Exam Questions Sampling Chapter.5

Chapter 8: Qualitative Methods and Data Analysis

Test Bank

MULTIPLE CHOICE

1. Research in which natural social processes are studied as they happen and left relatively undisturbed is also known as (8-3)
2. Survey research
3. Interview research
4. Field research
5. Covert research

ANS [C]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Origins of Qualitative Research

[LO 4]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Easy]

1. In her study of community policing (1999), Susan Miller adopted the role of (8-7)
2. Complete participant
3. Mixed participant-observer
4. Complete observer
5. None of the above

ANS [C]

LOC: Choosing a Role

TIP: Complete Observation

[LO 3]

COG [Application]

DIF [Easy]

1. Most field researchers adopt a role that involves (8-8)
2. Some covert participation in the setting
3. Some active participation in the setting
4. No active participation in the setting
5. Total participation in the setting

ANS [B]

LOC: Choosing a Role

TIP: Participation and Observation

[LO 4]

COG [Application]

DIF [Medium]

1. Decisions to study one setting or several settings and to pay attention to specific people and events will shape field researchers’ ability (8-11)
2. To generalize about what they have found
3. For others to have confidence in the results of their study
4. Both A and B
5. None of the above

ANS [C]

LOC: Participant Observation

TIP: Sampling People and Events

[LO 4]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. A systematic approach to sampling in participant observational research is (8-12)
2. Experiential sampling
3. Theoretical sampling
4. Field sampling
5. None of the above

ANS [B]

LOC: Participant Observation

TIP: Sampling People and Events

[LO 3]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. A strategy that increases the reliability of observational data by using explicit rules that standardize coding practices across observers is (8-14)
2. Dimensional observation
3. Strategic observation
4. Systematic observation
5. Intensive observation

ANS [C]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Systematic Observation

[LO 3]

COG [Synthesis]

DIF [Hard]

1. A group of 7-10 people, usually chosen so that they are relatively homogeneous, that participates in a focused discussion session is a (8-19)
2. Strategic discussion group
3. Question and answer group
4. Focus group
5. None of the above

ANS [C]

LOC: Systematic Observation

TIP: Focus Groups

[LO 6]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. Qualitative data analysis focuses on text rather than on (8-21)
2. Reflexive thought
3. Field notes and jottings about them
4. Numerical data
5. Both B and C

ANS [C]

LOC: Participant Observation

TIP: Sampling People and Events

[LO 1]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. Qualitative analysis features (8-21)
2. A focus on meanings rather than quantifiable phenomena
3. A conception of the researcher as an instrument rather than as the designer of objective instruments
4. A sensitivity to context rather than a seeking of universal generalizations
5. All of the above

ANS [D]

LOC: What Do We Mean by Qualitative Methods?

TIP: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

[LO 1]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Easy]

1. The next step after documenting the data in a qualitative study, the researcher should (8-22)
2. Corroborate by evaluating alternative explanations
3. Connect the data to show how one concept may influence another
4. Organize or categorize the data into concepts
5. Challenge validity

ANS [C]

LOC: Techniques of Qualitative Data Analysis

TIP: Making Sense of it: Conceptualization, Coding, and Categorizing

[LO 1]

COG [Synthesis]

DIF [ard]

1. The first formal analytical step in qualitative research is (8-22)
2. Documentation
3. Conceptualization, coding & categorizing
4. Examine relationships and display data
5. Corroborating and authenticate conclusions

ANS [A]

LOC: Techniques of Qualitative Data Analysis

TIP: Documentation

[LO 1]

COG [Application]

DIF [Medium]

1. Examining relationships is the centerpiece of the analytic process because it (8-23)
2. Allows the researcher to preserve a record of what happened
3. Allows the researcher to move from simple description to explanations of why things happened as they did
4. Allows the researcher to validate the authenticity of the conclusions from the data
5. Allows the researcher to have confidence in the field research study conclusions

ANS [B]

LOC: Techniques of Qualitative Data Analysis

TIP: Examining Relationships and Data

[LO 1]

COG [Ccomprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. There are no set standards for evaluating the validity or authenticity of conclusions in a qualitative study, but Becker (1958) argues that the data can be assessed in terms criteria such as: (8-23)
2. The credibility of the informant
3. Questions about the spontaneity of informant’s statements
4. Presence or absence of the researcher and how it influences other group members
5. All of the above

ANS [D]

LOC: Techniques of Qualitative Data Analysis

TIP: Corroboration and Authenticating Conclusions

[LO 1]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. The goal of many qualitative researchers is to create grounded theory, or to (8-26)
2. Create a theory that is simplistically built into a complex conceptual undertaking
3. Build up a systematic theory that is grounded in or based on observations
4. Deductively build a theory for the quantitative explanation
5. None of the above

ANS [B]

LOC: Alternatives in Qualitative Data Analysis

TIP: Grounded Theory

[LO 1]

COG [Analysis]

DIF [Medium]

1. Computer assisted qualitative data analysis can help to analyze text such as (8-28)
2. Notes or documents
3. Interview transcripts
4. Preparation, coding, analysis and reporting
5. All of the above

ANS [D]

LOC: Alternatives in Qualitative Data Analysis

TIP: Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis

[LO 9]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. In participant observation studies it can be difficult to make sure that participants are there voluntarily. Few researchers or IRBs are willing to condone covert participation because (8-31)
2. Interpreting the standard of involuntary participation is difficult
3. Although it may seem easy to tell if someone is participating voluntarily it may be difficult to get their consent officially
4. Voluntary consent by minors could be given by their guardian so that is not an issue
5. Because it does not offer a way to ensure that the participation is actually voluntary

ANS [D]

LOC: Ethical Issues in Qualitative Research

TIP: Voluntary Participation

[LO 3]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. Miller (2000) recruited young women from a residential facility to participate in her research and paid them to refer other girls who were gang members. Although this is common in snowball samples, one young woman decided to cash in on the deal by initiating new young women into her gang. The ethical dilemma was (8-31)
2. That the girls were underage
3. That the initiation ceremony for the particular gang involved recruits to the gang being “beaten into the gang”
4. That the girls didn’t realize that it was a gang initiation
5. All of the above

