Flashcards on Participant Observation (3.6)

Question	Answer
There are several different types of observation. Firstly, we can distinguish between non-participant observation and participant observation. What are they?	Non-participant observation: the researcher observes the group/event without taking part in it, e.g. using a two-way mirror. Participant observation: the researcher actually takes part in an event or the everyday life of the group while observing them.
In addition, we can distinguish between overt observation and covert observation. What are they?	Overt observation: the researcher makes their true identity and purposes known to the group being studied. Covert observation: the study is conducted 'undercover', with the researcher's true identity being concealed from the group being studied.
However, it is important to realise that research doesn't always fit neatly into one single category. Give an example of a study that fit into more than one category:	William Whyte's study of 'Street Corner Society' was semi-overt; a key member of the group knew Whyte's true identity and purpose, but the others did not.
In sociology, what form does most observation take?	Unstructured participant observation.
However, which group occasionally use structured observation, which is normally non-participant?	Positivists. They use a structured observational schedule to systematically categorise what happens. The schedule is a predetermined list of the types of behaviours the sociologist is interested in. They will note the number of times this behaviour occurs, producing quantitative data, from which patterns can be established.
Importantly, observation can be used in conjunction with what?	Other methods. For example, when interviewing, the researcher may observe interviewees' body language to determine whether they're telling the truth or not.
Sociologists face two main issues when conducting a participant observation. What are they?	1. Getting in, staying in, and getting out of the group. 2. Whether to use overt or covert observation.
Firstly, the sociologist must gain entry to the group. Some groups are fairly easy to join, while others are almost impossible to gain entry to. Give an example:	It would be fairly easy to join a group of football supporters at a match, but very difficult to join a criminal gang.
Making the initial contact with the group may depend on personal skills, having the right connections, or even pure chance. What helped Ned Polsky, James Patrick and Eileen Fairhurst when trying to enter their respective groups?	Polsky was a good pool player, and his skill helped him gain entry to the world of the poolroom hustler. Patrick knew a gang member, which helped him gain entry into the criminal gang. Fairhurst was hospitalised for a back injury and used the admission as an opportunity to study the life of a patient.
To gain entry into a group, the researcher will have to win the group's trust and acceptance. It can help to befriend a key group member. Which sociologist took this approach?	Sarah Thornton befriended a lady called Kate when studying the clubbing and rave scene.
However, the researcher's age, gender, class and/or ethnicity can hinder their research. What did Thornton note?	Her age and nationality made her research more difficult.
Some researchers have gone to remarkable lengths to gain acceptance and pass as a group member. However, John Howard Griffin probably went to the most extreme lengths. What did he do?	Griffin, a white man, used medication and sun lamp treatment to change his skin colour and pass as black. He then traveled to the Deep South of America to experience racism firsthand.
'Getting in' to the group means the researcher needs to decide what sort of role they should adopt. Ideally, their role should be what?	One that doesn't disrupt the group's normal patterns, and one that offers a good vantage point from which to make observations.
How did Whyte succeed in achieving both of these aims?	By refusing all leadership roles, with the one exception of secretary of the community club, a position which allowed him to take many notes under the guise of taking the minutes of the meeting.
However, it's not always possible to take a role that's both unobtrusive and a good vantage point. Some roles may also involve taking sides in conflicts. What does this result in?	The researcher potentially becoming estranged from one faction or the other, making observation more difficult.
Once accepted into the group, the researcher needs to be able to remain in the group and complete the study. A key problem arise here. What is it?	The researcher has to be involved in the group to understand it fully, but simultaneously they must remain detached from the group, so as to remain objective and unbiased.
One risk of remaining in a group is 'going native'. What is meant by this?	By over-identifying with the group, the researcher can become biased. They will subsequently stop being an objective observer, instead simply becoming a group member.
In his study of the Amsterdam police, which sociologists found himself over-identifying with the policemen, even seeing himself as an officer and considering the group members to be his 'colleagues'?	Maurice Punch.
However, this can go the other way too. How?	Researchers may preserve their detachment so as to avoid bias, but then subsequently risk not understanding the events they observe.
A further problem of staying in is tat the more time spent with the group, the less strange their ways appear to be. Why is this an issue?	The researcher may cease to notice things that would've struck them as noteworthy at an earlier stage of the research.
Finally, the research needs to leave the group at the end of the study. This is generally easier than getting and staying in. If necessary, the researcher can simply up and leave. Which sociologist did this, and why?	James Patrick. When studying the gang, he saw so much violence that he abruptly left.
Other sociologists can simply leave, particularly if their research has been overt. Nonetheless, leaving a group with whom one has become close to can be difficult. What issues do some sociologists face upon entering the 'normal' world?	They may struggle to adapt. When returning to Harvard University, Whyte found himself tongue-tied and unable to communicate with fellow academics. This can be made worse if the research is conducted on and off over a period of time, with multiple 'crossings' between the two worlds.
The researcher may also struggle with loyalty. Why?	They may find that loyalty prevents them from fully disclosing all obtained data, for fear that this information might harm the group. For example, data obtained regarding criminal gangs may result in prosecution.
Sociologists must decide whether they wish to use overt or covert observation. Many opt for overt observation, because it has several advantages. Give examples of advantages:	It avoids ethical problems; it allows the observer to ask naive but important questions that only an outsider could ask; they can take notes openly; they can use additional methods (e.g. interviews) to confirm insights derived from observations.
