Marketing Coordinator 16551 Essay Example

their corresponding expressions, certain facts would remain undisclosed. The role of a participant observer encompasses various attributes and requires experience in the field. In this approach, researchers become both the instrument for data collection and its subsequent analysis based on their personal experiences.

The importance of developing critical skills for success in participant observation includes learning the language to understand and ask clarifying questions, building memory for accurate reporting, maintaining naivete through a willingness to learn, and improving writing skills for publishing field notes. According to Bernard, entering the fieldwork is the most challenging part of participant observation. To address this challenge, one can choose an easily accessible site for data collection, bring documentation about oneself and the project, seek help from friends and connections, provide letters of recommendation, be prepared for questions while showing honesty and consistency, and familiarize oneself with the physical and social layout of the field site.

1. Field research literature, work experience, and conversations with experienced researchers have led Bernard to identify the different stages of Participant Observation:
• Initial contact
• Shock
• Discovering the obvious
• The break
• Focusing
• Exhaustion, the second break, and frantic activity
• Leaving
2. During the initial contact period, many anthropologists experience extreme excitement as they immerse themselves in a new culture. Bernard emphasizes that cultural anthropologists are drawn to the experience of living in a different culture. However, there have been instances when the opposite happened, typically due to the impact of culture shock. Nearly all anthropologists report feelings of depression and shock
   

shortly after their initial contact phase.

One form of anxiety that arises in researchers is related to their confidence in collecting reliable data. To address this, Bernard recommends being highly focused on specific tasks such as creating maps, conducting censuses, compiling household inventories, and gathering genealogical information. Additionally, one can document their emotional and personal responses to the process of participant observation fieldwork through clinical and methodological field notes. Another common experience among researchers is culture shock, where they tend to fixate on minor irritations and become frustrated with unfamiliar aspects of a different culture.

Bernard cautions that one must be ready to face the challenge of maintaining objectivity, while another issue frequently arises – the issue of a lack of privacy. During the third phase, known as the revelation of the obvious, anthropologists have the sensation that their informants are finally allowing them access to the essence of their culture. However, it later becomes apparent that this information is actually quite ordinary. At this stage, anthropologists feel a sense of belonging and the “village” begins to feel like home. Typically, a rupture occurs after a period of three to four months.

Returning to the field site is an opportunity for the anthropologist to gain both physical and emotional distance. It allows them to reflect on the research done so far and plan the remaining steps for the visit. This return also demonstrates genuine interest in the community and helps establish trust with the informants. Additionally, the break provides a chance for focusing, as the reflection and preparation during this time can be applied to this stage. The sixth stage includes exhaustion, a second break, and frantic activity.

Feeling

exhausted and embarrassed, one may hesitate to continue asking questions of informants. It can be easy to believe that the informants have no more information to offer. However, this is a misconception as cultural knowledge is vast and cannot be fully acquired in just a few years. Taking a second break can be helpful in reflecting on this and realizing how much more there is to discover. Yet, this break also leads to frantic activity as one becomes panicked about the limited time remaining and the extensive work that still needs to be completed. Leaving the field in a respectful and positive manner is crucial not only for one's own project but also for the future of participant observation. Unlike questionnaire surveys, ethnography relies on a select group of key informants rather than a representative sample.

Anthropologists search for suitable informants who can provide sufficient information about a culture. They achieve this by selecting competent informants and inquiring about their knowledge. Benard introduces an approach initially utilized by Poggie in 1972, where knowledgeable informants were questioned about communities and their responses were compared to well-executed social surveys. The level of correlation served as an indicator of the informants' qualifications. Romney discovered an alternative method of choosing key informants in 1986.

Informants who share agreement regarding certain aspects of cultural knowledge possess a deeper understanding of the corresponding domain compared to informants who hold conflicting opinions. Anthropologists employ a comprehensive set of approximately 40 questions to select general ethnographic informants, with answers known by knowledgeable members of a particular culture. Benard proposes an intriguing perspective on key informants, suggesting that individuals skeptical of their own culture tend to

be the most perceptive, thoughtful, and articulate.

