Which research method was predominantly used by the Chicago School?

The Chicago School of sociology, active primarily in the early 20th century, predominantly utilized life histories as a research method to understand the complex relationships between individuals and their social environments. This approach allowed researchers to explore the lived experiences of people, particularly in urban settings, and to delve deeply into the contexts of their lives, examining issues such as immigration, crime, and social change.

Life histories provide a qualitative insight into the social factors influencing behavior, which was central to the Chicago School's focus on social ecology and the impact of urban settings on human behavior. This method enabled researchers to gather rich, detailed accounts from individuals, reflecting the nuances of their experiences and the social structures surrounding them. Such qualitative data was instrumental in developing theories about how neighborhoods and social networks affected individual behavior, including delinquency and crime.

In contrast, the other options—case studies, surveys, and statistical analysis—were utilized by the Chicago School but did not represent the predominant method of inquiry. Case studies, while important, often focused on specific, singular events or individuals rather than broad social patterns. Surveys offered quantitative data, which was less emphasized in the Chicago School’s explorations of social phenomena, with a stronger leaning towards qualitative insights. Statistical analysis, while certainly useful, was