Participant Observation

What is overt observation?

open observation

What is covert observation?

hidden observation

What is an example of a historical usage of participant observation?

John Howard Griffin (1960) dyed his skin black to discover what it was like to live as a Black man in the southern states of America

KEY TERM:

the study of a way of life of a group of people - their culture & the structure of society

Ethnography

What are historical examples of ethnographies produced by participant observation?

• Whyte’s (1955) account of an Italian-American gang in Boston

• Venkatesh’s (2009) study of the Black Kings, an African American gang selling crack cocaine in Chicago

KEY TERM:

the process of a researcher successfully gaining permission/admittance to a particular setting, group, or situation for the purpose of observation, study, or participation

gaining entry

What is an example of a sociologist who gained entry with a particular group for research purposes?

Laud Humphreys (1970): acted as a lookout when researching casual sex between men in US public states - the “tearoom trade”

What are 2 examples of a researcher having to participate directly in order to gain entry?

• Hobbs (1994) wanted to research relationship between criminals & detectives in East London

• was coaching a football team when he discovered that Simon, a detective, was the father of one player

• he befriended Simon, who vouched for him & introduced him to others

• Hobbs drunk in a local pub frequented by detectives

• Festinger (1956) found that the only way to observe a small religious sect was to pretend to be a believer

What are the advantages & disadvantages of covert research?

• avoids Hawthorne effect (participants acting differently because they are being studied) eg. Ditton found that bakery salesmen would tell them how they stole bread

• can’t gain informed consent

What are the advantages & disadvantages of overt participant observation?

• some of the gang saw Venkatesh as a possible threat; one thought he was a spy from a rival Mexican gang

• key informants may go out of their way to assist the research (eg. the leader of the Black Kings for Venkatesh)

• Hawthorne effect

What is an example of a case in which the researcher became “invisible” or “taken for granted” (the Hawthorne effect was overcome)?

Walford’s (1993) study of a secondary school: took 4 weeks before students misbehaved, but after this time, “mock wrestling” & chairs flying across classrooms

What are the disadvantages of having key informants?

• Whyte (studying Italian-American gangs) had relationship with Doc, gang leader

• Whyte: “Doc became… a collaborator in the research”

• may change informant’s behaviour —> Doc: “when I do things, I have to think what Bill Whyte would want to know about it”

How does participant observation provide insights + knowledge?

• Venkatesh: “I had no experience whatsoever in an urban ghetto” (as young, MC uni student)

• to gain insight, had to “hang out with the people”

• Whyte: “I learned the answers to questions that I would not have had the sense to ask if I had been getting my information solely on an interviewing basis”

How does participant observation provide meanings + context?

• getting to know individuals —> discovering meanings which direct behaviour, construct worldview & make sense of experiences

• opportunity to observe behaviour in dif. contexts, in dif. circumstances & with dif. audiences

• Liebow spent nearly 2 years studying African-American men in Washington DC

• boasting about “flaws” helped to restore self-respect, but dif. meanings might be expressed in dif. contexts

How might participant observation studies be less valid than other research methods?

• personal involvement may reduce objectivity

• observers who identify with group may see members in positive light

• identification carried to extreme = to “go native”; observers never return to former lives

How might participant observation be unreliable?

• unlikely that dif. researchers will produce same results

• unsystematic - no fixed procedures & can’t plan ahead

• data rarely quantified

• relies on personal qualities of researcher

Why is it difficult to make generalisations from participant observation?

samples usually small

What are the disadvantages of participant observation?

• key informants/participants may change behaviour

• less reliable (unsystematic)

• less valid (not impartial, might “go native”)

• difficult to make generalisations

• time & money

• personal costs (dangerous)

• difficult to “gain entry”

• unlikely to produce quantitative data

What are the advantages of participant observation?

• provides insights + knowledge

• provides meanings + context

• key informants assist research

• key for studying virtual communities

• rich + in-depth qualitative data

How do the online & physical worlds interact?

• participants in games/virtual worlds form virtual communities

• members “live” part of their lives in virtual worlds eg. the world Second Life

• researchers + participants may meet physically eg. T.L. Taylor met 30 people from a game

How is there ambiguity as to how involved participant observers should get in virtual worlds?

• Pearce studied game Buggy Polo, & was told she was too detached

• Upon getting more involved, gained trust + respect

• the book “Ethnography and Virtual Worlds: A Handbook of Method” states that participant observation is “the heart + soul of our work” as gives deeper understanding

• HOWEVER, Hawthorne effect

What do positivists think of participant observation?

• may help to construct meaningful/relevant Qs for questionnaires

• not useful as end in itself - little quantifiable data & unreliable

• no representative samples for generalisations

What do interpretivists think of participant observation?

• interested in meanings + definitions

• qualitative data providers richness + depth not available from other methods

What is an example of unethical participant observation?

• Laud Humphreys (1970) studied casual sex between men in US public toilets = “tearoom trade”

• acted as a “watchqueen” warning the approach of strangers/police

• interviewed 50 of the men 1 year later under a disguise (health surveyor), about jobs, sexuality + marriage

• tracked their names + addresses

• gay sex was illegal, so had police found Humphrey’s data, men might have been imprisoned

How did Laud Humphrey (1970) justify his research?

• data destroyed harmful myths by showing that gay men were not threats & that straight people weren’t drawn into gay sex

• showed that participants were not “dangerous deviants”