Participant Observation

• Participant Observation 


  Participant observation is where the researcher attempts to become an accepted member of the group being studied. Participant observation has many problems associated with it, including practical, ethical and theoretical issues.
• Participant Observation 


  • This method is used by interpretivists, who argue that a sociological understanding of society can only be gained when researchers put themselves in the same position as the people they are studying.
  • Participant observation yields qualitative data.
  • The concept of Verstehen (an understanding developed through empathy or close identification) is seen as important in the use of participant observation.
• Practical Problems with participant observation


  • Practical problems include:
  • Becoming accepted by the group (getting in).
  • Gaining the trust and cooperation of the group (staying in).
  • Leaving the group once the research is concluded (getting out).
• Practical problems with participant observation 


  • The researcher may decide to adopt either:
  • An overt role within the group (where those being observed are aware of their status as a researcher).
  • A covert role (where they adopt a cover story to hide their real intentions).
• Ethical issues : covert roles


  • Ethical issues are certain to arise if the researcher has adopted a covert role, however, this may be partly dealt with by telling the people after the research has been conducted.
  • Ethical problems, such as deception, may be justified to protect the researcher, such as with Patrick’s (1973) study of Glasgow gangs.
• Ethical issue : overt roles

  • From an ethical perspective, an overt role is more acceptable, as it allows people to be aware that they are being studied and to provide informed consent.
• Theoretical Issues 


  • One theoretical issue concerns reliability.
  • Positivists argue that the data obtained are rarely quantified and are unreliable.
  • The second issue concerns validity.
  • Participant observation assumes that what the researcher recalls and how they have interpreted the situation is accurate, positivists would argue that this unlikely to be the case.
• Advantages 


  • They study people’s normal everyday behaviour.
  • Less likely to impose the sociologist’s own views on the group being studied.
  • Allows for the collection of more in-depth, valid qualitative data than other research methods.
  • Produces more valid data because there is less chance of the researcher being misled than with other methods.
• Advantages 


  • Gains in-depth insights into the meanings that a social activity has for those involved by seeing through their eyes (Verstehen).
  • May be the only valid methods for researching closed groups such as criminal gangs and religious sects.
  • Allows for the study of people in their normal everyday lives over a period of time, rather than a ‘snapshot’.
• Disadvantages 


  • Time-consuming and expensive.
  • Can be stressful for researchers, especially those in a covert role.
  • Data may not be valid or reliable and lack objectivity, according to positivists.
  • Overt role may undermine validity via the Hawthorne effect.
• Disadvantages 


  • Risk of researchers ‘going native’, that is, becoming so involved that they lose objectivity.
  • Only a small group is studied, so may not be representative.
  • Covert participant observation is ethically unsound.