lecture 11 - ethnography & participant observation

Question 1

ethnography

Answer 1

observing people and other social phenomena in real life, in a natural setting

• '’live’’ history, or daily life in ‘‘real time’’

researcher is embedded first-hand observer (on the ground/in the field) for an extended period of time = real commitment

• requires good social/interpersonal skills & personality

mostly qualitative assessments of behavior and thinking (‘‘thick description, Geertz)

• first detailed notes, than what it means
• thick description: first the facts, than interpretation of what this means

= theory-generating activity
*theory testing also possible (risky: you come in biased, you look for certain behavior rather than being unbiased)

main goal = understanding

Question 2

key steps involved

Answer 2

• case selection: usually single case (population from which is selected is crucial for possible generalizability)

access to research site:

• open: everyone can be present (e.g. public behavior)
• closed: need to get permission/access first from a gatekeeper (e.g. negotiations)
• permission required?
• ‘sampling’ (purposive, more like case selection) of informants: representativeness
  !you can’t observe everyone/everything closely, so you need to select a sample that you will observe more closely

observer role: two dimensions

1. participant (active) - observer (passive) = researcher participates in activities they want to observe VS or merely observes
2. overt/open vs covert/hidden = do people know they are being observed or not
   - going native = covert participant (can introduce bias: starts identifying with the community)
   - participant observer (overt participant) = requires consent

identity of the observer = can determine the success of failure of observational research (on these grounds e.g. researchers can be more integrated or excluded by the community)
- religion, ethnicity, gender

structured vs unstructured observation

• structured = specific predetermined observation schedule (behaviors that you might be looking for as checklist)
• unstructured = observing/noting what happens = typical approach

documentation: field notes can often only be done afterwards, sometimes recording/taping is possible

• field notes = separation of descriptive facts and (analytical) interpretations

analysis = systematic qualitative summary & interpretation

Question 3

ethics - issues

Answer 3

• obtaining informed consent for voluntary participation
  not possible in covert observation
• protection of privacy in field notes (don’t use actual names, etc.)
  in small communities it is often easy to determine who is who based on description behavior (= problem)

= ethical minefield,
need to have permission from an ethics commission
(easier with open observation)

Question 4

validity and reliability

• lincoln and guba

Answer 4

• objective observation vs personal involvement -> bias in interpretation
• documentation (field notes) and replicability

Lincoln & Guba: ‘‘trustworthiness’’ criteria

• internal validity -> credibility = depth of notes, triangulation, negative case analysis, member checks
• external validity -> transferability = thick description of context (enables reader to see whether the context is rather unique or if it may also exist in other cases and thus could be useful to understand other cases)
• reliability -> dependability = external audit, control of field notes (see if meas./observation is good)
• objectivity -> confirmability = external audit, control of field notes

Question 5

(example: Charles Foster)

Answer 5

Being a Beast

Charles Foster tried to live like several animals: badger, otter, fox, deer, swift

gave a presentation as African studies center in Leiden

Question 6

example: Kelsall (2005)

Answer 6

Truth & Reconciliation Commission meeting in Sierra Leone (after civil war/conflict)

puzzle: truth is seldom told but due to ceremonial component, the meeting might still work

conclusion: presence/quality of hearing + presence/quality of ceremony -> degree/feeling of reconciliation
- problem: third factors? he doesn’t address them

criticism:

• open observer (participant: is part of the audience)
• transparency = acknowledges he found it difficult to separate interpretation and facts (also provided solution: let others read his notes)
• ethical issues? directly quotes, identifies people by name etc. is tricky for privacy (he doesn’t ask permission, bc it is a public event (which is not a solid excuse))

good points:

• case selection = one case, doesn’t provide justification as to why this particular case + how it compares to other cases -> problem with generalizability
• first part = observation, second part is interpretation -> clear distinction fact/interpretation