Definitions provided by other authors and Anthropologists:

- Kluckhohn (1940) defines it as "a conscious and systematic participation, to the extent possible, in the activities of a group, including interests and emotions."
- Zelditch (1962) outlines three methods employed by participant observers: direct observation, informant interviews for acquiring knowledge on institutionalized norms and statuses, and gathering detailed or sampling data to document frequencies. This approach cannot be utilized independently from other research methods or procedures. It represents an approach encompassing suitable techniques inherent in all participant observation forms.

Participant observation refers to the method of study where researchers immerse themselves in a community and observe or participate in daily activities. It is not a single method but rather a combination of techniques used to study various subjects, including primitive societies, deviant subcultures, complex organizations, social movements, communities, and informal groups. According to Whyte (1979), a participant observer is a researcher who engages in social activities with the subjects over an extended period of time. Gosling and Edwards (1995) state that participant observation is used during participatory rural appraisal (PRA) exercises to gain insight into the daily activities of children by accompanying them or observing them at gathering places. Pratt & Loizos (1992) emphasize that participant observation involves the researcher becoming a resident in the community.

This combination of techniques involves conducting research with active participation and social interaction with the subjects being studied. It includes direct observation of relevant events, informal and formal interviews, systematic counting, collection of documents and artifacts, and allows for flexibility in the direction of the study. The main goal of participant observation is to gather, comprehend, and validate

data from the field. This method involves engaging in intense social interaction with individuals in their natural environment, fostering cooperative relationships. The following approach, previously discussed by Bernard, is commonly utilized to carry out this project:

• Plan for fieldwork: create a research framework, choose and contact a community, obtain permission for a village stay. Inform the community about the intended duration of the stay.
• Immerse oneself in the village and establish a connection with its residents.
• Show interest in the culture, daily life, and special events. Learn through observation and conversations with people.
• Adapt to the locals' lifestyle by consuming their food and living as they do. Assist in daily activities and participate in special events.
• Mentally record observations while interacting with people. Transcribe these notes when alone. Regularly review notes and address any areas requiring clarification or further investigation.
• Depart in a manner that aligns with the culture of the study community.

• Anthropologists propose that engaging in participant observation aids in comprehending and acquiring Indigenous Knowledge, including its benefits and challenges, from the community's standpoint. However, I believe there is some room for disagreement as the report still reflects the anthropologists' perspective and does not solely convey the community's viewpoint.

Participant observation is frequently combined with other methods such as interviews, mapping, ranking, etc. Unless the participant observer is already familiar with the local language and culture, it may take several months for this method to produce meaningful insights.

Characteristics:

- Non-standardized: Research can often be redirected based on data received from the field. Changes

in direction can be made to focus more directly on gathering data for emerging hypotheses. - Utilizes the relationships established between the researcher and informants in the field for collecting data where mutual trust is necessary. (Fringe societies, gangs...)

Advantages:

• Researchers can modify the research problem as they continue their research. Predefined hypotheses often limit the value of collected data.
• Due to close contact with the field situation, researchers are better able to avoid misleading or irrelevant questions.
• Impressions are often more reliable than numbers when classifying respondents.
• Observation typically involves experienced and qualified individuals. A survey director is usually several steps removed from the data-gathering process.
• The research and interaction pace can be adjusted appropriately.
  • By taking part in the events they observe, describe, and analyze, anthropologists gain insights that surpass the ones obtained from more distant descriptions and surveys.
  • Certain behaviors and beliefs can only be comprehended through intimate, day-to-day relationships or by simply being present when things occur.
  • Traditional research techniques in social science, relying on statistics from the Census Bureau or random sample neighborhood surveys, cannot accurately access individuals who exist in the underground economy, let alone those involved in illegal drug trade. The participant-observation techniques developed mainly by cultural anthropologists since the 1920s are more suitable for documenting the lives of people who live on the fringes of a society that rejects them.
  • Comparing actions to stated ideals allows the observer to more accurately discern motives.
  • If an area remains unclear, the researcher can choose additional informants at a later time.
  • The researcher can typically gather "depth material" that surveys lack.
  • Information initially considered irrelevant may prove highly valuable
    

as the researcher's perspective evolves.

