FIELD RESEARCH AND FOCUS GROUP RESEARCH- See Geertz (1973, 1979) on “thick description.” Also
see Denzin (1989:159–160) for additional discussion. - For more on ethnomethodology, see Cicourel (1964),
Denzin (1970), Leiter (1980), Mehan and Wood (1975),
and Turner (1974). Also see Emerson (1981:357–359)
and Lester and Hadden (1980) on the relationship between
field research and ethnomethodology. Garfinkel (1974a)
discussed the origins of the term ethnomethodology. - The misunderstandings of people resulting from the
disjuncture of different cultures is a common theme. - For a general discussion of field research and natu-
ralism, see Adler and Adler (1994), Georges and Jones
(1980), Holy (1984), and Pearsall (1970). For discus-
sions of contrasting types of field research, see Clammer
(1984), Gonor (1977), Holstein and Gubrium (1994),
Morse (1994), Schwandt (1994), and Strauss and Corbin
(1994). - See Georges and Jones (1980:21–42) and Lofland
et al. (2006:11–15). - Johnson (1975:65–66) has discussed defocusing.
- See Lofland (1976:13–23) and Shaffir et al. (1980:
18–20) on feeling marginal. - See Adler and Adler (1987:67–78).
- See Hammersley and Atkinson (1983:42–45) and
Lofland et al. (2006:17–32). - Jewish researchers have studied Christians (Kleinman,
1980), Whites have studied African Americans (Liebow,
1967), and adult researchers have become intimate with
youngsters (Fine, 1987; Fine and Glassner, 1979; Thorne
and Luria, 1986). Also see Eichler (1988), Hunt (1989),
and Wax (1979) on the role of race, gender, and age in
field research. - See Douglas and Rasmussen (1977) and Yancey and
Rainwater (1970). - For more on gatekeepers and access, see Beck
(1970:11–29), Bogdan and Taylor (1975:30–32), Corra
and Willer (2002), and Wax (1971:367). - Adapted from Gray (1980:311). See also Hicks
(1984) and Schatzman and Strauss (1973:58–63). - For discussions of ascribed status (and, in particular,
gender) in field research, see Adler and Adler (1987),
Ardener (1984), Ayella (1993), Denzin (1989:116–118),
Douglas (1976), Easterday et al. (1982), Edwards (1993),
Lofland et al. (2006:22-24), and Van Maanen (1982). - Roy (1970) argued for the “Ernie Pyle” role based
on his study of union organizing in the southern United
States. In this role, named after a World War II war cor-
respondent, the researcher “goes with the troops” as a
type of participant as observer. Trice (1970) discussed
the advantages of an outsider role. Schwartz and Schwartz
(1969) discussed various roles.
20. See Douglas (1976), Emerson (1981:367–368), and
Johnson (1975:124–129) on being patient, polite, and
considerate.
21. Negotiation in the field is discussed in Gans (1982),
Johnson (1975:58–59, 76–77), and Schatzman and
Strauss (1973:22–23).
22. On entering and gaining access to field sites with
deviant groups, see Becker (1970a:31–38), Hammersley
and Atkinson (1983:54–76), Lofland et al. (2006:30–47),
and West (1980). Elite access is discussed by Hoffman
(1980).
23. See Lofland et al. (2006:22-25).
24. For discussion of “normalizing,” see Gans (1982:
57–59), Georges and Jones (1980:43–164), Hammersley
and Atkinson (1983:70–76), Harkens and Warren
(1993), Johnson (1975), and Wax (1971). Mann (1970)
discussed how to teach members about a researcher’s
role.
25. For more on roles in field settings, see Barnes
(1970:241–244), Emerson (1981:364), Hammersley and
Atkinson (1983:88–104), Warren and Rasmussen (1977),
and Wax (1979). On dress, see Bogdan and Taylor (1975:
45) and Douglas (1976).
26. See Lofland (1976) and Lofland et al. (2006) on
focusing. Spradley (1979b:100–111) also provides a
helpful discussion.
27. See Denzin (1989:71–73, 86–92), Glaser and
Strauss (1967), Hammersley and Atkinson (1983: 45–53),
Honigmann (1982), and Weiss (1994:25–29) on sampling
in field research.
28. See Gurevitch (1988), Hammersley and Atkinson
(1983), and Schatzman and Strauss (1973:53) on
“strangeness” in field research.
29. See Gans (1982), Goward (1984b), and Van Maanen
(1983b:282–286).
30. See Douglas (1976:216) and Corsino (1987).
31. See Warren and Rasmussen (1977) for a discussion
of cross-gender tension.
32. See Wax (1971:13).
33. Also see Adler and Adler (1987:40–42), Bogdan and
Taylor (1975:35–37), Douglas (1976), and Gray (1980:
321).
34. See Bogdan and Taylor (1975:50–51), Lofland et al.
(2006:57–60), Shupe and Bromley (1980), and Wax
(1971).
35. See Johnson (1975:105–108).
36. The acceptable incompetent or learner role is dis-
cussed in Bogdan and Taylor (1975:46), Douglas (1976),
Hammersley and Atkinson (1983:92–94), Lofland et al.
(2006:55-57), and Schatman and Strauss (1973:25).
37. See Strauss (1987:10–11).