ANS [B]

LOC: Ethical Issues in Qualitative Research

TIP: Subject Well-Being

[LO 10]

COG [Application]

DIF [Hard]

1. Current ethical standards require (8-32)
2. Casual consent of research subjects
3. Subjects must be able to comprehend what a researcher does so as to be able to weigh any possible consequences of research
4. Researchers do not have to fully disclose their identity to participants
5. That deception is natural

ANS [B]

LOC: Ethical Issues in Qualitative Research

TIP: Identity Disclosure

[LO 10]

COG [Application]

DIF [Medium]

1. Researchers should make every effort to expunge possible identifying material (8-32)
2. From published information
3. But it should also be clear that they cannot guarantee confidentiality for research subjects
4. Alter unimportant aspects of a description when necessary
5. Only A and C

ANS [D]

LOC: Ethical Issues in Qualitative Research

TIP: Confidentiality

[LO 10]

COG [Application]

DIF [Medium]

1. Researchers generally develop understandings early in a project with all major participants and stakeholders (8-34)
2. To respond to what is consider fair use of the results
3. Regarding the obligation of inappropriate use of findings
4. To encourage appropriate use of project results
5. To use findings appropriately

ANS [C]

LOC: Ethical Issues in Qualitative Data

TIP: Who Owns the Qualitative Data?

[LO 10]

COG [Analysis]

DIF [Hard]

1. Qualitative methods emphasize (8-2)
2. Categories of information that is predetermined by the researcher to make sure of getting the best information available
3. Research that begins with preformulated hypotheses
4. Observations about natural behavior and artifacts that captures social life as it is experienced by the participants
5. All of the above

ANS [C]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Collection primarily of qualitative rather than quantitative data

[LO 1]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. Because qualitative researchers seek to discover what people think in a certain social situation, qualitative research often (8-2)
2. Begins with an emphasis on numbers-driven research at first, only later turning to a participant’s understanding of how and why they act a certain way
3. Has a commitment to inductive reasoning in order to discover what people think as well as how and why they act in certain social settings
4. Begins with preformulated hypotheses
5. Has its beginnings in widely studied social processes and anticipated phenomena do as to understand why people act as they do

ANS [B]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Exploratory research questions, with a commitment to inductive reasoning

[LO 1]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. Qualitative research focuses on the interconnections between
2. People and how they interact with social surveys
3. People and how they interconnect with social phenomena rather than the discrete features of those phenomena
4. People and the meanings they attach to events and their lives
5. All of the above

ANS [B]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: An orientation to social context, to the interconnections between social phenomena rather than to their discrete features

[LO 1]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. When conducting his study of teenage boys in Oakland, CA, Victor Rios (8-8)
2. Was unaware of how his research would affect the boys
3. Was very aware of how his past experiences shaped his research
4. Was unaware of how his past research would affect him
5. Was very aware of how outsiders could affect people

ANS [B]

LOC: What Do We Mean by Qualitative Methods?

TIP: Fundamentals of Qualitative Research

[LO 1

COG [Application]

DIF [Medium]

1. Boas and Malinowski were researchers who laid the foundation for (8-3)
2. Modern quantitative research in the 20^th century
3. Research on modern south American natives
4. Participation in research studies in the 19^th century
5. Modern qualitative methods while doing field research in the early 20^th century

ANS [D]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Origins of Qualitative Research

[LO 1]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Medium]

1. Study of a culture or cultures that a group of people share is (8-4)
2. An observation
3. An ethnography
4. A fieldwork project
5. A characteristic ethnographic study

ANS [B]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Origins of Qualitative Research

[LO 7]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. Communities can refer to not only people in a common physical location but also to (8-22)
2. Relationships that develop on-line
3. Relationships that emerge in the course of work or school
4. Relationships that supplement emerging relationships
5. All of the above

ANS [D]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Netnography

[LO 2]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. The use of ethnographic methods to study online communities is known as (8-5)
2. Fishnetting
3. Netnography
4. Kyberography
5. All of the above

ANS [B]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Netnography

[LO 2]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Easy]

1. Qualitative methods must rely on (8-5)
2. Conceptualizing what is meant by the study
3. Operationalizing exactly what is meant by research constructs
4. Conceptualizing the definition of peer groups
5. None of the above

ANS [B]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Case Study: Life in a Gang

[LO 1]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF Easy]

1. The method of studying natural social processes as they happen in the field, is known as (8-6)
2. Observational participation
3. Complete observation
4. Participant observation
5. Observer-as-participant

ANS [C]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Participant Observation

[LO 3]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

TRUE/FALSE

1. Qualitative researchers do not typically begin their projects seeking to test preformulated hypotheses. (8-2)
2. True
3. False

ANS [A]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Exploratory research questions, with a commitment to inductive reasoning

[LO 1]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. There is a focus on previously well-studied processes and phenomena in qualitative research. (8-2)
2. True
3. False

ANS [B]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: A focus on previously unstudied processes and unanticipated phenomena

[LO 1]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. The context of concern in qualitative research is often a program or broader social context. (8-2)
2. True
3. False

ANS [A]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: An orientation to social context, to the interconnections between social phenomena rather than to their discrete features

[LO 1]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [1]

1. Qualitative research is often focused on the meanings that participants attach to events. (8-2)
2. True
3. False

ANS [A]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: A focus on human subjectivity, on the meanings that participants attach to events and that people give to their lives

[LO 1]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. A lack of reflexivity in research design and sensitivity to objective role of the researcher is very important in qualitative research. (8-3)
2. True
3. False

ANS [B]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Reflexive research design and sensitivity to the subjective role of the researcher

[LO 1]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. Field research involves studying natural social processes as they happen. (8-6)
2. True
3. False

ANS [A]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Participant Observation

[LO 1]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. The study of a culture or cultures that a group of people share is known as a netnography. (8-5)
2. True
3. False

ANS [B]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Origins of Qualitative Research

[LO 2]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Easy]

1. Netnography is the same as virtual ethnography. (8-5)
2. True
3. False

ANS [A]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Origins of Qualitative Research

[LO 2]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Medium]

