Participant observation
Participant observation is one type of data collection method by practitioner-scholars typically used in qualitative research and ethnography. This type of methodology is employed in many disciplines, particularly anthropology, sociology, communication studies, human geography, and social psychology. Its aim is to gain a close and intimate familiarity with a given group of individuals and their practices through an intensive involvement with people in their cultural environment, usually over an extended period of time.
The concept "participant observation" was first coined in 1924 by Eduard C. Lindeman, an American pioneer in adult education influenced by John Dewey and Danish educator-philosopher N.F.S.Grundtvig, in his 1925 book
Social Discovery: An Approach to the Study of Functional Groups. The method, however, originated earlier and was applied in the field research linked to European and American voyages of scientific exploration.
In 1800 one of precursors of the method, Joseph Marie, baron de Gérando, said that: "The first way to get to know the Indians is to become like one of them; and it is by learning their language that we will become their fellow citizens." Later, the method would be popularized by Bronisław Malinowski and his students in Britain; the students of Franz Boas in the United States; and, in the later urban research, the students of the Chicago school of sociology.
History and development
Participant observation was used extensively by Frank Hamilton Cushing in his study of the Zuni people in the latter half of the nineteenth century. This would be followed in the early twentieth century by studies of non-Western societies through such people as Bronisław Malinowski, E.E. Evans-Pritchard, and Margaret Mead.The practice emerged as the principal approach to ethnographic research by anthropologists and relied on the cultivation of personal relationships with local informants as a way of learning about a culture, involving both observing and participating in the social life of a group. By living with the cultures they studied, researchers were able to formulate first-hand accounts of their lives and gain novel insights. This same method of study has also been applied to groups within Western society and is especially successful in the study of sub-cultures or groups sharing a strong sense of identity, where only by taking part may the observer truly get access to the lives of those being studied. The postmortem publication of Grenville Goodwin's decade of work as a participant-observer with the Western Apache established him as a prominent figure in the field of ethnology.
Since the 1980s, some anthropologists and other social scientists have questioned the degree to which participant observation can give veridical insight into the minds of other people. At the same time, a more formalized qualitative research program known as grounded theory, initiated by Glaser and Strauss, began gaining currency within American sociology and related fields such as public health. In response to these challenges, some ethnographers have refined their methods, either making them more amenable to formal hypothesis-testing and replicability or framing their interpretations within a more carefully considered epistemology.
The development of participant-observation as a research tool has therefore not been a haphazard process, but instead has involved a great deal of self-criticism and review. It has, as a result, become specialized. Visual anthropology can be viewed as a subset of methods of participant-observation, as the central questions in that field have to do with how to take a camera into the field, while dealing with such issues as the observer effect. Issues with entry into the field have evolved into a separate subfield. Clifford Geertz's famous essay on how to approach the multi-faceted arena of human action from an observational point of view, in Interpretation of Cultures uses the simple example of a human wink, perceived in a cultural context far from home.
Method and practice
Such research involves a range of well-defined, though variable methods: informal interviews, direct observation, participation in the life of the group, collective discussions, analyses of personal documents produced within the group, self-analysis, results from activities undertaken off or online, and life-histories. Although the method is generally characterized as qualitative research, it can include quantitative dimensions. Traditional participant observation is usually undertaken over an extended period of time, ranging from several months to many years, and even generations. An extended research time period means that the researcher is able to obtain more detailed and accurate information about the individuals, community, and/or population under study. Observable details and more hidden details are more easily observed and interpreted over a longer period of time. A strength of observation and interaction over extended periods of time is that researchers can discover discrepancies between what participants say—and often believe—should happen and what actually does happen, or between different aspects of the formal system; in contrast, a one-time survey of people's answers to a set of questions might be quite consistent, but is less likely to show conflicts between different aspects of the social system or between conscious representations and behavior.Howell's phases of participant observation
In participant observation, a researcher's discipline based interests and commitments shape which events they consider are important and relevant to the research inquiry. According to Howell, the four stages that most participant observation research studies are establishing rapport or getting to know the people, immersing oneself in the field, recording data and observations, and consolidating the information gathered.The phases are as follows:
- Establishing Rapport: Get to know the members, visit the scene before study. Howell states that it is important to become friends, or at least be accepted in the community, in order to obtain quality data.
- In the Field : It is important for the researcher to connect or show a connection with the population in order to be accepted as a member of the community. DeWalt & DeWalt call this form of rapport establishment as "talking the talk" and "walking the walk". Also mentioned by Howell, DeWalt & DeWalt state that the researcher must strive to fit in with the population of study through moderation of language and participation. This sets the stage for how well the researcher blends in with the field and the quality of observable events they experience.
- Recording Observations and Data: Along with field notes and interviews, researchers are encouraged to record their personal thoughts and feelings about the subject of study through reflexivity journals. The researchers are prompted to think about how their experiences, ethnicity, race, gender, sex, sexual orientation, and other factors might influence their research, in this case what the researcher decides to record and observe. Researchers must be aware of these biases and enter the study with no misconceptions about not bringing in any subjectivities into the data collection process.
- Analyzing Data:
- * Thematic Analysis: organizing data according to recurrent themes found in interviews or other types of qualitative data collection and
- * Narrative Analysis: categorizing information gathered through interviews, finding common themes, and constructing a coherent story from data.
Types of participant observation
| Type | Level of Involvement | Limitations |
| Non-Participatory | No contact with population or field of study | Unable to build rapport or ask questions as new information comes up. |
| Passive Participation | Researcher is only in the bystander role | Limits ability to establish rapport and immersing oneself in the field. |
| Moderate Participation | Researcher maintains a balance between "insider" and "outsider" roles | This allows a good combination of involvement and necessary detachment to remain objective. |
| Active Participation | Researcher becomes a member of the group by fully embracing skills and customs for the sake of complete comprehension | This method permits the researcher to become more involved in the population. There is a risk of "going native" as the researcher strives for an in-depth understanding of the population studied. |
| Complete Participation | Researcher is completely integrated in population of study beforehand. | There is the risk of losing all levels of objectivity, thus risking what is analyzed and presented to the public. |
Limitations To Any Participant Observation
- The recorded observations about a group of people or event is never going to be the full description.
- As mentioned before this is due to the selective nature of any type of recordable data process: it is inevitably influenced by researchers' personal beliefs of what is relevant and important.
- This also plays out in the analysis of collected data; the researcher's worldview invariably influences how they interpret and evaluates the data.
- The researcher may not capture accurately what the participant or may misunderstand the meaning of the participant's words, thus drawing inaccurate generalizations about the participant's perceptions.