Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches

FIELD RESEARCH AND FOCUS GROUP RESEARCH

and procedures for others to evaluate. A study

is valid in terms of natural history if outsiders

see and accept the field site and your actions.

3. Member validationoccurs when you take
   field results back to members and they judge
   the adequacy of the results. A study is “mem-
   ber valid” if many members recognize and
   understand your description as reflecting their
   intimate social world. Member validation has
   limitations because conflicting perspectives in
   a setting produce disagreement with your
   observations, and members may object when
   results do not portray their group in a favor-
   able light. In addition, members may not rec-
   ognize the description because it is not from
   their perspective or does not fit with their
   purposes.^57


4. Competent insider performanceis the abil-
   ity of a nonmember to interact effectively as a
   member or pass as one. This includes the abil-
   ity to tell and understand insider jokes. A valid
   study gives enough of a flavor of the social life
   in the field and sufficient detail so that an
   outsider can act as a member. Its limitation is
   that it is not possible to know the social rules
   for every situation. Also, an outsider might be
   able to pass simply because members are
   being polite and do not want to point out social
   mistakes.^58

ETHICAL DILEMMAS

OF FIELD RESEARCH

Your direct, personal involvement in the social lives

of other people during field research introduces

ethical dilemmas. Some of them arise when you are

alone in the field and have little time to deliberate

over ethics. You may be aware of general ethical

issues before entering the field, but they often arise

unexpectedly in the course of observing and inter-

acting in the field. We consider five ethical issues

in field research: covert research, confidentiality,

involvement with illegal behavior, the powerful,

and publishing reports.^59

1.Covert research.The most debated of the
ethical issues is that of covert versus overt field

research.^60 It involves the broader issue of decep-

tion both in fully secret or covert research and when

the researcher assumes a false role, name, or iden-

tity, or lies to members in some way. Some in the

research community support covert research or

deception and see it as necessary to enter into and

gain a full knowledge of some areas of social life.

Others oppose it absolutely. They argue that it

undermines a trust between researchers and soci-

ety.^61 Although its moral status is questionable,

some field sites or activities can be studied only

covertly.

Covert research is never preferable and rarely

easier than overt research because of the difficulties

of maintaining a front and the constant fear of being

caught. Lofland et al. (2006:39) note, “the ethical

sensitive, thoughtful, and knowledgeable investi-

gator is the best judge of whether covert research

is justified. However... we suggest you undertake

no covert research... before you have acquainted

yourself with the problems, debates, and dilemmas

associated with such research and local IRB proto-

cols and mandates.”

2.Confidentiality.You may learn intimate

knowledge revealed in confidence and have a strong

moral obligation to uphold the confidentiality of

data. This obligation includes keeping information

confidential from others in the field and disguising

members’ names in field notes. Sometimes you can-

not directly quote a person in a research report. One

strategy is to find documentary evidence that says

the same thing and use the document (e.g., an old

memo, a newspaper article) as the source of the

information instead of the member.

A more serious ethical difficulty arises when

a field researcher and a member develop a close,

Member validation A method that field researchers

use to demonstrate the authenticity and trustwor-

thiness of a study by having the people who were

studied read and confirm as being true what the

researchers have reported.

Competent insider performance Action that field

researchers use to demonstrate the authenticity and

trustworthiness of a study by having the researcher

“pass” as a member of the group under study.