1. Rios (2011) relied on several different qualitative research methods to determine how patterns of punished experienced by youth in his study affected them. (8-6)
2. True
3. False

ANS [A]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Case Study: Life in a Gang

[LO 3]

COG [Analysis]

DIF [Medium]

1. Participant observation is also called fieldwork in psychology. (8-6)
2. True
3. False

ANS [B]

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Participant Observation

[LO 3]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. In her study of community policing, Susan Miller (1999) adopted the role of a complete observer. (8-7)
2. True
3. False

ANS [A]

LOC: Choosing a Role

TIP: Complete Observation

[LO 3]

COG [Application]

DIF [Medium]

1. One of the ethical advantages of disclosing your research role to participants is that group members can choose to keep some information or attitudes hidden. (8-8)
2. True
3. False

ANS [A]

LOC: Choosing a Role

TIP: Participant and Observation

[LO 3]

COG [Application]

DIF [Medium]

1. The changes in individual or group behavior due to being observed or otherwise studied is known as a proactive effect. (8-7)
2. True
3. False

ANS [B]

LOC: Choosing a Role

TIP: Complete Observation

[LO 3]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Medium]

1. Researchers must be careful to manage relationships in the research setting so that the research can continue through a long period of participant observation. (8-11)
2. True
3. False

ANS [A]

LOC: Participant Observation

TIP: Developing and Maintaining Relationships

[LO 3]

COG [Analysis]

DIF [Medium]

1. Decisions to study one setting or several settings do not shape field researchers’ ability to generalize about what they have found. (8-11)
2. True
3. False

ANS [B]

LOC: Participant Observation

TIP: Sampling People and Events

[LO 3]

COG [Application]

DIF [Medium]

1. A systematic approach to sampling in participant observational research is theoretical sampling. (8-12)
2. True
3. False

ANS [A]

LOC: Participant Observation

TIP: Sampling People and Events

[LO 3]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. Written field notes are the primary means of recording participant observation data. (8-13)
2. True
3. False

ANS [A]

LOC: Participant Observation

TIP: Taking Notes

[LO 3]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. The impact of personal issues do not vary with the researchers’ involvement in the setting. (8-13)
2. True
3. False

ANS [B]

LOC: Participant Observation

TIP: Managing the Personal Dimensions

[LO 3]

COG [Application]

DIF [Medium]

1. Systematic observation is a strategy that increases the reliability of observational data by using explicit rules that standardize coding practices across observers. (8-14)
2. True
3. False

ANS [A]

LOC: Participant Observation

TIP: Systematic Observation

[LO 4]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. Intensive interviewing relies almost exclusively on closed-ended questions. (8-16)
2. True
3. False

ANS [B]

LOC: Systematic Observation

TIP: Intensive Interviewing

[LO 5]

COG [Analysis]

DIF [Medium]

ESSAY

1. Describe the features of qualitative research that most distinguish it from quantitative research.

• A focus on meanings rather than on quantifiable phenomena
• Collection of many data on a few cases rather than few data on many cases
• In-depth study and attention to detail, without predetermined categories or directions, rather than emphasis on analyses and categories determined in advance
• A conception of the researcher as an instrument rather than as the designer of objective instruments to measure particular variables
• Sensitivity to context rather than a seeking of universal generalizations
• Attention to the impact of the researcher’s and others’ values on the course of the analysis rather than presuming the possibility of value-free inquiry
• A goal of rich descriptions of the world rather than measurement of specific variables

You will also want to keep in mind features of qualitative data analysis that are shared with those of quantitative data analysis. Both qualitative and quantitative data analysis can involve making distinctions about textual data. You also know that textual data can be transposed to quantitative data through a process of categorization and counting. Some qualitative analysts also share with quantitative researchers a positivist goal of describing the world as it really is, but others have adopted a postmodern goal of trying to understand how different people see and make sense of the world without believing that there is any correct description.

LOC: Analyzing Qualitative Data

TIP: Qualitative Compared With Quantitative Data Analysis

[LO 1]

COG [Analysis]

DIF [Medium]

1. Define the methods of ethnography and how they compare to netnography.

Communities can refer not only to people in a common physical location but also to relationships that develop online. Online communities may be formed by persons with similar interests or backgrounds, perhaps to create new social relationships that location or schedules did not permit or to supplement relationships that emerge in the course of work or school or other ongoing social activities. Like communities of people who interact face-to-face, online communities can develop a culture and become sources of identification and attachment (Kozinets, 2010). And like physical communities, researchers can study online communities through immersion in the group for an extended period. Netnography, also termed cyberethnography and virtual ethnography (James & Busher, 2009), is the use of ethnographic methods to study online communities.

Netnography: The use of ethnographic methods to study online communities; also termed cyberethnography and virtual ethnography.

In some respects, netnography is similar to traditional ethnography. The researcher prepares to enter the field by becoming familiar with online communities and their language and customs, formulating an exploratory research question about social processes or orientations in that setting, selecting an appropriate community to study. Unlike in-person ethnographies, netnographies can focus on communities whose members are physically distant and dispersed. The selected community should be relevant to the research question, involve frequent communication among actively engaged members, and have a number of participants who, as a result, generate a rich body of textual data (Kozinets, 2010). For example, after a residence center in Sweden that housed asylum-seeking unaccompanied minors was vandalized and its staff members threatened with violence, Katrina Hirvonen (2013) conducted a netnography to understand how the anti-immigration sentiment was rising in a country that has traditionally perceived tolerance as a national virtue. Based on the frequency of comments about the residence center, Hirvonen examined three anti-immigration websites and specifically coded data from 288 comments and 60 articles. She discovered that the “comment fields on sites serve as an echo chamber with extremists reaching out for others with the same ideas to reinforce extreme opinions already held. . . . [S]uch a forum for sharing ideas constantly encourages the development of ever more extreme thoughts and suggested action” (2013, p. 84).

A netnographer must keep both observational and reflective field notes, but unlike a traditional ethnographer, he or she can return to review the original data—the posted text—long after it was produced. The data can then be coded, annotated with the researcher’s interpretations, checked against new data to evaluate the persistence of social patterns, and used to develop a theory that is grounded in the data.

