Ethnography

and
Par.cipant Observa.on
PAUL ATKINSON
MARTYN HAMMERSLEY

Science and Social Life: 3 Dimensions

Dierences in views about which of the natural
sciences is to be taken as paradigma.c for scien.c
method.
There can be various interpreta.ons even of any
method held to be characteris.c of par.cular sciences
at par.cular .mes.
There can be disagreements about what aspects of
natural scien.c method should and should not be
applied to social research.

ETHNOGRAPHY vs
SCIENCE

Relies on ar.cial seMngs (in the case of experiments)

Relies on what people say than do (in survey)

Reducing observable meanings.

A sta.c social phenomena.

The cri.cism against ethnography

OBJECTIVITY:
The observers presence may in itself contribute to results that are
inaccurate; Since the observed behavior is not usual behavior, hence
the derived results are false because it does not depict normal
behavior.
Reect only the masculinity assump.ons of researchers.
The possibility of ethno to become knowledge which is impossible due
to the produc.on of the ethno works only construc.ons, based on
presupposi.ons ; cannot be universal knowledge.
The literary models and mo.fs of the ehnographers are similar to
each other.
This whole cri.cism were lately turn to skep.cism or rela.vism

Another debate about ethnography

The rela.onship of it to social and poli.cal prac.ce:
Most ethnography has been directed toward contribu.ng to
disciplinary knowledge rather than solving prac.cal problems.
An applied anthropology movements in USA indica.ng a stand where
the ethnographers direct their orienta.on to solving prac.cal
problems.
In Britain, ironnically, this applied ethnography trends has been more
obvious to commercial market research than in gov-funded work.
These trends causing some modica.ons of ethnographic prac.ct
These trends also arisen out from the concern about the lack of
impact that ethnographic has on social & poli.cal prac.ce, which in
turn, demanding more that prac..oners themselves must included in
the research to make it more prac.cally relevant, this led to
collabora.ve research.

The end of the debatecontd.

The main goal of ethnography is the produc.on of
knowledge, of which should not be replaced with the
pursuit of prac.cal goals, because:
The prac.cal goals are no more worthy than the pursuit of
knowledge in terms of .me and eort.
The goals themselves some.mes not prac.cally
achieveable.

Conclusion on this that we have to stay focus on the

produc.on of knowledge and not mispriori.ze it with the
goal of prac.cal solu.on to the social and poli.cal world.

Rethoric and Representa.on

Recently, there are more a`en.on to the aesthe.cs and
ethics of ethnographic texts: authority and authorship,
connec.on among rhetoric, representa.on, and logic
generally.
This rhetoric follows the theore.cal and methodological
tendencies like feminism, poststructuralism, and
postmodernism, especially from cultural and social
anthropologist, recently by sociologists.
Regardless those various tendencies, the broad theme
of rhetoric among all disciplines are: conven.onality of
ethno texts, representa.on of Self and Other in such
texts, the character of ethno as textual genre, the nature
of ethno argumenta.on, and the rhetoric of evidence.

Rethoric and Representa.on

..
Among social and cultural anthropologists,
the standard ethno or monograph was
some.mes a taken-for-granted format.
In 1973, Geertz, claiming that those
anthropological wri.ngs could be regarded
as c.on, because; craded by their
authors, shaped by literary conven.ons
and devices.
In 1986, Cliord and Marcus works on
Wri$ng Culture, is a sign of cri.cal
awareness on ethno textuality,
emphasizing the textual imposi.on that
anthropology exerts over its subject
ma`er, also the interplay of the literary.

These two experts

sought to
illuminate the
literary
antecedents that
are similar among
anthropologists

The literary cri.cs of Atkinson

Atkinson (1982) track the origin of these literary
and parallels of the social ethno associated with
Chicago school, USA He cri.cize the literary also.
In 1990, Atkinson iden.es the recurrent/
repeated textual methods and mo.fs that ethno
construct their texts, using a various major
devices and tropes (kiasan/gure of speech):
Narra.ve forms used to convey accounts of social
ac.on and causa.on.
Uses of various gures of speech such as metaphor,
irony, and synecdoche.

Rethoric and Representa.on

Some aspects of literary antecedents
cri.cized were:
For anthropology, an a`en.on to literary as well as biographical
ani.es between the work of Malinowski and Conrad (by
Cliord, 1988), between surrealism and French ethno (Cllord,
1988), and in the poe.c wri.ng of Benedict and Sapir (Brady,
1991)
Atkinson (1982) revealed an iden.ca.on of Chicago school
urban ethno with the naturalis.c and realis.c novels of American
literature.
In Britain, the sociologists like Booth and Rowntree have major
ani.es/closeness with several literary models.
Even famous author/writer of c.onal products such as Dickens,
provide real mixtures of realism, melodrama, and grotesque that
similar to the sociological tradi.on.

