Ethnographic research is used when observational research is not sufficient and to provide a deeper understanding of a social problem. Ethnographers study up close and personal or actively participate in their study. There are a couple of pros and cons to ethnographic research. A positive result is that the study can show us places or situations that we don't normally see or experience. For example, how a street gang works as in the video shown, society in a prison cell or, on the contrary, the daily life of Mark Zuckerberg. Venkatesh was given an inside look at how difficult it is to be a gang leader, something most others would never learn in everyday society. Furthermore, he learned that poor communities in Chicago had to rely on a street gang to survive, more than the government could do there. Furthermore, he compared gang members to normal, everyday societies. Stating that there are many things in common within both groups such as racial, ethnic and social class divisions. Another strength of ethnographic research is its ability to provide a much more detailed representation than a group of people responding to surveys. It is different when a person claims that something is true, but when observed, it may be the exact opposite or have a hidden meaning. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay On the other hand, there are also weaknesses. Research finds it almost impossible to draw general conclusions from small, local circumstances. Furthermore, the subjects must be a faithful representation of the widest possible audience. Furthermore, the researcher must forget about any potential biases he or she has in carrying out the research. Finally, research can be dangerous depending on what the topic is, as Venkatesh experienced in his study. The gang members didn't believe he was a sociologist asking simple questions, they thought he was part of a rival Mexican gang member, and held him hostage under a staircase for twenty-four hours. According to the text, causality is central to sociological research analysis. Causation is when an event occurs one way and that event leads to another, then in turn causes a correlation. This occurs when two social phenomena that appear together occur within each other. For example, the great “video games create violent people” debate. If simply looked at, others would obviously think. There are countless violent acts players can perform in Grand Theft Auto, such as picking up a weapon off the street and killing civilians or throwing someone out of a car to steal their vehicle. However, this would be a spurious relationship. People who buy various shooters are perhaps already violent. Inherently, violent people are simply drawn to more violent games. Video games do not condition a person to be aggressive or more aggressive than they already are. Correlation does not mean causation in this case. There are several gaming conventions where hundreds of people promote and play video games. If violent video games really made the population aggressive, society would call it an epidemic. The majority of the world's population uses social media, so imagine the power it has over you. For example, you create an account on Facebook, add a couple of friends, like some pages, etc. In turn, you believe you are in control of your timeline. However, they can still control what they show you, not just for research purposes, they are currently doing so..