The field worker desires informants to discuss their preferred topics, while the survey researcher aims to guide them towards specific subjects. Difficult-to-measure variables are likely to be less distorted through observation compared to attempting to quantify them for a survey. Surveys generally incur higher expenses than field observation. The reliance on firsthand information, the high face validity of data, and the use of simple and cost-effective methods are advantages. However, there are also disadvantages. Participant observation is subjective as it reflects the observer's background, education, family, culture, personality, values, beliefs, and lifestyle. Achieving true objectivity in participant observation is impractical. The anthropologist selects the informants, although subjective elements persist in the selection process despite suggested methods. Moreover, if a researcher becomes too immersed in the group's culture and activities, their ability to interpret the group's behavior may be compromised by a desire to be involved in the group dynamic. Many observers lack the necessary time to conduct research for a sufficient duration to ensure reliable and accurate data.Some cultures withhold important information until a person is fully integrated, leading to delayed insights. The researcher's choice of informants who agree on common facts may ignore the possibility of oppression preventing the truth from being revealed. In some cases, only one researcher visits new locations, limiting the reliability and representativeness of the data. Participant observation is always influenced by the observer's interpretation, as it is not conducted by actual natives. The non-standardized data collection method makes it unsuitable for statistical analysis or study repetition. Generalization beyond the studied population is not

possible. There is a likelihood of bias in research as the direction of investigation can be guided by impressions from previous informants. Additionally, researchers often lack certainty about whether they are dealing with a representative population.

• Outside influence on the informants can make it challenging to assess their behavior, as the presence of an outsider may affect their actions. It is important to acknowledge that the observer is an integral part of the observed context.

The researcher is both influenced by and modifies the circumstances. This technique of gathering data is a heightened threat to the researcher's objectivity due to the unsystematic collection of data and reliance on subjective measurement. The issue of objectivity arises as participation in the study requires an investment of time, energy, and self, which raises concerns of possible bias. However, defenders of participant observation argue that supposedly neutral instruments like survey questionnaires actually introduce greater bias. They assert that these instruments impose a "scientific" measuring device onto individuals who have their own unique perception of reality (Bruyn, 1966). Participant observation is a widely used method for qualitative data collection, but it is also highly demanding as it necessitates the researcher's active involvement in the observed culture or context.

The literature on participant observation delves into various topics such as entering the context, the researcher's role as a participant, field note collection and storage, and field data analysis. Participant observation is a time-consuming process that may require months or even years of intensive work to ensure that the observations accurately capture the natural phenomenon within the culture. Despite prior research methods' disadvantages, participant observation offers numerous benefits in research. It

is crucial to remember that participant observation is conducted by an individual who possesses various character traits that contribute to the project's outcomes.

Traditional Research Methods: Participant Observation

What does Participant Observation bring to research?

H. Russell Bernard’s perspective on Participant Observation:
Participant observation, according to H. Russell Bernard, serves as the fundamental pillar of anthropological research while serving as a well-defined methodological component of the discipline. The process involves establishing rapport within a new community, learning how to blend in seamlessly so that people continue with their normal activities, and temporarily stepping back from cultural immersion in order to analyze and contextualize the acquired knowledge before documenting it.Although participant observation and field research have distinct differences, there exists a subtle distinction between the two methods.

Bernard suggests that participant observation should be considered without regard to time. He also believes that it is the only approach that can truly provide an understanding of social change, achieved through extensive participant observation spanning several decades. Additionally, participant observation can be conducted within a few days if the observer is fluent in the native language and already familiar with etiquette. Bernard supports this with an example from his own college experience at Laundromats. He defines participant observation as a strategy rather than a method, which allows for the collection of both qualitative and quantitative data. Furthermore, participant observation minimizes reactivity as the observer becomes less noticeable over time.

