Socioogy-RM-Participant observation

Question 1

What are the different types of observation?

Answer 1

Non-participant (researcher observed group without taking part in it eg may use two way mirror), participant (researcher takes part in an event or everyday life of group while observing it), overt (researcher is open and makes their true identity and purpose known to those being studied) and covert (study is carried out ‘under cover’-researchers real identity and purpose are kept concealed from those being studied, and researcher takes a false identity and role)

Question 2

What type of observation is actual research normally?

Answer 2

Actual research does not always fit into one or other of these categories, eg Whyte’s study of ‘street corners of society’ was semi-overt. He revealed his real purpose to a key member of the group, but not to others

Question 3

What are most observations like in sociology?

Answer 3

Unstructured participant observation. However, positivist sociologists in particular do occasionally use structured observation, which is normally non-participant

Question 4

What are structured observations?

Answer 4

The researcher used a structured observational schedule to categorise systematically what happens. The schedule is pre-determined list of types of behaviour or situations the sociologist is interested in. Each time an instance of such behaviour occurs, the sociologist records it on the schedule. The numbers of times each event occurs is added to which produces quantitative data, from which patterns and correlations can then be established

Question 5

How can observations be used alongside other methods?

Answer 5

They can be used in conjunction with other methods, eg, when interviewing, the researcher may observe interviewees’ body language to gauge whether or not they are telling the truth

Question 6

What are the main issues when deciding to conduct a participant observation study?

Answer 6

Getting in/staying in/getting out, and whether to use overt or cover observation

Question 7

What is ‘getting in’?

Answer 7

Have to gain entry to group. Some groups are easier to enter than others, eg football crowd easier to enter than joining a criminal gang. Making initial contact depends on personal skills/connections/chance. Then have to win trust and acceptance, eg by making friends with key individuals/ Age/gender/class/ethnicity of researcher can be an obstacle though. There is then a question of what role the researcher should adopt, but ideally it should be one that doesn’t disrupt group’s normal pattern, and offer good vantage point to make observations, though it isn’t always possible to take a role that is unobtrusive and good vantage point-some roles may also taking sides in conflict making observation harder

Question 8

What sociologists provide examples of making contact?

Answer 8

Polsky was good at pool and found his skill useful in gaining entry to the world of the poolroom hustler. Patrick was able to join a Glasgow gang because he looked young and knew one of its members from having taught him in approved school (young offenders’ institutions). Fairhurst found herself hospitalised by back trouble and used the opportunity to conduct a study on being a patient

Question 9

What sociologists provide examples of gaining acceptance?

Answer 9

Thornton made friends with Kate in her study of clubbing and rave scene, but she slowly aged out of the peer group and felt like a stranger due to her nationality. Liebow succeeded in gaining acceptance by black street-corner gang in Washington DC. Griffin was white and used medication and sun lamp treatments to change his skin colour and pass as black in a time and place where everything was racially segregated and black people faced discrimination

Question 10

What sociologists provide examples of the observer’s role?

Answer 10

Whyte succeeded in achieving both aims of the observer’s role by refusing all leadership roles, with the one exception of secretary of the community club, a position that allowed him to take many notes under the disguise of taking the minutes of meetings

Question 11

What is ‘staying in’?

Answer 11

Researcher needs to be able to stay in group and complete the study. Key problem for participant observer is having to be involved in the group to understand it fully but stay detached to remain objective and unbiased.

Question 12

What is ‘going native’?

Answer 12

Danger of staying in group is becoming over-involved or ‘going native’. By over-identifying with the group, the researcher becomes biased. When this happens, they stop being objective observer and become a member of the group. Eg Punch found that in striving to be accepted by tight-knit patrol group he was studying, he over-identified with them and acted as a policeman himself. Other extreme, researcher may preserve their detachment to avoid bias, but by doing so they risk not understanding events they observe. Rock says there needs to be balance between the two extremes but it’s very difficult. Also more time spent in the group, the less strange its ways appear and as Whyte said, things that would seem unusual or noteworthy earlier on, now seem ‘normal’-observer is less observant

Question 13

What is ‘getting out’?