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Origins of Qualitative Research

[LO 2]

COG [Analysis]

DIF [Medium]

1. Compare the advantages and disadvantages of each participant observer role.

Participant observation is a qualitative method for gathering data that involves developing a sustained relationship with people while they go about their normal activities

Choosing a Role

The first concern of all participant observers is to decide what balance to strike between observing and participating and whether to reveal their role as researchers. These decisions must take into account the specifics of the social situation being studied, the researcher’s own background and personality, the larger sociopolitical context, and ethical concerns. The balance of participating and observing that is most appropriate also changes many times during the majority of projects. Ultimately, the researcher’s ability to maintain either a covert or an overt role can be challenged many times throughout the research effort.

Complete Observation

In her study of community policing, Susan Miller (1999) adopted the role of a complete observer. Community policing is an approach to policing that emphasizes building closer ties between police and members of the community. Miller was particularly interested in how gender affected the attitudes and behavior of community–police liaisons or neighborhood police officers (NPOs).

Complete observation A role in participant observation in which the researcher does not participate in group activities and is publicly defined as a researcher.

In complete observation, researchers try to see things as they happen, without disrupting the participants. Along with intensive interviews with police officers, Susan Miller also observed police officers on their daily shifts:

Both neighborhood and patrol officers’ shifts were observed, either on foot with neighborhood officers, or in squad cars with patrol officers. This component of the project also permitted gathering some observational information about citizens’ reactions to police delivery of services. (pp. 232–233)

Of course, the researcher’s presence as an observer alters the social situation being observed. It is not natural in most social situations to have an observer present who at some point will record his or her observations for research and publication purposes. The observer thus sees what individuals do when they are being observed, which is not necessarily what they would do without an observer. This is called a reactive effect, and the extent to which it can be a problem varies with the situation. In Susan Miller’s (1999) study, the extended measure of time she spent as an observer made her presence commonplace, thereby serving to decrease the problem of reactive effects. She states,

Since I had spent so many hours over eighteen months with the Jackson City Police Department [fictional name], I had grown to be a familiar face; this, I believe, decreased respondents’ tendencies toward social desirability. Officers took my presence for granted in the briefing room, the hallways, the interview rooms, and in the field, including me in jokes and informal conversation in the coffee shop. (p. 235)

Generally, in social settings involving many people, an observer may not attract attention. On the other hand, when the social setting involves few people and observing is apparent rather than camouflaged or when the observer differs in obvious respects from the participants, the complete observer is more likely to have an impact.

Participation and Observation

Most field researchers adopt a role that involves some active participation in the setting. Usually, they inform at least some group members of their research interests, but then they participate in enough group activities to develop trust and rapport with members and to gain a direct sense of what group members experience. This is not an easy balancing act. Observational studies are generally conducted over a long period of time.

During the three years that Rios spent in Oakland conducting his research, it was inevitable that he became a participant as well as an observer. For example, one day while walking home after school with a boy Rios called Slick, they were approached by a patrol car who followed them. Slick recognized the officer as the one who had recently beaten up another boy named Marquil in a McDonald’s parking lot during lunch hour. Rios writes,

I turned to Slick and told him, “Let’s just keep walking. We’ll be fine.” The officer continued to follow us, driving slowly behind us. Slick became paranoid, turned around, and gave the officer a dirty look. I turned to look. The officer, a White man with a shaved head in his thirties, looked at us, grinned, and drove off. Police officers played crafty cat-and-mouse games in which the boys remained in constant fear of being humiliated, brutalized, or arrested. (p. 81)

On one occasion, Rios was even arrested. Sitting in a park with several of the youth, a police car approached. Rios and the other boys except one pulled their hands out of the pockets and “stood in a position of submission, with our hands open to show that we didn’t have a weapon,” while a boy Rios called Spider kept his hands in his pockets. The officers, one White and lone Latino, got out and said, “Face the wall” (Rios, 2011, p. 126). The officers searched everyone and because Spider had a pocket knife in his pocket, he was arrested. When Rios asked the officers why they were stopped in the first place, he was handcuffed and arrested, too.

Embedded into the community as Rios was, he witnessed life as it happened, which included youth-on-youth violence as well as harassment and abuse by the police. During his observational time, he witnessed over 40 citations imposed by the police on the boys in his study. These were usually for minor things such as loitering, not wearing a properly fitted bicycle helmet, or disturbing the peace. Rios never participated in violence, but sometimes intervened to stop it.

Disclosing your research to participants as Rios did has two clear ethical advantages. Because group members know the researcher’s real role in the group, they can choose to keep some information or attitudes hidden. By the same token, the researcher can decline to participate in unethical or dangerous activities without fear of exposing his or her identity.

Even when researchers maintain a public identity as researchers, the ethical dilemmas arising from participation in group activities do not go away. In fact, researchers may have to prove themselves to group members by joining in some of their questionable activities.

Covert Participation

To lessen the potential for reactive effects and to gain entry to otherwise inaccessible settings, some field researchers have adopted the role of covert participant. By doing so, they keep their research secret and do their best to act like other participants in a social setting or group. Covert participation is also known as complete participation. Laud Humphreys (1970) served as a “watch queen” so that he could learn about men engaging in homosexual acts in a public restroom. Randall Alfred (1976) joined a group of Satanists to investigate group members and their interaction. Erving Goffman (1961) worked as a state hospital assistant while studying the treatment of psychiatric patients.

Covert (complete) participation A role in field research in which the researcher does not reveal his or her identity as a researcher to those who are observed. The covert participant has adopted the role of a “complete participant.”

Although the role of covert participant lessens some of the reactive effects encountered by the complete observer, covert participants confront other problems. The following are a few examples:

• Covert participants cannot openly take notes or use any obvious recording devices. They must write up notes based solely on memory and must do so at times when it is natural for them to be away from group members.
• Covert participants cannot ask questions that will arouse suspicion. Thus they often have trouble clarifying the meaning of other participants’ attitudes or actions.
• The role of covert participation is difficult to play successfully. Covert participants will not know how regular participants act in every situation in which the researchers find themselves. Suspicion that researchers are not “one of us” may then have reactive effects, obviating the value of complete participation (Erikson, 1967).
• Covert participants must keep up the act at all times while in the setting under study. Researchers may experience enormous psychological strain, particularly in situations where they are expected to choose sides in intragroup conflict or to participate in criminal or other acts. Of course, some covert observers may become so wrapped up in their role that they adopt not just the mannerisms but also the perspectives and goals of the regular participants—they “go native.” At this point, they abandon research goals and cease to critically evaluate their observations.