Lower reactivity enhances data validity, aids in formulating meaningful questions in the local language, and requires in-depth cultural knowledge that is unattainable from a remote location. Participant observation enables the researcher to draw firm conclusions about cultural phenomena by understanding the significance of observations rather

than solely relying on collected data. Without familiarity with specific customs and their corresponding expressions, certain facts remain hidden.

The essential skill set of a participant observer includes various attributes, as well as general experience in the field. A researcher must serve as both the instrument for data collection and its analysis, drawing upon personal experience. There are several critical skills that a researcher should develop in order to succeed in participant observation:

• Learning the language to comprehend observations and pose questions that enhance and clarify research
• Building a strong memory to accurately report observations
• Maintaining a sense of naivete and an eagerness to learn
• Developing writing skills to convert field notes into published works

In entering the field: Bernard believes that initiating fieldwork is the most challenging aspect of participant observation. However, there are several strategies to overcome this challenge:

• Select a site that is easily accessible, providing convenient access to data
• Come prepared with extensive documentation about oneself and the project
• Utilize any available assistance, such as friends, connections, or letters of recommendation
• Be prepared to answer questions honestly and consistently
• Familiarize oneself with the physical and social layout of the field site

• Field research literature, work experience, and conversations with experienced researchers have led Bernard to conclude that Participant Observation can be divided into different stages, which include:
• Initial contact
• Shock
• Discovering the obvious
• The break
• Focusing
• Exhaustion, the second break, and frantic activity
• Leaving
• During the initial contact period, many anthropologists feel extreme excitement as they immerse themselves in a new culture. According to Bernard, cultural anthropologists are drawn to the experience of living in a new culture.

However, there have been cases when the opposite occurred, usually caused by the effect of culture shock. Almost all anthropologists report experiencing a

form of depression and shock soon after they first make contact. One form of this shock reveals itself in the anxiety they feel about their ability to collect accurate data. Bernard suggests that a good way to respond to this is by being highly focused on completing tasks, such as making maps, taking censuses, doing household inventories, and collecting genealogies. Another approach is to write clinical and methodological field notes about their feelings and responses during participant observation fieldwork.

The text discusses various aspects of the anthropological experience, including culture shock, frustration with differences in culture, the need for objectivity, and the lack of privacy. It also mentions the stage where anthropologists feel a sense of belonging and familiarity with their informants, only to later realize that the information they receive is common knowledge. Overall, the text highlights the different stages and challenges that anthropologists encounter during their fieldwork.

The break typically happens after three to four months, providing a valuable chance for the anthropologist to gain some physical and emotional separation from the field site. During this time, they can reflect on the progress of their research, assess the initial objectives, and strategize the upcoming steps of the visit. Additionally, by returning to the community, the anthropologist displays genuine interest and builds stronger trust with their informants.

The fifth stage, known as focusing, is reached after taking a break. This break enables reflection and preparation, which can be used during the focusing stage. The sixth stage involves exhaustion, another break, and frantic activity. Exhaustion occurs when one feels embarrassed to continue asking questions to the informants, mistakenly believing they have no more information. However, this feeling is

a misconception due to the vast amount of cultural knowledge that cannot be acquired in just a few years.

Reflecting on the amount of work still to be done is a valuable result of taking a second break. However, this break can also lead to frantic activity and panic due to the limited time remaining. It is crucial to leave the field in a positive manner, not only for the individual project but also for the future of participant observation. Unlike questionnaire surveys, ethnography relies on select informants who can offer substantial information about the culture. Anthropologists carefully choose these informants and ask them about their knowledge on relevant topics.

Benard introduced an approach in 1972 that was initially implemented by Poggie. Poggie conducted a study where knowledgeable informants were asked questions about communities and their answers were compared to high quality social surveys. The level of correlation determined the expertise of the informants. Another method for selecting key informants was later discovered by Romney in 1986.

