Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches

FIELD RESEARCH AND FOCUS GROUP RESEARCH

Adopt a Level of Involvement.We can arrange
researcher roles along a continuum by their degree
of involvement with members. At one extreme is a
detached outsider observer; the opposite extreme is
an intimately involved insider participant. Several
authors have developed systems for discussing the
researcher roles (see Chart 1).
Your level of involvement will vary based on
negotiations with members, specifics of the field
setting, your personal comfort level, and the social
role you occupy within the field site. You may move
from outsider to insider levels with more time in
the field. Each level has its advantages and dis-
advantages. Different field researchers advocate
different levels of involvement. For example, some
criticize the Adlers’ (1978) complete member role
for overinvolvement and loss of a researcher’s per-
spective. Others argue that it is the only way to
understand a member’s social world.

Roles at the outsider end of the continuum

reduce the time needed for acceptance, make over-

rapport less an issue, and can sometimes help mem-

bers open up. These roles facilitate detachment and

protect the researcher’s self-identity. Rueben May

assumed this role over the 18 months as he studied

Trena’s bar, visiting it three to four times a week.

He reports (2001:174), “My goal as an ethnogra-

pher was to document the daily lifestyle of Trena’s

regulars, while being as unobtrusive as possible....

I spent most of my time listening to the patrons’

exchanges and documenting those topics patrons

thought important.” Although there is less risk of

going native (see later discussion on the subject) the

outsider is less likely to capture the full depth of an

insider’s experience and is more likely to make mis-

interpretations.

Many reject the outsider observer role and

argue that the only way to acquire an understanding

CHART 1 Involvement in the Field

Junker (1960, also see Denzin, 1989, Gold, 1969, and Roy, 1970) describes four researcher
roles:

1. Complete observer.The researcher is behind a one-way mirror or taking on an
   “invisible role” such as an eavesdropping janitor.


2. Observer as participant.The researcher is known from the beginning but has limited
   contact.


3. Participant as observer.The researcher is overt and an intimate friend of participants.


4. Complete participant.The researcher acts as a member and shares secret information
   of insiders.

Gans (1982) offers a similar scheme but collapses the two middle categories into researcher
participant. He emphasizes the degree of attachment/emotional involvement or detachment
at each level.

Adler and Adler (1987) suggest three roles:

1. Peripheral membership.The researcher maintains distance between her- or himself
   and the members studied or sets limits based on her or his beliefs or discomfort with
   the members’ activities.


2. Active membership.The researcher assumes a membership role and goes through a
   typical member induction and participates as a member, maintaining high levels of
   trust and withdrawing from the field periodically.


3. Complete member.The researcher converts to become a fully committed member,
   experiencing the same emotions as others. He or she “goes native” and finds it very
   difficult or impossible to leave the field and return to being a researcher.