Field Work and Observations

Field Work and Field Observations

Observer Roles

Complete Participant (Going Undercover)

• Researcher functions as a fully functioning member of the setting.
• Appears as another member of the subject group to other participants (subjects).
• Does not identify themselves as a researcher.

Advantages

• Subjects' behavior is natural, as they are not reacting to the researcher's presence.

Disadvantages

• The researcher cannot ask questions without potentially blowing their cover.
• Risk of getting involved in unethical or illegal activities.
• Issue of objectivity.

Participant Observation

• Researcher participates in the activities of the group they are observing.
• Subjects are aware that the researcher is indeed researching.

Advantages

• Researcher can decline participation in certain activities (e.g., drug dealing) without raising suspicion.
• Researcher can ask questions.
• Addresses ethical concerns related to voluntary participation and informed consent.

Disadvantages

• Subjects might be reactive to the research and change their behavior

Observer as Participant vs. Participant as Observer

• Observer as Participant: Identifies as a member of the group but is recognized as a researcher; may interact but is not fully integrated.
• Participant as Observer: Interacts with group members and participates in their activities but is not considered a true member.
• In practice, researchers often simply use the term "participant observation."

Simple Observations

• Direct observation where the researcher sits down and takes note of what's happening.
• Benefit is asking questions.

Entering the Field (Gaining Access to Subjects)

Two General Approaches

1. Accessing Formal Organizations
2. Accessing Subcultures

Accessing Formal Organizations

• Examples: Criminal justice agencies, social service organizations, large corporations.
• Generally involves multiple steps and preparation.

Steps

1. Educate yourself on the organization.
2. Identify a gatekeeper: Someone within the organization who can grant access.
   • In a large police organization (e.g., Metro), this might be someone at least at the captain level.
   • In smaller organizations, it could be anyone within the rank structure.
3. Create a memo for the chief executive officer (CEO/Sheriff/Warden)
   • Content of the memo:
     • Introduction: How you got the contact, who you talked to (the gatekeeper).
     • Succinct description of the research purpose and design (keep it to one page).
     • Specific action request: What you are asking the CEO to do (e.g., ride-alongs, access to staff, surveys, data).
     • Offer to meet with the CEO.
   • Run the memo by the gatekeeper first to ensure it's appropriate.
   • Maintain a formal tone in communication.

Accessing Subcultures

• Examples: Drug dealers, outlaw bikers.

Methods

1. Through a sponsor:
   • Someone who knows members of the group and can introduce the researcher.
2. Be a group member themself:
   • Easiest way to access, if possible.
3. "Hanging around" method:
   • Attend events or linger in places where group members congregate or operate.
   • Develop familiarity with the environment.

Examples

New York City's Auto Maintenance Programs

• 40 ride along observation with police in New York City.
• Formal Organization

Club Drugs in New York City (Dina Frone's Study)

• Subculture.
• Participant as Observer - The group perceived her as a member.

Illegal Gambling in Pennsylvania (Tim's Study)

• Subculture.
• Linger at location method.

Case Studies & Ethical Considerations

Studying the Satanists (Randall Alfred, 1976)

• Alfred approached the Church of Satan in 1968, feigning interest in joining.
• Made rapid progress, advancing in ritual rank and administrative responsibilities.
• Attended 52 rituals, participated in most, and attended council meetings and classes.
• Concealed his research identity until the end.

Findings

• Discovered diverse motivations for joining satanism (sexual indulgence, power from magic, rebellion, a new millennium).
• Observed that Satanists limit sexual indulgence to non-harmful acts.
• Observed a negative view of drug use.
• Observed that Lavey urged followers to work hard and succeed.

Ethical Concerns

• Alfred felt his deception was unethical.
• LaVey was not surprised and considered it appropriately satanic.
• Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) now review research proposals to determine ethical implications.

Observing Outlaw Biker (Daniel Wolfe, 1990)

• Wolfe sought to understand the bikers' worldview.
• Attempted to join the King's Crew MC but was unsuccessful due to impatience.
• Made contact with the Rebels, gradually befriending members.
• For three years, became involved with the Rebels, experiencing their sense of brotherhood.

Ethical Issues

• Wolfe felt his secret research was a betrayal.
• Concerned about the fate of previous infiltrators (police officers murdered).
• The club eventually agreed to his research after he proposed it, prompted by their question.
• Worked with club members to create fictitious names to protect them.
• As his ethnographer role became more evident, his biker role diminished.

Observer Roles

• Started as a full participant.
• Shifted to a participant observer.

Publishing Work & Ethical Implications

• Disguising names of individual members but keeping the gang name.

Ethical Challenges

• Due to concerns for the under cover officers the IRB would likely not allow a full participant role.
• May allow participant observed with some potential access issues.
• Would need to ensure member was not joining gang for research purposes.