Informants who share common knowledge in a cultural domain possess more expertise than informants who hold conflicting views. Anthropologists rely on a set of approximately 40 questions to identify suitable general ethnographic informants. These questions assess the knowledge possessed by competent members of a culture. Interestingly, Benard asserts that the most valuable informants are individuals who possess a critical perspective on their own culture. Such informants are consistently observant, introspective, and articulate.

Definitions From Other Authors and Anthropologists:

- Kluckhohn (1940): defines cultural knowledge as "a conscious and systematic sharing, as far as possible, in the activities, interests, and emotions of a group of people."
- Zelditch (1962): highlights that participant observation involves three

methods rather than just one. These methods encompass direct observation, interviewing informants to understand institutionalized norms and social statuses, and collecting detailed frequency data through sampling. Participant observation cannot be used in isolation from other research methods; it is an approach that requires the integration of appropriate methods inherent in all forms of participant observation.

- According to Whyte (1979), a participant observer is a researcher who engages in social activities with the subjects of study for an extended period of time.
- Gosling and Edwards (1995) explain that participant observation is used in Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) exercises to gain insight into the daily activities of children. This can be achieved by accompanying them on their tasks or observing them at gathering places during specific times of the day.
- Pratt and Loizos (1992) describe participant observation as a method where the researcher becomes a resident in the community. It involves immersing oneself in village life and either observing or participating in daily activities.
- It is important to note that participant observation should not be considered as a single method, as it encompasses various approaches.

The term "participant observation" refers to a combination of methods and techniques used in studying various subjects, including primitive societies, deviant subcultures, complex organizations, social movements, communities, and informal groups. This approach involves social interaction with the subjects in their field, direct observation of relevant events, formal and informal interviews, systematic counting, collecting documents and artifacts, and allowing for an open-ended study direction. The primary goal of participant observation is to collect and understand field data, while also validating it. This method requires intense social interaction within the subjects'

own environment, which can result in cooperative engagement. The process for conducting this project typically involves planning the fieldwork, selecting and contacting a community, obtaining permission for a village stay, informing the community of the intended duration of stay, moving into the village to establish rapport, taking interest in the culture and daily life through observation and conversations, experiencing the same lifestyle as the subjects by participating in daily activities and special events.

• Take mental notes when with people
• Transcribe mental notes when alone
• Check notes regularly
• Look for entries that need clarification or follow-up
• Depart in a way that is appropriate to the culture of the study community

According to anthropologists, participant observation is suggested as a way to learn and understand Indigenous Knowledge, its advantages, and problems from the community's perspective.

Although the report does not solely represent the community, I would challenge it to some extent as it is still presented from the perspective of anthropologists. Participant observation is often combined with other methods such as interviews, mapping, ranking, and so on. If the participant observer is not already familiar with the local language and culture, this method may take several months to provide meaningful insights.

Characteristics:

- Research is non-standardized and can be redirected based on data from the field. Changes in direction can be made to focus more on gathering data for emerging hypotheses.
- The researcher effectively utilizes their relationship with informants in the field to extract data, relying on mutual trust.

Fringe societies and gangs have a range of advantages according to researchers. One advantage is that researchers can continuously reformulate the problem as their research progresses, avoiding limitations imposed

by preset hypotheses. Additionally, being in close contact with the field situation allows researchers to avoid asking misleading or meaningless questions. Impressions from the field are often more reliable for classifying respondents than numbers. Observation methods also allow for the utilization of highly experienced and qualified talent, as the survey director is usually several steps removed from the data-gathering process. The pace of research and interaction can be set appropriately as well. Moreover, by actively participating in the events they observe, describe, and analyze, anthropologists gain insights beyond what can be obtained through distant description and surveys. Some behaviors and beliefs can only be understood through intimate day-to-day relationships or by being present when events occur. Traditional social science research techniques that rely on statistics from the Census Bureau or random sample neighborhood surveys cannot accurately access individuals who survive in underground economies, let alone those involved in illegal drug trade. The participant-observation techniques developed by cultural anthropologists since the 1920s provide access to these hidden aspects of society.