Fight against the literary cri.cism of ethno

In 1990, a group of Bri.sh anthro revealed the dierent
textual styles according to dierent regional biases and
preoccupa.ons, cri.cizing back the literary cri.cs for
trea.ng anthro ethno as a undieren.ated textual type.
In 1988, Van Maanen explores various modes of ethno
wri.ng, contras.ng the style of realist (typically being
central, more impersonal) and confessional (typically
being marginal, more personal) among sociologists and
anthros.

Implica.ons of rhetorical turns:

Has ethical and poli.cal implica.ons
A paradox between the ethnographers and the
ethnography as textual product:
On one hand is the ethnos epistemological, personal, and
moral commitment to his/her hosts, an assimila9on
between the observer and observed in social and culture,
a shared social world.
On the other hand, the classic text of ethno itself claimed a
radical dis9nc9on between the Author and the Other. For
example, in the methods of realist, the Author has
privilege voice to the text wri`en, but the voice of the
Other is muted. Regarding this, a movement occurs to
produce more dialogic forms of ethno wri.ng replacing
the monologic ones (a work example of Dwyer, 1982).

The role of par.cipant observa.on:

The rhetorical turn has in.mately related to a
postmodern tendency in the construc.on of
ethnography; explores the discon.nui.es, paradoxes, and
inconsistencies of culture and ac.on.
Thus, the postmodern author seeks to eliminate the
distance between the observer and the observed. The
use of par.cipant observa.on thus is to produce a
dialogue that shows the coopera.ve and collabora.ve
nature of the ethno situa.on (Tyler, 1986).

Natural science is

Cultural disillusionment
A highly destruc.ve weaponry
An oppressive force that dominates the modern world
Some.mes associated with male aggression and
patriarchy

SCIENCE MODEL

LINK WITH THE

HUMANITIES

QUESTIONING THE OBJECTIVITY OF SOCIAL RESEARCH: ETHNOGRAPHY

Findings of social
research (including
ethnography) were
too masculin.
Limited by a male
point of view.
A bourgeois social
science, advocates of
black sociology.

Is it possible to become
a social scien.c
knowledge?
The ndings reect
only presupposi.ons
and sociohistorical
circumstances.
The ability of these
research to produce
knowledge that is
universally valid.

Ethnography: Science or not

Ethnographic methodology in recent years is based on
rejec.on of posi.vism. Why?
Recently, the rejec.on even more of both quan.ta.ve
method and the scien.c model. What and why?
The ethnographers ques.oned the frequently assumed
rela.onship between science and quan.ca.on.
Oden, the two of them are rejected together (Lincoln &
Guba, 1985, J.K. Smith, 1989).
Science is some.mes associated with male aggression
and patriarchy (Harding, 1986), whereas these two
approaches (male aggresion & patriarchy have become
inuen.al to ethnographers).

Ques.oning the Objec.vity of Ethnography

The ndings are too masculine in assump.ons.
The whole perspec.ve on the world is limited by the
male point of view.

Ethnography (and other) research are further

fundamentally ques.oned of their possibility of social
scien.c knowledge, why:
The accounts are merely construc.ons, reec.ng only
presupposi.ons and socio-historical circumstances of
their produc.on.
This, led to the ques.on whether ethnography (and
other) research can produce knowledge that is
universally valid.

Tradi.onal ethnography & inuence of

an.realism
In the past, ethnographers argued that their approach
which were mainly quan.ta.ve, had the capacity to
represent the nature of social reality accurately.
These arguments are rarer nowadays, under the
inuence of an.realism.
The comments of Denzin and Richardson (1955) about
the accuracy of Whytes (1955) classic ethnography
study ended in a conclusion that the whole issue of
which account more accurately represents reality is
MEANINGLESS.

The creden.als of ethnography

Some arguments used to promote ethnography against
quan.ta.ve method and to jus.fy its features are open
to serious ques.on.
The theory in ethnography is ill dened
The concept of theore.cal descrip.on is of doubtul
value (Hammersley, 1992)
The ques.oning of this objec.vity of ethnography has
led to skep.cism and rela.vism

Finally, we need to reassess the methodological and

philosophical arguments of the science and the rela.onship
of ethnography to this.

Rela.onship between Ethnography and Social

and Poli.cal Prac.ce contd
Next, this applied forms of ethnographic led to
collabora.ve research, because the lack of impact the
ethnography has on social and poli.cal prac.ce.
This lack of impact eliminated by pushing that
prac..oners should be involved in the research process,
to make it more prac.cally relevant, and to be more
mo.vated to draw on it as a result of being involved.
The Marxist cri.cal theory and feminism has led to cri.ze
the work of tradi.onal ethnographic that has been
undemocra.c in the rela.onship between researcher
and researched, because the former makes the decisions
of what, how, and whose voice is represented in the
wri`en ethnography.