As you learned in Chapter 3, ethical issues have been at the forefront of debate over the strategy of covert participation. Erikson (1967) argues that covert participation is by its very nature unethical and should not be allowed except in public settings. Covert researchers cannot anticipate the unintended consequences (e.g., gang violence) of their actions for research subjects, Erikson points out. In addition, other social research is harmed when covert research is disclosed, either during the research or upon its publication, because distrust of social scientists increases and future access to research opportunities may decrease.

But a total ban on covert participation would “kill many a project stone dead” (Punch, 1994, p. 90). Studies of unusual religious or sexual practices and institutional malpractice would rarely be possible. According to Punch, “The crux of the matter is that some deception, passive or active, enables you to get at data not obtainable by other means” (p. 91). Therefore, some field researchers argue that covert participation is legitimate in certain circumstances. If the researcher maintains the confidentiality of others, keeps his or her commitments to them, and does not directly lie to the participants, some degree of deception may be justified in exchange for the knowledge gained.

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Participant Observation

[LO 3]

COG [Analysis]

DIF [Medium]

1. Discuss the major challenges at each stage of a field research project. (8-22)

• documentation of the data and the process of data collection;
• organization or categorization of the data into concepts;
• connection of the data to show how one concept may influence another;
• corroboration or legitimization by evaluating alternative explanations, challenging validity, and searching for negative cases; and
• representing the account (reporting the findings).

The analysis of qualitative research notes begins while interviewing or as early as the researcher enters the field; researchers identify problems and concepts that appear likely to help in understanding the situation. Simply reading the notes or transcripts is an important step in the analytic process. Researchers should make frequent notes in the margins to identify important statements and to propose ways of coding the data.

An interim stage may consist of listing the concepts reflected in the notes and diagramming the relationships among concepts (Maxwell, 1996). In a large project, weekly team meetings are an important part of this process. Susan Miller (1999) described this process in her study of NPOs. Miller’s research team members met both to go over their field notes and to resolve points of confusion as well as to dialogue with other skilled researchers who helped to identify emerging concepts.

This process continues throughout the project and should assist in refining concepts during the report-writing phase, long after data collection has ceased. Let us examine each of the stages of qualitative research in more detail.

Documentation

The first formal analytical step is documentation. The various contacts, interviews, written documents, and whatever it is that preserves a record of what happened must all be saved and listed. Documentation is critical to qualitative research for several reasons: It is essential for keeping track of what will become a rapidly growing volume of notes, tapes, and documents; it provides a way of developing an outline for the analytic process; and it encourages ongoing conceptualizing and strategizing about the text.

What to do with all this material? Many field research projects have slowed to a halt because a novice researcher becomes overwhelmed by the quantity of information that has been collected. A one-hour interview can generate 20 to 25 pages of single-spaced text (Kvale, 1996). Analysis is less daunting, however, if the researcher maintains a disciplined transcription schedule.

Making Sense of It: Conceptualization, Coding, and Categorizing

Identifying and refining important concepts is a key part of the iterative process of qualitative research. Sometimes conceptualizing begins with a simple observation that is interpreted directly, pulled apart, and then put back together more meaningfully. Stake (1995) provides an example: “More often, analytic insights are tested against new observations, the initial statement of problems and concepts is refined, the researcher then collects more data, interacts with the data again, and the process continues” (p. 75).

Jody Miller (2000) provides an excellent illustration of the developmental process of conceptualization in her study of girls in gangs:

I paid close attention to and took seriously respondents’ reactions to themes raised in interviews, particularly instances in which they “talked back” by labeling a topic irrelevant, pointing out what they saw as misinterpretations on my part, or offering corrections. In my research, the women talked back the most in response to my efforts to get them to articulate how gender inequality shaped their experiences in the gang. Despite stories they told to the contrary, many maintained a strong belief in their equality within the gang.... As the research progressed, I also took emerging themes back to respondents in subsequent interviews to see if they felt I had gotten it right. In addition to conveying that I was interested in their perspectives and experiences, this process also proved useful for further refining my analyses. (p. 30)

The process described in this quote illustrates the reflexive nature of qualitative data collection and analysis. In qualitative research, the collection of data and their analysis are not typically separate activities. This excerpt shows how the researcher first was alerted to a concept by observations in the field, then refined her understanding of this concept by investigating its meaning. By observing the concept’s frequency of use, she came to realize its importance.

Examining Relationships and Displaying Data

Examining relationships is the centerpiece of the analytic process, because it allows the researcher to move from simple description of the people and settings to explanations of why things happened as they did with those people in that setting. The process of examining relationships can be captured in a matrix that shows how different concepts are connected or perhaps what causes are linked with what effects.

Exhibit 8.7 provides an excellent example of a causal model developed by Baskin and Sommers (1998) to explain the desistance process for the sample of violent female offenders they interviewed in the state of New York. They described the process for the women who made it out of their lives of crime as follows:

Desistance is a process as complex and lengthy as the process of initial involvement. It was interesting to find that some of the key concepts in initiation of deviance—social bonding, differential association, deterrence, age—were equally important in the process of desistance. We see the aging offender take the threat of punishment seriously, reestablish links with conventional society and sever associations with subcultural street elements. We found, too, that the decision to give up crime was triggered by a shock of some sort that was followed by a period of crisis. They arrived at a point at which the deviant way of life seemed senseless. (p. 139)

Corroboration and Authenticating Conclusions

No set standards exist for evaluating the validity or authenticity of conclusions in a qualitative study, but the need to consider carefully the evidence and methods on which conclusions are based is just as great as with other types of research. Data can be assessed in terms of at least three criteria (Becker, 1958):

• How credible was the informant? Were statements made by someone with whom the researcher had a relationship of trust or by someone the researcher had just met? Did the informant have reason to lie? If the statements do not seem to be trustworthy as indicators of actual events, can they at least be used to help understand the informant’s perspective?
• Were statements made in response to the researcher’s questions or were they spontaneous? Spontaneous statements are more likely to indicate what would have been said had the researcher not been present.
• How does the presence or absence of the researcher or the researcher’s informant influence the actions and statements of other group members? Reactivity to being observed can never be ruled out as a possible explanation for some directly observed social phenomena. However, if the researcher carefully compares what the informant says goes on when the researcher is not present, what the researcher observes directly, and what other group members say about their normal practices, the extent of reactivity can be assessed to some extent.

