PP OBSERVATIONS Flashcards
1
Q
Engaging in Participant Observation (Making Contact, Acceptance, Staying In)-
A
- Making initial contact depends on the researchers personal skills, or connections.
- For example, it was easy for Patrick to get in with the Glasgow gang he researched as he looked quite young and knew one of its members from having taught him in approved school.
- Fairhurst also became hospitalised due to back problems, which she used to conduct research on being a patient.
- To gain entry to a group the researcher also needs to win trust and support from those whom they’re researching.
- For example, Thornton became friends with a girl called Kate in her study of the clubbing and raving scene, which was even an issue as since she was 23 she found herself ‘ageing out’ of the group she was studying. She was also initially met with suspicion, with Kate’s brother saying ‘how do you know she won’t sell this to the Daily Mirror?’.
- Although, despite barriers, researchers like Liebow (white) have succeeded in gaining acceptance by a black street-corner gang in Washington DC.
- Even researchers like Griffin went to extreme lengths- a white man in 1959 who used medication and sun lamp treatments to pass as black to research the impacts of racism in the South of the USA.
- Researchers also need to understand their role, to not be too involved, which Whyte succeeded in by refusing all leadership roles, apart from the secretary of the community club as this allowed him to take ample notes.
- They also need to be able to ‘stay’ in the group as they need to be able to be both involved in the group and at the same time remain slightly detached.
2
Q
Eval (Patrick, Getting Out, Punch, ‘Going Naïve’)-
A
- Practically, getting out has a lot less problems than getting in.
- The researcher is simply able to call a halt and leave, such as when Patrick’s experience of studying a Glasgow gang caused him to witness so much violence that he had to leave.
- There are problems re-entering the normal world again as your behaviour alters due to secondary socialisation, which can be worse if the research is conducted on and off over a period of time, with multiple ‘crossings’ between worlds.
- It may also be found that loyalty prevents a researcher from disclosing everything, such as revealing criminal activity as it could lead to persecution. However, there is the danger which comes before leaving, which is ‘going naïve’.
- By over-identifying with a group, the researcher becomes biased, such as how Punch found that in trying to be accepted by the close-knit patrol group he was studying, he became ‘policemanlike’ himself.
3
Q
Overt Observation (Advantages)-
A
- Involves the researcher revealing their identity and purpose to the group they’re studying, and asking for their permission to be studied
- . This avoids the ethical problems of obtaining information by deceit and, when studying deviant groups, that of being expected to join in with potentially illegal activities.
- It also allows the observer to ask the kind of naïve but vital questions that only an outsider could ask, like why someone would commit theft, helping get the perspective of those being researched.
- The observer is also able to openly take notes, and it allows for the researcher to use interview methods to check insights derived from observations, making the study more ‘in-depth’.
4
Q
Eval (Punch, Disadvantages)-
A
- A group may simply refuse to be observed, or may prevent the researcher from seeing certain things, leading to an incomplete investigation.
- This was seen when Punch researched two police officers from Amsterdam, who told him ‘when you were with us, we only let you see what we wanted you to see’.
- It also risks creating the Hawthorne effect as those who know they are being observed begin to behave differently, undermining validity.
5
Q
Humphreys (Covert Observation, Practical Advantages)-
A
- The main practical advantage of covert observation is that it reduces the risk of altering people’s behaviour, and sometimes it is the only way to obtain valid information.
- This is especially true in cases where people are engaged in illegal or deviant activities.
- As Humphreys, who studied gay men’s sexual encounters in public toilets, notes: ‘there is only one way to watch highly discreditable behaviour, and that is to present to be in the same boat with those engaging in it’.
- If these people knew they were being observed, it would make the observation less valid as they would change or conceals their behaviour and so the main advantage would be that it preserves the naturalness of people’s behaviour.
6
Q
Eval (Patrick, Practical Disadvantages)-
A
- It can require the researcher to keep up an act, which may call for detailed knowledge of the group’s way of life even before joining it.
- This can pose risks of having your ‘cover blown’, even by a trivial mistake, such as when Patrick was almost found out when he bought his suit with cash instead of credit, and when he fastened the middle button of his jacket rather than the top one, which was out of line with the gang he was studying’s normal practices.
- This could bring the research to an abrupt end, and in the case of some criminal groups, lead to physical harm, especially since it’s unethical as no consent was gained to study these groups.
- Also since you have to blend in you can’t really take notes, which relies on memory which can cause a researcher to forget parts of what they have studied.
7
Q
Yablonsky and Cicourel (Practical Advantages, Flexibility)-
A
- Participant observation can sometimes be the only viable method for studying certain groups, particularly those engaged in activities that the wider society sees as deviant or disreputable.
- It’s flexibility helps this too as entering an observation with an open mind means that it is easier to discover things about certain groups that may otherwise not be noted.
- Some groups are likely to be suspicious of outsiders who start asking too many questions, and as Yablonsky points out, a teenage gang is likely to see researchers who come armed with questionnaires as the unwelcomed representatives of authority.
- By contrast, participant observation enables the sociologist to build a rapport with the group and gain its trust- it has proved a successful method of studying delinquent gangs, thieves, drug users etc.
- It’s also effective in situations where questioning may be ineffective, e.g. when Cicourel studied how police and probation officers categorise juveniles by making unconscious assumptions based on criminal ‘types’, as since they’re unaware of their assumptions it would be pointless to ask about them. This therefore often makes it easier to access information.
8
Q
Eval (Downes and Rock, Practical Disadvantages, Representativeness, Lack of Concept Structure)-
A
- These studies can take years to complete, and the researcher needs to be trained so they’re able to recognise aspects of a situation that are sociologically significant and worth attention. It can also be personally stressful and demanding, and requires observational and interpersonal skills that not everyone possesses. Personal characteristics such as age and gender may also restrict what can be studied, with Downes and Rock saying ‘not everyone would pass uneventfully into the world of punk rockers or Hell’s Angles’.
- Some groups may also not want to be studied, and powerful groups have the resources to avoid it, causing it to often focus on powerless groups.
- This also effects its representativeness as the sample size is often small, and so although participant observation may provide valid insights into the particular group being studied, it is doubtful how far these ‘internally valid’ insights are ‘externally valid’.
- This small sample size has also led Marxists and Feminists to call it ’inadequate’ as it focuses on the ‘micro’ levels of actors, ignoring wider structural forces which shape our behaviour, like class- in the structuralist view, seeing things only through the actors’ eyes will never give us the complete picture, decreasing it’s validity.