Rela.onship between Ethnography and Social

and Poli.cal Prac.ce contd
The main goal of ethnography is the produc.on of
knowledge, of which should not be replaced with the
pursuit of prac.cal goals, because:
The prac.cal goals are no more worthy than the pursuit of
knowledge in terms of .me and eort.
Eventough

Conclusion on this that we have to stay focus on the

produc.on of knowledge and not mispriori.ze it with the
goal of prac.cal solu.on to the social and poli.cal world.

Rethoric and Representa.on

Recently, there are more a`en.on to the aesthe.cs and
ethics of ethnographic texts: authority and authorship,
connec.on among rhetoric, representa.on, and logic
generally.
This rhetoric is a part of broader movement in engaging
with feminism, poststructuralism, and postmodernism,
especially from cultural and social anthropologist,
recently by sociologists.
The broad theme of rhetoric among all disciplines are:
conven.onality of ethno texts, representa.on of Self
and Other in such texts, the character of ethno as
textual genre, the nature of ethno argumenta.on, and
the rhetoric of evidence.

Rethoric and Representa.on

..
Among social and cultural anthropologists,
the standard ethno or monograph was
some.mes a taken-for-granted format.
In 1973, Geertz, claiming that those
anthropological wri.ngs could be regarded
as c.on, because; craded by their
authors, shaped by literary conven.ons
and devices.
In 1986, Cliord and Marcus works on
Wri$ng Culture, is a sign of cri.cal
awareness on ethno textuality,
emphasizing the textual imposi.on that
anthropology exerts over its subject
ma`er, also the interplay of the literary.

These two experts

sought to
illuminate the
literary
antecedents that
are similar among
anthropologists

The literary cri.cs of Atkinson

Atkinson (1982) track the origin of these literary and parallels of
the social ethno associated with Chicago school, USA He cri.cize the
literary also.
In 1990, Atkinson iden.es the recurrent/repeated textual methods
and mo.fs that ethno construct their texts, using a various major
devices and tropes (kiasan/gure of speech):
Narra.ve forms used to convey accounts of social ac.on and causa.on.
Uses of various gures of speech such as metaphor, irony, and
synecdoche.

Rethoric and Representa.on

Some aspects of literary antecedents cri.cized were:
For anthropology, an a`en.on to literary as well as biographical
ani.es between the work of Malinowski and Conrad (by
Cliord, 1988), between surrealism and French ethno (Cllord,
1988), and in the poe.c wri.ng of Benedict and Sapir (Brady,
1991)
Atkinson (1982) revealed an iden.ca.on of Chicago school
urban ethno with the naturalis.c and realis.c novels of American
literature.
In Britain, the sociologists like Booth and Rowntree have major
ani.es/closeness with several literary models.
Even famous author/writer of c.onal products such as Dickens,
provide real mixtures of realism, melodrama, and grotesque that
similar to the sociological tradi.on.

Fight against the literary cri.cism of ethno

In 1990, a group of Bri.sh anthro revealed the dierent
textual styles according to dierent regional biases and
preoccupa.ons, cri.cizing back the literary cri.cs for
trea.ng anthro ethno as a undieren.ated textual type.
In 1988, Van Maanen explores various modes of ethno
wri.ng, contras.ng the style of realist (typically being
central, more impersonal) and confessional (typically
being marginal, more personal) among sociologists and
anthros.

Implica.ons of rhetorical turns:

Has ethical and poli.cal implica.ons
A paradox between the ethnographers and the
ethnography as textual product:
On one hand is the ethnos epistemological, personal, and
moral commitment to his/her hosts, an assimila9on
between the observer and observed in social and culture,
a shared social world.
On the other hand, the classic text of ethno itself claimed a
radical dis9nc9on between the Author and the Other. For
example, in the methods of realist, the Author has
privilege voice to the text wri`en, but the voice of the
Other is muted. Regarding this, a movement occurs to
produce more dialogic forms of ethno wri.ng replacing
the monologic ones (a work example of Dwyer, 1982).

The role of par.cipant observa.on:

The rhetorical turn has in.mately related to a
postmodern tendency in the construc.on of
ethnography; explores the discon.nui.es, paradoxes, and
inconsistencies of culture and ac.on.
Thus, the postmodern author seeks to eliminate the
distance between the observer and the observed. The
use of par.cipant observa.on thus is to produce a
dialogue that shows the coopera.ve and collabora.ve
nature of the ethno situa.on (Tyler, 1986).

The cri.cism against ethnography

The observers presence may in itself contribute to results that are
inaccurate; Since the observed behavior is not usual behavior, hence the
derived results are false because it does not depict normal behavior.