A qualitative researcher’s conclusions should be assessed by their ability to provide a credible explanation for some aspect of social life. That explanation should capture group members’ tacit knowledge of the social processes that were observed, not just their verbal statements about these processes. Tacit knowledge, “the largely unarticulated, contextual understanding that is often manifested in nods, silences, humor, and naughty nuances,” is reflected in participants’ actions as well as their words and in what they fail to state but nonetheless feel deeply and even take for granted (Altheide & Johnson, 1994, pp. 492–493). These features are evident in Whyte’s (1955) analysis of Cornerville social patterns.

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Techniques of Qualitative Data Analysis

[LO 4]

COG [Knowledge]

DIF [Hard]

1. Describe the process of intensive interviewing and compare it to the process of interviewing in survey research. (8-17)

What distinguishes intensive interviewing from more structured forms of questioning is consistency and thoroughness. The goal is to develop a comprehensive picture of the interviewees’ background, attitudes, and actions, in their own terms—to “listen to people as they describe how they understand the worlds in which they live and work” (Rubin & Rubin, 1995, p. 3). For example, even though Decker and Van Winkle (1996) had an interview guide, they encouraged elaboration on the part of their respondents and “went to great lengths to insure that each person we interviewed felt they had received the opportunity to tell their story in their own words” (p. 45).

Intensive interviewing A qualitative method that involves open-ended, relatively unstructured questioning in which the interviewer seeks in-depth information on the interviewee’s feelings, experiences, and perceptions; also called in-depth interviewing

Random selection is rarely used to select respondents for intensive interviews, but the selection method still must be considered carefully. Researchers should try to select interviewees who are knowledgeable about the subject of the interview, who are open to talking, and who represent the range of perspectives (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). Selection of new interviewees should continue, if possible, at least until the saturation point is reached, the point when new interviews seem to yield little additional information (see Exhibit 8.6). As new issues are uncovered, additional interviewees may be selected to represent different opinions about these issues.

Saturation point : The point at which subject selection is ended in intensive interviewing, when new interviews seem to yield little additional information.

Research by Fleury-Steiner (2003) that examines the thoughts and emotions of jurors in death penalty cases is an excellent illustration of the tremendous insights that can be uncovered through intensive interviewing. In Jurors’ Stories of Death, Fleury-Steiner reports on his work with the Capital Jury Project (CJP), which was a national study of the experiences of citizens who served as jurors on death penalty cases. To encourage respondents to tell stories about their experiences, the CJP survey explicitly asked jurors to tell interviewers about important moments during the trial and deliberations and their impressions of the defendant. Fleury-Steiner states,

The goal of these questions was to facilitate jurors to construct their responses in their own ways.... Given the leeway to answer as they saw fit, in many instances jurors’ stories emerged when I least expected them to. (p. 44)

LOC: Systematic Observation

TIP: Intensive Interviewing

[LO 5]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. Discuss the advantages of focus group research and identify particular challenges focus group researchers face.

Focus group is a qualitative method that involves unstructured group interviews in which the focus group leader actively encourages discussion among participants on the topics of interest

Most focus groups involve seven to 10 people, a size that facilitates discussion by all in attendance. Although participants usually do not know one another, they are chosen so that they are relatively homogeneous, which tends to reduce their inhibitions in discussion. Of course, the characteristics of individuals that determine their inclusion are based on the researcher’s conception of the target population for the study. Focus group leaders must begin the discussion by creating the expectation that all will participate and that the researcher will not favor any particular perspective or participant.

Focus groups are interviewed to collect qualitative data using open-ended questions posed by the researcher (or group leader). Thus, a focused discussion mimics the natural process of forming and expressing opinions and may give some sense of validity. The researcher may also want to conduct a more traditional survey, asking a representative sample of the target population to answer closed-ended questions, to weigh the validity of data obtained from the focus group. No formal procedure exists for determining the generalizability of focus group answers, but the careful researcher should conduct at least several focus groups on the same topic and check for consistency in the findings as a partial test of generalizability.

As with other field research techniques, focus group methods emphasize discovering unanticipated findings and exploring hidden meanings. Although they do not provide a means for developing reliable, generalizable results (the traditional strong suits of survey research), focus groups can be an indispensable aid for developing hypotheses and survey questions, for investigating the meaning of survey results, and for quickly identifying the range of opinion about an issue.

LOC: Intensive Interviewing

TIP: Focus Groups

[LO 6]

COG [Application]

DIF [Medium]

1. Describe differences between ethnography and ethnomethodology.

What Is Ethnomethodology? Ethnomethodology is a theoretical approach in sociology based on the belief that you can discover the normal social order of a society by disrupting it. Ethnomethodologists explore the question of how people account for their behaviors. To answer this question, they may deliberately disrupt social norms to see how people respond and how they try to restore social order. Ethnomethodology was first developed during the 1960's by a sociologist named Harold Garfinkel. It is not an especially popular method, but it has become an accepted approach. NOTE: I found no mention of ethnomethodology in the text.

LOC: Fundamentals of Qualitative Methods

TIP: Origins of Qualitative Research

[LO 7]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. Understand how grounded theory is developed. (8-26)

LOC: Alternatives in Qualitative Data Analysis

TIP: Grounded Theory

[LO 8]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. Discuss the ways computer software programs can facilitate qualitative data analysis. (8-28]

Computer-assisted qualitative data analysis Uses special computer software to assist qualitative analyses through creating, applying and refining categories; tracing linkages between concepts; and making comparisons between cases and events.