Answer 13

Practically, getting out of the group at the end of the study generally presents fewer problems than getting in/staying in. Worst comes to worse you can simply just leave (Patrick just left after he was sickened by the gangs violence). It can be easier if the observation was overt, though it is still hard if the researcher can become close with the group. Also re-entering one’s normal world can be difficult. Plus loyalty may prevent full disclosure of everything that has been learnt for fear of harming group members

Question 14

What was Whyte’s problem with ‘getting out’?

Answer 14

When he returned to Harvard University after his research, he was tongue-toed and unable to communicate with fellow academics. These problems can be made worse if research is conducted on and off over a period of time, with multiple ‘crossings’ between the two worlds

Question 15

What are the advantages of an overt observation?

Answer 15

Avoids ethical problem of obtaining information by deceit and won’t be expected to join in activities of deviant groups if they are being studied for example. Allows observer to ask the naïve but important questions that only an outsider could ask. Observer can openly take notes, and it allows the researcher to use interview methods to check insights derived from observations

Question 16

What are the two major disadvantages of overt observation?

Answer 16

A group may refuse the researcher permission (Eg two Amsterdam police officers that Punch did his research with, later told him ‘when you were with us, we only let you see what we wanted you to see’) and it risks creating the Hawthorne effect (where those who know they are being observed behave differently as a result, undermining the validity of the data)

Question 17

What are the practical advantages of covert observation?

Answer 17

Reduces risk of altering behaviour and is sometimes the only way to obtain valid information. Especially when studying behaviours people want to keep secret-as found by Humphreys who studied gay men’s sexual encounters in public toilets. If they knew they were being observed, they would change or conceal their behaviour and so the main advantage of observation-that it preserves the naturalness of people’s behaviour-would be lost

Question 18

What are the practical problems with covert observation?

Answer 18

Requires researcher to keep up an act, and may call for detailed knowledge of group’s way of life before even joining. Risk of cover being ‘blown’ by even a trivial mistake, which would likely bring research to an abrupt end and may, in the case of some criminal groups, lead to physical harm. Also sociologist cannot take notes openly so must rely on memory and opportunity to write them in secret. Also researcher cannot ask naïve but important questions, or combine the observation with other methods such as interviews. Plus, although pretending to be an insider reduces risk of Hawthorne Effect, the addition of a new member can still change the group’s behaviour and reduce validity

Question 19

How was Patrick’s almost ‘found out’ in his covert observation?

Answer 19

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-things the gang would never have done

Question 20

What does Polsky note as a disadvantage of covert observation?

Answer 20

That you should not pretend to be “one of them” because they will test you and you will either find yourself involved in illegal activities, or your cover will be blown. This was something Patrick also discovered when the gang he was studying handed him an axe to use in an expected flight

Question 21

How have sociologists struggled with the fact that they cannot openly write notes?

Answer 21

Festinger et al, studying a religious sect that predicted the imminent end of the world, and Ditton, studying theft among bread deliverymen, had to use toilets as a place for recording their observations. In Ditton’s case, this eventually aroused suspicion

Question 22

What are the ethical issues of covert observations?

Answer 22

Immoral to deceive people, obtaining information by pretending to be their friend or in a similar situation. Informed consent should be gained after the purpose of the study and use of findings has been explained. Covert observers may have to lie about reasons for leaving the group. Others such as Patrick abandon the group without explanation-critics argue this is unethical. May have to participate in immoral/illegal activities as part of their ‘cover’ role. Similarly, as witnesses to such activities, they may have moral/legal duty to intervene or report them to police

Question 23

What are the advantages of participant observation?

Answer 23

Validity, insight, flexibility, and practical advantages

Question 24

How is validity an advantage of participant observation?

Answer 24

What people say they do when asked in a questionnaire and what they actually do in real life, are not always the same thing. By contrast, by actually observing people they can obtain rich qualitative data that provides a picture of how they really live. Supporters of participant observation argue this is the method’s main strength, and most other advantages are linked to this

Question 25

How is insight an advantage of participant observation?

Answer 25

Best way to truly understand what something is like is to experience it four ourselves. Sociologists call this personal or subjective understanding ‘verstehen’ (German meaning empathy) that comes from putting yourself in another’s place. Participant observation allows researcher to gain empathy through personal experience, and gain insight. We can come to understand their ‘life world’ as they themselves understand it. This closeness to people’s lived reality means participant observations can give uniquely valid, authentic data

Question 26

How is flexibility an advantage of participant observation?

