can be, and usually are, coded in some fashion, either by hand or with the help of a data analysis software package. Much of the information that might be collected in the course of an interview, observation, or survey embeds some sort of geographic component.
Holistic understanding
We research because we want to understand a situation or issue in order to act on it or make a decision about it. Policy describes methods, laws, or courses of actions used to make decisions about something. To understand a problem or issue enough to make a policy about it, it is useful to think holistically. GIS allows you to do this by giving you the ability to integrate multiple data forms. GIS facilitates data analysis that moves beyond the silo approach, wherein researchers consider a topic within its own context and fail to consider multiple contexts. It is common for people to develop a research project or study based on one method. GIS is useful in developing a larger, more overarching perspective because it facilitates examining multiple layers of information. GIS gives you the ability to adopt macro- and micro-level perspectives simultaneously. Many aspects of research involve moving toward or identifying a holistic or synergistic (meaning the whole is greater than the sum of the parts) understanding of a particular research question.
Implement
Visualizing your data using GIS can help you put your ideas into action and implement policy. The first step in developing and enacting any sort of policy or solution is to assess the situation. The next step is to develop viable solutions or policies that can be used to improve the situation. The final step is to take some action to implement a potential solution for the situation. Incorporating GIS into research can provide you, policy makers, and the general public with the tools you need to engage in better decision making.
Multiple research methods approach
Research methods are used to identify and gather information and patterns. Why? Although research occurs for different purposes, such as to test a hypothesis, to better understand a phenomenon, or to evaluate the effectiveness of a program, all research shares the common link of investigation. Different types of research methods can be thought of as tools in a toolbox. As a researcher, the greater the diversity of the tools to which you have access, the more adept you will be at investigating your research question.
Multiple methods research involves using both quantitative and qualitative research practices together (Creswell and Clark 2007). For the researcher, using multiple methods is a major strength for a number of reasons:
1. Providing multiple views of a problem or issue allows a broader picture of the issue under study to be developed.
2. Using multiple methods presents the opportunity to include a greater variety of variables in the study.
3. Multiple methods can provide multiple measures of the same concept, which increases the validity of the project.
Multiple methods research helps you delve into various aspects of a topic to better comprehend it. Involving more variables means that you can capture a more true-to-life picture of the situation you are studying through the diverse data sources. It is common for researchers to focus on only a few key variables. Doing this can often limit the conceptualization of the issue at hand. It can also limit the real-world applicability of findings. However, adopting a multiple method approach to research requires the interest and desire to learn different research methods.
GIS is a natural fit with multiple methods research because of its unique ability to integrate different types of data. Incorporating GIS into your research allows you to examine multiple data sources at different points in time, space, and place. Later, we will show you how to use multiple research methods to collect data and better understand your research question.
Sociospatial thinking
The term sociospatial accurately captures the importance of the topic here. For the purposes of this text, sociospatial is defined as an integrated examination of space, place, and social indicators in a holistic fashion (Steinberg and Steinberg 2009). This means that one can simultaneously examine multiple indicators that relate to a particular problem or issue under study, and in a holistic way. Why would someone want to employ a sociospatial approach? In any project, resources are tied to the success of the project. The resources may be your time as a researcher or the cost of gathering, analyzing, and interpreting the data.
Historic poverty example
Of course, examples of sociospatial research occurred well before GIS and computer technology existed. In this section, we examine a historic example of sociospatial thinking and multiple methods in urban England. Between 1886 and 1903, Charles Booth conducted an in-depth study of poverty in London, England. His approach involved conducting field research by visiting every street in London. Through this approach, he was able to document the social, economic, and environmental conditions for residents (Fearon 2008). He was interested in examining the relationship between space, time, and social class. His grounded-theory approach to research eventually disproved original statistics that had underestimated the poverty rate in London at 25 percent. Booth’s detailed, on-the-ground examination of poverty illustrated that poverty levels were really closer to 35 percent (Fearon 2008).
His research project took a number of years to complete and is a good example of sociospatial research that considers space, place, and social indicators in a holistic fashion. Booth methodically visited all homes within a designated geographic area to assess urban poverty (figure 1.11). Today, that same work could be undertaken more quickly using computers rather than manual analysis. As a researcher, Booth employed both quantitative and qualitative methods (he took detailed field notes on the survey-gathering process of poverty data). Booth was definitely ahead of his time as a researcher because he incorporated interviews with survey data and field observations. Additionally, he simultaneously achieved a holistic and spatially specific review of poverty using this process. Had Booth had access to GIS in 1903, he could have provided interesting analyses to policy makers, and it would not have taken twelve years to do so.
Figure 1.11 A map created by Charles Booth that indicates levels of poverty in London, 1898–99. Courtesy of the Library of the London School of Economics and Political Science, reference LSE/BOOTH/E/1/6.
The interesting thing is that social inequalities always exist within a particular environmental context. In other words, every community has its haves and have-nots, just like in the days of Charles Booth and his study of poverty. People from different income levels will vary in terms of their ability to access different resources and in their general life chances. Incorporating GIS today into research projects on inequality can open up an entirely new way of looking at a topic. Using GIS allows a researcher to consider and actively model the spatial context and the inequalities that exist within that context. Not only can GIS model real environmental and spatial inequalities, it can also model “perceived” inequalities. This becomes extremely important to the social scientist interested in perception and how perception influences action. In Booth’s case, there were real manifested inequalities that he did not perceive. Being able to physically map out and “document” these conditions made the issue of urban poverty more real for the larger population.
GIS as a useful tool
As a research tool, GIS provides a wide range of opportunities for examining relationships in space, often by incorporating additional information