LOC: Alternatives in Qualitative Data Analysis

TIP: Computer Assisted Data Analysis

[LO 9]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. Identify the major ethical challenges faced by qualitative researchers and discuss one qualitative research project that posed particular ethical concerns. (8-31]

Voluntary Participation: Ensuring that subjects are participating in a study voluntarily is not often a problem with intensive interviewing and focus group research, but it is often a point of contention in participant observation studies. Few researchers or IRBs are willing to condone covert participation because it does not offer a way to ensure that participation by the subjects is voluntary. Even when the researcher’s role is more open, interpreting the standard of voluntary participation still can be difficult. Most field research would be impossible if the participant observer were required to request permission of everyone having some contact, no matter how minimal, with a group or setting being observed. For instance, should the requirement of voluntary participation apply equally to every member of an organization being observed? What if the manager consents, the workers are ambivalent, and the union says no? Requiring everyone’s consent would limit participant observation research only to settings without serious conflicts of interest.

The issue of voluntary participation is particularly important when interviewing or observing minors. At what age can individuals validly give their voluntary consent to participate in a project? It is customary for human subjects committees to want the consent of parents when their children are participating in research. This requirement poses a problem for research that may be investigating issues that parents or guardians may not want uncovered, such as abuse or neglect. In other instances, alerting parents or guardians about the nature of the study may compromise the confidentiality of the participants. For example, if Decker and Van Winkle (1996) had been forced to obtain parental approval for their gang member interviews, it would have violated the confidentiality they tried to provide to their respondents. To assure the human subjects committee that their participants understood their rights, Decker and Van Winkle obtained an advocate for each juvenile member of their sample. This advocate was responsible for making sure that the juveniles each understood his or her right to refuse or quit the interview at any time without penalty and the confidential nature of the project. Only after these issues were carefully explained did the participant sign a consent form. As noted in Chapter 3, issues of true voluntary participation also arise with other populations such as patients or inmates in a correctional facility.

Subject Well-Being: Before beginning a project, every field researcher should carefully consider how to avoid harm to subjects. It is not possible to avoid every theoretical possibility of harm or to be sure that any project will not cause adverse consequences to any individual. Direct harm to the reputations or feelings of particular individuals is what researchers must carefully avoid. They can do so in part by maintaining the confidentiality of research subjects. They must also avoid adversely affecting the course of events while engaged in a setting.

Jody Miller (2000) encountered a unique ethical dilemma while she was recruiting young women from a residential facility by paying them to refer other girls who were gang members to her research. These referral gratuities are common in snowball samples such as this. Unfortunately, in this case one young woman decided to cash in on the deal by initiating new young women into her gang. Here, the ethical dilemma regarding “subject well-being” was that the initiation ceremony for this particular gang involved recruits to the gang being “beaten into the gang.” Miller decided to stop conducting research at this location and ultimately lost several interviews. She states,

It was a difficult decision to make because I had struggled for so long to locate gang girls in Columbus [Missouri]. Ultimately, I believe it was the right thing to do. My presence had stirred up trouble for the agency, and I had an ethical obligation to back away, regardless of the cost to me. (p. 26)

Identity Disclosure: How much disclosure about the study is necessary, and how hard should researchers try to make sure that their research purposes are understood? Less-educated subjects may not readily comprehend what a researcher does or be able to weigh the possible consequences of the research for themselves. Should researchers inform subjects if the study’s interests and foci change while it is in progress? Current ethical standards require informed consent of research subjects. Can this standard be met in any meaningful way if researchers do not fully disclose their identity in the first place? But isn’t some degree of deception a natural part of social life (Punch, 1994)? Can a balance be struck between the disclosure of critical facts and a coherent research strategy?

Confidentiality: Field researchers normally use fictitious names for the people in their reports, but doing so does not always guarantee confidentiality for their research subjects. Individuals in the setting studied may be able to identify those whose actions are described and may thus become privy to some knowledge about their colleagues or neighbors that would otherwise have been kept from them. Researchers should therefore make every effort to expunge possible identifying material from published information and to alter unimportant aspects of a description when necessary to prevent identity disclosure. In any case, no field research project should begin if it is clear that some participants will suffer serious harm by being identified in project publications.

Confidentiality is particularly important if the research is uncovering deviant or illegal behavior. In Rios’s research in Oakland, it was almost inevitable that he would witness illegal activity and/or be told about past criminal behavior. However, he told the boys he was not there to study their criminality. He stated,

This could put them in danger if the records would ever end up with the police. Inevitably I would witness and hear a plethora of stories about crime. Later I would find myself reminding the young men not to provide me with details about the crimes that they had committed. (2011, p. 170)

As we discussed in Chapter 3, researchers are not generally compelled to report past offending behavior to authorities unless information is reported that indicates a research subject intends to harm himself/herself or others in the future.

Appropriate Boundaries: This is an ethical issue that cuts across several of the others, including identity disclosure, subject well-being, and voluntary participation. You probably are familiar with this issue in the context of guidelines for professional practice: Therapists are cautioned to maintain appropriate boundaries with patients; teachers must maintain appropriate boundaries with students. This is a special issue in qualitative research because it often involves loosening the boundary between the researcher and the research subject. Qualitative researchers may seek to build rapport with those they plan to interview by expressing an interest in their concerns and conveying empathy for their situation. Is this just faking friendship for the purpose of the research? Jean Duncombe and Julie Jessop (2002) posed the dilemma clearly in a book chapter titled “‘Doing Rapport’ and the Ethics of ‘Faking Friendship.’”

With deeper rapport, interviewees become more likely to explore their more intimate experiences and emotions. Yet they also become more likely to discover and disclose experiences and feelings which, upon reflection, they would have preferred to keep private from others... or not to acknowledge even to themselves. (p. 112)

Researcher Safety: Research in the field, whether researchers are studying gang life or anything else, should not begin until any potential risks to researcher safety have been evaluated. Qualitative methods may provide the only opportunity to learn about organized crime in Russian ports (Belousov et al., 2007), street crime in the Dominican Republic (Gill, 2004), or the other topics examined by studies in this chapter, but they should not be used if the risks to the researchers are unacceptably high. Safety needs to be considered at the time of designing the research, not as an afterthought upon arriving at the research site. As Hannah Gill learned in the Dominican Republic, such advance planning can require more investigation than just reading the local newspapers: “Due to the community’s marginality, most crimes, including murders, were never reported in newspapers, making it impossible to have known the insecurity of the field site ahead of time” (p. 2).

