael (2009). 10 Great Books for (Traumatizing) Children. Cracked Entertainment, 21.04.2009. Retrieved from http://www.cracked.com/blog/10-great-childrens-books-for-people-who-hate-their-children
  • Scholastic (2010). Kids & Family Reading Report 2010: Turning the Page in the Digital Age. Harrison Group and Scholastic. 56 p. Retrieved from http://mediaroom.scholastic.com/files/KFRR_2010.pdf
  • Rubakin, Nicholas (1929). The psychology of the reader and the books. Moscow-Leningrad: Kniga, [2nd ed. 1977]. 264 p. [in Russian]
  • Rubakin, Nicholas (1924). What is this bibliological psychology?. Leningrad: Kolos. 61 p. [in Russian]
  • Rubakin, Nicholas (1922). Introduction à la Psychologie Bibliologique: La Psychologie de la Création des Livres, de leur Distribution et Circulation, de leur Utilisation par les Lecteurs, les Écoles, les Bibliothèques, les Librairies, etc. Théorie et Pratique. 2 T. Paris: J. Povolozky. 604 p.
  • Riesman, David (1950). Some types of character and society. Riesman, David. The Lonely Crowd. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 3-26.
  • Pivot, Bernard (2005). Le Métier de lire. Paris: Gallimard, 2001; Sofia: Prozorec. 347 p.
  • Ouspensky, Petr (1996). The psychology of man's possible evolution [1950]. Sofia: Heliopol. 123 p.
  • Ortega y Gasset, José (1993). The Revolt of the Masses [La rebelion de las masas, 1930]. Sofia: Sofia University Press. 211 p.
  • Open Science Collaboration (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 2015, Vol. 349, №6251, aac4716. DOI: 10.1126/science.aac4716
  • Noelle-Neumann, Elisabeth (1978). Umfragen in der Massengesellschaft. Einführung in die Methoden der Demoskopie (1963). Moskva: Progress. 382 p.
  • Moscovici, Serge (1986). The Discovery of the Masses. Changing conceptions of crowd mind and behaviour. New York, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 5-25.
  • Mead, George Herbert, and Charles W. Morris (1997). Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934; Pleven: EA. 400 p.
  • McLuhan, Marshall, and Eric McLuhan (1988). Laws of Media: The New Science. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. xi, 252 p.
  • McDougall, William (1920). The Group Mind: A Sketch of the Principles of Collective Psychology with Some Attempt to Apply Them to the Interpretation of National Life and Character. Cambridge: The University press. 304 p.
  • McCardle, P., and Chhabra, V. (Eds.). (2004). The voice of evidence in reading research. Baltimore: Paul H Brookes Publishing. 528 p.
  • Mailloux, Steven (1984). Literary Theory and Social Reading Models. Mailloux, Steven. Interpretive Conventions: The Reader in the Study of American Fiction. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1984. 228 p.
  • Mackintosh, Paul St John (2015). Anti-ebook "research" is junk: It's official. TeleRead, December 3, 2015. Retrieved from http://teleread.com/anti-ebook-research-is-junk-its-official
  • Lynes, Russell (1976). Highbrow, Lowbrow, Middlebrow [1949]. The Wilson Quarterly, Vol. 1, №1, pp. 146-158.
  • Literary Saloon (2007). Half-read. The Literary Saloon at the Complete Review, 12.03.2007. Retrieved from http://www.complete-review.com/saloon/archive/200703b.htm#wl2
  • Le Bon, Gustave (1926). The Crowd: A Study in Popular Mind. London: T. Fisher Unwin. 239 p.
  • Law on Copyright and Neighbouring Rights (1993). [Bulgaria]. Promulgated. State Gasette, No 56/1993; amended No 63/1994, No 10/1998, No 281/2000, No 77/2002. Retrieved from http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=237956
  • Law for the Higher Education (1995). [Bulgaria]. Promulgated. State Gasette, No 112 of 27 December, 1995, article 17, paragraph 2, section 1.
  • Kon, Igor S. (1967). The sociology of personality. Moscow: Politizdat. 383 p.
  • Jung, Carl Gustav (1993). Selected Writings: Vol. 1. Pleven: Evrasia Abagar, 1993. 208 p. [in Bulgarian]
  • García-Santillán, Arturo, Moreno-García, Elena, Molchanova, Violetta S. Education and Knowledge in the Use of Financial Products and Services in Bachelor's Degree Students. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 2017, Vol. 6, №3, pp. 530-541. DOI: 10.13187/ejced.2017.3.530
  • Fromm, Erich (1956). The Sane Society. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. 370 p.
  • Fletcher, Dan (2010). Awful Library Books. Retrieved from http://awfullibrarybooks.wordpress.com
  • Fahrer, Sigrid (2014). Im Gespräch mit der Stiftung Lesen. Stiftung Digitale Spielekultur, 12.11.2014. Retrieved from http://www.stiftung-digitale-spielekultur.de/im-gespraech-mit-der-stiftung-lesen
  • European Commission (2012). MEMO IP/12/940. Frequently Asked Questions on the European Commission's literacy policy and report by the High-Level Group of Experts on Literacy. Brussels, 6 September 2012. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-646_en.htm
  • Escarpit, Robert (1971). Sociology of Literature. Transl. by Ernest Pick. 2nd ed. [Sociologie de la literature. Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1958]. London: Cass. 104 p.
  • Ellul, Jacques (1965). Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. xxii, 320, vii p.
  • Eco, Umberto, and Jean-Claude Carrière (2011). This in not the end of the books: Conversation with Jean-Philippe de Tonnac. Sofia: Enthusiast. 384 p.
  • Eco, Umberto (2006). A passo di gambero: Guerre calde e populismo mediatico. Milano: Bompiani. 349 p.
  • Eagleton, Terry (2001). Literary theory: an introduction [1983]. Sofia: Sofia University Press. 234 p.
  • Doidge, Norman (2015). The Brain's Way of Healing. Remarkable Discoveries and Recoveries from the Frontiers of Neuroplasticity. New York: Viking. 432 p.
  • Brodsky, Joseph (1993). Award Ceremony Speech. Nobel Lectures: Literature 1981-1990. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Retrieved from https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1987/presentation-speech.html
  • Berdyaev, Nicholas (1997). The Philosophy of Inequality (1923). Sofia: Prozorec. 224 p. [in Bulgarian]
  • BBC (2009). Poll reveals UK's reading secrets. BBC News, 5.03.2009. Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/arts_and_culture/7925720.stm
  • Bayard, Pierre (2007). How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read. New York: Bloomsbury. xxi, 185 p.