However, overt observation has two major disadvantages. What are they?	1. A group may simply refuse the researcher permission to observe them, or may conceal certain elements. 2. It risks creating the Hawthorne Effect.
Because of these disadvantages, some sociologists opt for covert observation. Covert observation has several practical advantages, but also several practical disadvantages. What is the main practical advantage?	It reduces the risk of altering people's behaviour and is sometimes the only way to obtain valid data.
Laud Humphrey's used covert observation to study homosexual men's sexual encounters in public toilets. What did he note?	"There's only one way to watch highly discreditable behaviour and that is to pretend to be in the same boat as those engaging in it."
However, covert observation can pose practical problems. Give examples:	The researcher is required to keep up an act and may need detailed knowledge before even joining; there's always the risk of their true identity being discovered, which would abruptly end the research; they can't ask naive questions or combine methods; the addition of a new member can alter group dynamics even when the researcher's identity is concealed.
Furthermore, the researcher can't openly take notes, instead having to rely on memory. Which two sociologists found that this caused a problem?	Leon Festinger et al; Jason Ditton. They both used bathrooms to record observations, but this aroused suspicion in Ditton's case.
In addition to the practical issues, there are numerous ethical issues in covert observation. Give examples:	It's immoral to deceive people, obtaining information through false pretenses, and researcher's should obtain informed consent; researcher's often have to lie about their reasons for leaving the group, or even simply abandon the group altogether; they may be forced to witness or even participate in illegal/immoral activities;
Participant observation offers many advantages. Why is it more valid than other methods?	What a person says they do (in a questionnaire, for example) and what they actually do is sometimes very different. By actually observing them, rich qualitative data is obtained, and this provides a true picture. This is arguably the main advantage of participant observation.
In addition, participant observation provides more insight. Why?	The best way to truly understand something it to experience it firsthand. This personal understanding is called 'verstehen', the German word for 'empathy'. The researcher gains empathy through experience, achieving insight by living as a group member. They come to understand the subject's 'life-world'.
Furthermore, participant observation is very flexible. For methods such as questionnaires, the researcher must begin with a specific hypothesis and preset questions. Thus, even before collecting data, they will have already decided what is and isn't important. How does participant observation differ?	It's much more flexible. The researcher doesn't need to start with a fixed hypothesis, and can thus enter the situation with a relatively open mind. As new situations occur, they can alter their explanations and theories and follow up new ideas. This allows them to notice things that might otherwise be missed.
Finally, there are many practical advantages. For example, sometimes participant observation is the only practical method for studying certain groups, especially groups engaged in criminal activity, who are likely to be suspicious of outsiders asking questions. What does Lewis Yablonsky point out?	A teenage gang is likely to see researchers who come armed with questionnaires as the unwelcome representatives of authority. Participant observation, alternatively, allows the researcher to build a rapport with the group and gain its trust.
Participant observation can also be used in situations where questioning would be ineffective. Which sociologist showed this in their study of how police and probation officers categorise juveniles by making unconscious assumptions about them?	Aaron Cicourel.
Despite having a number of advantages, participant observation also faces a number of disadvantages. Give examples of practical disadvantages:	It's time consuming - Whyte's study took four years; the researcher needs to be trained; the situation can be stressful and demanding for the researcher; it requires skills that not everyone possesses; personal characteristics can hinder researchers; many groups don't want to be observed and can make research difficult.
Give examples of ethical disadvantages that occur in participant observation:	The researcher is lying to those they observe, they haven't gained (true) consent, they often leave without explanation, they may witness or even participate in criminal activity and fail to report it for fear of damaging their data.
Another disadvantage is that participant observation isn't representative. This can be compared to quantitative survey methods, which study large, representative samples. Why is the lack of representation an issue?	It doesn't provide a sound basis for making generalisations.
To achieve reliability, research procedures need to be standardised, thus allowing other researchers to reproduce them. Why is participant observation fairly unreliable?	It dependss largely on the researcher's personal skills and characteristics, meaning it's unlikely that any other researcher would be able to replicate the study.
In addition, participant observation produces qualitative data. What can this result in?	It makes comparisons with other studies difficult, and is thus unlikely to result in reliable data. This is why positivists reject participant observation; they see it as unsystematic.
Another disadvantage is its lack of objectivity. Why do critics argue that participant observation lacks objectivity?	Researchers risk 'going native'; loyalty to the group and fear of the group being punished can result in researcher's concealing data; this method typically attracts sociologists whose sympathies lie with the underdog.
According to its supporters, a great strength of participant observation is its validity. Why do positivists reject this claim?	They argue that the findings from such studies are merely subjective and biased impressions of the researcher. The data won't be a true reflection, but an interpretation. Furthermore, researcher's select what facts they consider worth recording, and discard the rest. There is also the issue of the Hawthorne Effect.
Interactionists favour participant observation because it is useful in examining microlevel interactions firsthand. Why do structural sociologists see this as inadequate?	Because it focuses on the microlevel of individuals' meanings, it ignores wider structural forces that shape our behaviour, such as class inequality or the norms and values into which we're socialised.

Next up

Flashcards on Participant Observation (3.6)

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by Em Maskrey almost 7 years ago