Being realistic about evaluating risk does not mean simply accepting misleading assumptions about unfamiliar situations or communities. For example, reports of a widespread breakdown in law and order in New Orleans were broadcast repeatedly after Hurricane Katrina, but researchers found that most nontraditional behavior in that period was actually prosocial rather than antisocial (Rodríguez, Trainor, & Quarantelli, 2006):

One group named itself the “Robin Hood Looters.” The core of this group consisted of eleven friends who, after getting their own families out of the area, decided to remain at some high ground and, after the floodwaters rose, commandeered boats and started to rescue their neighbors.... For about two weeks they kept searching in the area.... They foraged for food and water from abandoned homes, and hence [acquired] their group name. Among the important norms that developed were that they were going to retrieve only survivors and not bodies and that group members would not carry weapons. The group also developed informal understandings with the police and the National Guard. (p. 91)

LOC: Alternatives in Qualitative Data Analysis

TIP: Ethical Issues in Qualitative Research

[LO 10]

COG [Evaluation]

DIF [Medium]

1. Describe Victor Rios’s case study, “Life in a Gang.” (8-5)

Qualitative methods still must rely on operationalizing exactly what it is meant by research constructs. For example, one of the first issues Decker and Van Winkle (1996) were challenged with was precisely defining a gang (recall Chapter 4). After all, the term gang could refer to many groups of youth, including high school Debate Society or the Young Republicans. After reviewing the literature, Decker and Van Winkle developed a working definition of a gang as an “age-graded peer group that exhibits some permanence, engages in criminal activity, and has some symbolic representation of membership” (p. 31). To operationalize who was a gang member, they relied on self-identification. “Are you claiming . . .?” was a key screening question that was also verified, as often as possible, with other gang members.

Decker and Van Winkle (1996) were interested in several questions:

Our study revolved around a number of activities, both gang and nongang related, that our subjects were likely to engage in. First, we were interested in motivations to join gangs, the process of joining the gang, the symbols of gang membership, the strength of associational ties, the structure or hierarchy within the gang, motivations to stay (or leave) the gang. . . . The second set of issues concerned the activities gang members engaged in. These included such things as turf protection, drug sales and use, and violence, as well as conventional activities. An accurate picture of gang members must portray both the nature of their gang involvement and the legal status of their activities. (pp. 54–55)

Rios (2011) relied on several different qualitative research methods to determine how the patterns of punishment experienced by the youth in his study affected them. While his primary method was participant observation, he also used intensive interviews and focus groups. He states,

I shadowed these young men as they conducted their everyday routine activities, such as walking the streets, “hanging out,” and participating in community programs. I walked the streets and rode the bus with them from home to school and as they met with friends or went to the community center after school. There were days when I met them in front of the doorsteps at 8 a.m. and followed them throughout the day until they returned home late at night. (pp. 7–8)

Unlike the personal interviews that rely on closed-ended questions that were discussed in the last chapter, Rios relied only on an interview guide that posed several open-ended questions to the youth in his sample. He called them life story interviews because the goal was to place their personal testimonies about their lives at the forefront of his research.

As you can see, Rios approached his research question inductively, not deductively. First, he gathered data. Then, as data collection continued, he interpreted the data and developed analytic categories from which more questions were developed. Rios and other qualitative researchers have provided the field of criminology with in-depth descriptions and idiographic connections of sequences of events that could not have been obtained through other methodologies. They successfully used field research to explore human experiences in depth, carefully analyzing the social contexts in which the experiences occurred.

LOC: Origins of Qualitative Research

TIP: Case Studies: Life in a Gang

[LO 4]

COG [Analysis]

DIF [Medium]

1. Why is Rios’s research in Oakland a perfect example of participant observation? (8-8)

Disclosing your research to participants as Rios did has two clear ethical advantages. Because group members know the researcher’s real role in the group, they can choose to keep some information or attitudes hidden. By the same token, the researcher can decline to participate in unethical or dangerous activities without fear of exposing his or her identity.

Even when researchers maintain a public identity as researchers, the ethical dilemmas arising from participation in group activities do not go away. In fact, researchers may have to prove themselves to group members by joining in some of their questionable activities.

LOC: Choosing a Role

TIP: Participation and Observation

[LO 3]

COG [Analysis]

DIF [Medium]

1. What kinds of concerns are there in choosing which role to take as a participant observer in qualitative research? (8-7)

LOC: Participant Observation

TIP: Choosing a Role

[LO 3]

COG [Comprehension]

DIF [Medium]

1. What is meant by this statement? “Although the role of covert participant lessens some of the reactive effects encountered by the complete observer, covert participants can confront other problems.” (8-9)

• Covert participants cannot ask questions that will arouse suspicion. Thus they often have trouble clarifying the meaning of other participants’ attitudes or actions.
• The role of covert participation is difficult to play successfully. Covert participants will not know how regular participants act in every situation in which the researchers find themselves. Suspicion that researchers are not “one of us” may then have reactive effects, obviating the value of complete participation (Erikson, 1967).
• Covert participants must keep up the act at all times while in the setting under study. Researchers may experience enormous psychological strain, particularly in situations where they are expected to choose sides in intragroup conflict or to participate in criminal or other acts. Of course, some covert observers may become so wrapped up in their role that they adopt not just the mannerisms but also the perspectives and goals of the regular participants—they “go native.” At this point, they abandon research goals and cease to critically evaluate their observations.

LOC: Choosing a Role

TIP: Covert Participation

[LO 3]

COG [Analysis]

DIF [Medium]

1. Pearson (2009) conducted covert participation research in the illegal behavior of English football (soccer), commonly referred to as hooligans. Describe the research. What did he find? (8-10]

LOC: Participant Observation

TIP: Case Study: The “Researcher as a Hooligan”

[LO 3]

COG [Analysis]

DIF [Hard]