Answer 26

Rather than starting with a fixed hypothesis, it allows the sociologist to enter the situation with a relatively open mind about what they will find. As new situations are encountered, new explanations can be formulated and sociologist can change direction there and then. In this way, any theories that the researcher produces are ‘grounded’ in real life. This open-mindedness allows researcher to discover things other methods may miss (Whyte found answers to questions he would never had asked)

Question 27

What are practical advantages are there for participant observation?

Answer 27

May be only viable method for studying certain groups, especially ones seen as deviant, though these are likely to be suspicious of outsiders coming in and asking questions. Yablonsky points out a teenage gang is likely to see researcher coming armed with questionnaires as unwelcome representatives of authority. By contrast as it enables rapport with group and gain trust, it has proved successful method of studying delinquent gangs/thieves etc. Can also be used where questioning would be ineffective, eg Cicourel’s study of how police and probation officers categories juveniles by unconscious assumptions of criminal ‘types’ (unaware assumptions so questionnaires would be pointless)

Question 28

What are the disadvantages of participant observation?

Answer 28

Practical disadvantages, ethical problems, representativeness, reliability, bias/lack of objectivity, validity, and lack of a concept of structure

Question 29

What are the practical disadvantages of participant observation?

Answer 29

Time consuming (Whyte’s study took 4 years), training needed to recognise sociologically significant aspects of a situation, can be personally stressful and demanding (especially if covert), observational and interpersonal skills are needed, personal characteristics (age/gender/ethnicity) may restrict what groups can be studied. Many groups may not wish to be studied in this way and some have power to make access difficult

Question 30

What are the ethical issues of participant observation?

Answer 30

Covert participant observation in particular raises serious ethical difficulties, including deceiving people in order to obtain information about them and participating in illegal or immoral activities in the course of sociological research

Question 31

How is representativeness a disadvantage of participant observations?

Answer 31

Groups studied are usually very small and the ‘sample’ is often selected without structure eg chance encounters. This doesn’t provide sound basis for making generalisations. Downes and Rock note, although participant observation may provide valid insights into particular group being studied, it is doubtful how fat these ‘internally valid’ insights are ‘externally valid’ (generalisable to the wider population)

Question 32

How is reliability a disadvantage of participant observation?

Answer 32

In participant observation so much depends on the personal skills and characteristics of a lone researcher that it is unlikely any other investigator would be able to replicate the original study (Whyte recognised his method was to some extent unique to him alone). Because participant observation usually produces qualitative data, this can make comparisons with other studies difficult and so unlikely to produce reliable data. Positivists therefore reject participant observation as an unsystematic method that cannot be replicated

Question 33

How is bias and lack of objectivity a disadvantage of participant observation?

Answer 33

Risk of becoming too involved and going native makes it difficult to remain objective. Loyalty to group or fear of reprisals leads to sociologists concealing sensitive information, denying those who read published study a dull and objective account of the research. Participant observation often attracts sociologists whose sympathies lie with the underdog so may be biased in favour of their subjects eg Willis was accused of presenting romanticised account of the ‘lads’

Question 34

How is validity a disadvantage of participant observations?

Answer 34

Positivists reject the claim that this method is valid. Argue findings from such studies are subjective and biased impressions of observer. It shows things how the observer sees it. Supporters claim it doesn’t impose own categories and ideas on facts, but positivist argue in reality the researcher selects what facts they think are worth recording and these likely fit in with researchers pre-existing views and prejudices. The Hawthorne effect is a further threat to validity

Question 35

Why is lack of a concept of structure a disadvantage of participant observation?

Answer 35

Interactionists favour participant observation. See society as constructed through small-scale face-to-face interactions of this members and meanings that individual actors give to situation. In their view, participant observation is useful tool for examining micro-level interactions/meanings first hand. However structural sociologists (eg Marxism/functionalism) see this as inadequate. Argue that because it focuses on micro level of actors meanings participant observation tends to ignore wider structural forces that shape behaviour such as class inequality or norms/values into which we are socialised. Therefore structuralist view they believe it will never give us a complete picture-at best it will only be a partial view