FIELD RESEARCH AND FOCUS GROUP RESEARCHbe important in gaining access and can restrict the
available roles. For example, Gurney (1985) reported
that being a female in a male-dominated setting
required extra negotiations and “hassles.” Never-
theless, her gender provided insight and created sit-
uations that a male researcher would not have had.
Because many roles are gender-typed, gender
is an important consideration. Female researchers
often have more difficulty when the setting is per-
ceived as dangerous or seamy and where males are
in control (e.g., police work, fire fighting). Female
researchers may be shunned or pushed into limit-
ing gender stereotypes (e.g., “sweet kid,” “mascot,”
“loud mouth”). Male researchers have more prob-
lems in routine and administrative sites where
males are in control (e.g., courts, large offices), nor
may they be accepted in female-dominated terri-
tory. In sites where both males and females are
involved, both genders may be able to enter and
gain acceptance.^18
Almost any role limits access to some parts of
a field site. For example, the role of a bartender in
a bar limits knowledge of intimate customer behav-
ior or presence at customer gatherings in other loca-
tions. You want to take care when choosing a role
(or having it assigned) but should recognize that all
roles involve trade-offs.
Most social settings contain cliques, informal
groups, hierarchies, and rivalries. A role can help
you gain acceptance into or be excluded from a
clique, be treated as a person in authority or as an
underling, or be a friend or an enemy of some mem-
bers. You need to be aware that by adopting a role,
you may be forming allies and enemies who can
assist or limit research.
Danger and high risk are aspects of some set-
tings (e.g., police work, violent criminal gangs) and
influence social roles. You should be aware of risks
to safety, assess them, and then decide what you are
willing to do. Some observers argue that the field
researcher should share in the risks and danger of
a setting to understand it and its members. For
example, Westmarland (2000) argued that a field
researcher could acquire police officers’ viewpoints
only by putting on a safety vest while rushing to
the scene of violent crime and then dodging bullets
along with them. Taking risks has meant that some
researchers have had “near misses” or have been
injured.
In addition to physical injury, you can face legal
or financial risks and damage to your professional or
personal reputation based on actions in the field.
Research into some settings (e.g., mental hospitals,
trauma centers, war zones) may create emotional-
psychological discomfort and damage a researcher’s
sense of inner well-being. Field researchers who have
studied high-risk settings, such as inner-city drug
dealers, offer suggestions for staying safe (see Expan-
sion Box 3, Staying Safe in Unsafe Settings).EXPANSION BOX 3
Staying Safe in Unsafe Settings- First impressions matter; adopt a personal style and
demeanor appropriate to the setting. - Learn “street life” and fit in; do not dress or act too
much like an outsider. - Explain yourself, who you are, and why you are
there. - Scan the physical environment for obvious signs of
danger (e.g., floors likely to collapse, a ceiling likely
to fall). - Stay alert and be prepared to respond quickly to
potentially dangerous circumstances (paranoia, sex-
ual approaches, robbery, theft, shootings, police
raids, and arrests). - Find a “protector” (i.e., a powerful person in the set-
ting with whom you create strong trust and who will
provide verbal/physical protection). - Develop an assertive, confident mind-set and do not
act like a victim; overly fearful behavior can invite
aggression. - Acquire a “sixth sense” and use prudence or com-
mon sense for changing conditions. Keep some
money hidden for an emergency. - Develop a “safety zone” of people whom you trust
and feel comfortable with and who accept you. - If feeling discomfort, leave the setting and return
another time. The threat of sexual assault or rape is
often a real concern for female researchers and
should be taken seriously.
Sources:Adapted from Bourgeois (1996), Lee-Treweek and
Linkogle (2000), and Williams and Dunlap (1992).