EXPANSION BOX 7
Obstacles to Reliable Field Data- Misinformationis an unintended falsehood caused
by the uncertainty and complexity of life. For
example, nurses in a hospital state something as
“official hospital policy” when, in fact, there is no such
written policy.
2.Evasionsare intentional acts of not revealing infor-
mation. Common evasions include not answering
questions, answering a different question than was
asked, switching topics, or answering in a purpose-
fully vague and ambiguous manner. For example, a
salesperson appears uncomfortable when the topic
of using call girls to get customers comes up at a din-
ner party. He says, “Yes, a lot of people use them.”
But later, alone, after careful questioning, the sales-
man is drawn out and reveals that he himself uses the
practice.
3.Liesare untruths intended to mislead or to give a
false view. For example, a gang member gives you
a false name and address, or a church minister gives
an inflated membership figure in order to look
more successful. Douglas (1976:73) noted, “In all
other research settings I’ve known about in any
detail, lying was common, both among members
and to researchers, especially about the things that
were really important to the members.”
4.Frontsare shared and learned lies and deceptions.
They can include the use of physical props and
collaborators. An example is a bar that is really a
place to make illegal bets. The bar appears to be
legitimate and sells drinks, but its true business is
revealed only by careful investigation. Fronts are not
always malicious. A common example is that of
Santa Claus—a “front” put on for small children.
FIELD RESEARCH AND FOCUS GROUP RESEARCHthat to please me? Is there anything that might limit
her or his spontaneity?
Take subjectivity and context into account as
you evaluate credibility. A person’s subjective per-
ceptions influence his or her statements or actions,
which are colored by an individual’s point of view
and past experiences. Instead of evaluating each
statement to see whether it is true, you may find
statements useful in themselves. Even inaccurate
statements and actions can be revealing.
As mentioned before, the context shapes
actions and statements. What is said in one setting
may differ in other contexts. For example, when
asked, “Do you dance?” a member may say no in a
public setting full of excellent dancers but yes in a
semiprivate setting with few dancers and different
music. It is not that the member is lying but that
the answer is shaped by the context. Four other
obstacles to reliability include behaviors that can
mislead you: misinformation, evasions, lies, and
fronts (see Expansion Box 7, Obstacles to Reliable
Field Data).^56
Validity in Field Research
Validity in field research comes from your analysis
of data as accurate representations of the social
world in the field. Replicability is not a criterion
because field research is virtually impossible to
replicate. Essential aspects of the field change:
The social events and context change, the members
are different, the individual researcher differs, and so
on. There are four types of validity or tests of research
accuracy: ecological validity, natural history, mem-
ber validation, and competent insider performance.
Fronts People in a field site who engage in actions
and say things that give an impression or appearance
that differs from what is actually occurring.Natural history A detailed description of how a
project was conducted.- Ecological validityis the degree to which the
social world you describe matches the mem-
bers’ world. It asks whether the natural setting
described is relatively undisturbed by your
presence or procedures. A study has ecological
validity if events would have occurred without
your presence. - Natural historyis a detailed description of
how you conducted the project. It is a full and
candid disclosure of your actions, assumptions,
Ecological validity Authenticity and trustworthiness
of a study; demonstrated by showing that the
researcher’s descriptions of the field site match those
of the members and that the field researcher’s pres-
ence was not a disturbance.