Making Sense of the Social World 4th Edition Chapter 9, Qualitative Methods

What Are the Possible Roles? Complete observation Mixed participation/observation Complete participation These decisions must take into account the specifics of the social situation being studied, the researcher’s own background and personality, the larger sociopolitical context, and ethical concerns. Which balance of participating and observing is most appropriate also changes during most projects, often many times. Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition © 2012 SAGE Publications

Complete Observation In complete observation, researchers try to see things as they happen, without actively participating in these events. What might be one problem you would encounter? Will people act naturally knowing that you’re watching them? Reactive Effects occur when people are aware that they are being observed and their actions are being recorded Chambliss watched nurses closely, but he never bathed a patient, changed a dressing, started an intravenous line, or told a family their loved one had died. Once during an emergency surgery for a ruptured ectopic pregnancy – a drastic, immediately life-threatening event – a surgeon ordered him to “put in a Foley” – a urinary catheter! – but a nurse quickly said, “He’s a researcher, I’ll do it.” Of course at the same time that they are observing the setting, the researchers must take account of the ways in which their presence as an observer itself alters the social situation being observed. Such reactive effects occur because it is not “natural” for someone to be present who will record her or his observations for research and publication purposes (Thorne, 1993:20). Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition © 2012 SAGE Publications

Mixed Participation/Observation Most field researchers adopt a role that involves some active participation in the setting. Usually they inform at least some group members of their research interests, but then they participate in enough group activities to develop rapport with members and to gain a direct sense of what group members experience. This is not an easy balancing act. Most field researchers adopt a role that involves some active participation in the setting. Usually they inform at least some group members of their research interests, but then they participate in enough group activities to develop rapport with members and to gain a direct sense of what group members experience. Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition © 2012 SAGE Publications

A strategy of mixed participation and observation has two clear ethical advantages. Because group members know the researcher’s real role in the group, they can choose to keep some information or attitudes hidden. A researcher can decline to participate in unethical or dangerous activities. In his massive, ten-year study of gangs in urban America, Martin Sanchez Jankowski (1991) participated in nearly all the things they did. I ate where they ate, I slept where they slept, I stayed with their families, I traveled where they went, and . . . I fought with them. The only things that I did not participate in were those activities that were illegal . . . (including taking drugs) . . . (Jankowski, p. 13) Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition © 2012 SAGE Publications

Complete Participation Some field researchers adopt a complete participation role, in which they operate as a fully functioning member of the setting. Most often, such research is also covert, or secret— other members don’t know the researcher is doing research. In one famous covert study, Laud Humphreys (1970) served as a “watch queen” so that he could learn about men engaging in homosexual acts in a public restroom. In another case, Randall Alfred (1976) joined a group of Satanists to investigate group members and their interaction. And Erving Goffman (1961) worked as a state hospital assistant while studying the treatment of psychiatric patients. Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition © 2012 SAGE Publications

Ethical issues have been at the forefront of debate over the strategy of covert participation. They “go native”—and so may end up “going along to get along” with group activities that are themselves unethical. If others suspect the researcher’s identity or if the researcher contributes to, or impedes, group action, these consequences can be adverse. Some covert observers may become so wrapped up in the role they are playing that they adopt not just the mannerisms but also the perspectives and goals of the regular participants . Kai Erikson (1967) argues that covert participation is therefore by its very nature unethical and should not be allowed except in public settings. Covert researchers cannot anticipate the unintended consequences of their actions for research subjects or even for other researchers, because it can increase distrust of social scientists. Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition © 2012 SAGE Publications

Qualitative Research Aims to Go Where Real People Live Which role you take depends on the specifics of the social situation being studied, the researcher’s own background and personality, the larger sociopolitical context, and ethical concerns. Chambliss/Schutt, Making Sense of the Social World 4th edition © 2012 SAGE Publications