Participant monitoring was presented into anthropology at the start of the twentieth century once Bronislegislation Malinowski (1884–1942) challenged the traditional paradigm of researchers conducting their research studies from the veranda of a missionary terminal, by taking accounts from individuals rather than observing situations firsthand (Wax and also Cassell 1979). He exhorted his colleagues to conduct fieldwork in situ, utilizing participant monitoring. This approach was supplied by Malinowski in his studies of the Trobriand also Islands (Malinowski 1922, 1935, 1948) “to grasp the native’s allude of see, his relation to life, to realize his vision of his world” (Malinowski 1922, p. 25, emphasis in original). Participant monitoring connected a area expedition of one or two years, functioning in the indigenous language as a member of the neighborhood being stupassed away. Yet Malinowski’s diary illustprices the obstacles in living approximately his very own requirements as he had actually determined the right problems in which to conduct participant observation, while many type of difficulties required to be reresolved in the area (Malinowski 1967).

You are watching: Participant observation as a research strategy is an essential part of

This observational approach was taken up by many kind of anthropologists in timeless studies including E. E. Evans-Pritctough (1902–1973) on the Nuer (1940) and also Margaret Mead (1901–1978) in New Guinea (1977). Due to the fact that the 1960s, anthropologists have “come home” to study their own cultures making use of participant observation to research metropolitan settings. Harry Wolcott (1973, 1982) studying elementary schools perceived the primary as if he were the chief of a little tribe. Sociologists have taken a comparable approach, studying institutions (Ball 1981; Citizen 1983), factories (Pollert 1981; Beynon 1973), hospitals (Roth 1963), and also new religious movements (Barker 1984, 1987; Zablocki 2001). In sociology, the occupational of Robert E. Park (1864–1944) and the Chicearlier institution (Park 1952) provided observational approaches to research homemuch less men, street-corner gangs, and delinquents. Like the social anthropologists, the Chicago sociologists were strangers in their own society; they were associated yet likewise detached. An observational technique was likewise supplied in neighborhood and locality research studies in the USA and in Britain (Lynd and also Lynd 1929, 1937; Warner and Lunt 1941, 1942; Warner 1959; Frankenberg 1957; Stacey 1960; Kluckhohn 1940).

The hallmarks of participant monitoring involve the researcher living in the area being studied, participating through people, observing and talking with them and interpreting the situations observed. The researcher is the main instrument of data repertoire, and also shares in the stays and also tasks of those being studied by learning their language and interpreting their habits (Becker 1958). Participant monitoring entails examining social actions as it occurs fairly than as it is reported via interviews and also questionnaires.

Much has been created on the duties supplied by the participant observer (Adams and Preiss 1960; Bryguy and also Burgess 1999; Gans 1999). Participant monitoring can be formal or informal, concealed or revealed, and also deserve to involve finish participation and also finish observation. These right kinds have been extended by R. Gold (1958) and also Buford Junker (1960) right into 4 significant roles: (1) the complete participant, (2) the participant as observer, (3) the observer as participant, and (4) the finish observer.

The complete participant seldom reveals that study is being conducted bereason the researcher does not wish to influence the conduct of the tasks being studied (Festinger et al. 1956; Humphreys 1970; Hoguy 1978). However before, in these situations it is challenging for the participant observer to pose concerns. This puts the researcher in the duty of spy and provides it difficult to identify everyday roles from research study roles. Tbelow is additionally a danger of “going native” by failing to question the activities oboffered (Murray 2003). Due to the fact that this function infringes the principle of “informed consent,” it is seldom supplied. The participant as observer function entails researcher and researched being conscious that their relationship stems from research study task (Roy 1970). The researcher is involved in the social case yet additionally detached (Cohen 2000). This role is many typically offered. The observer as participant consists of the observer making the study objective clear from the start of the examination, yet there is no intense connection through those researched (Schatzman and Strauss 1973; Hong and also Duff 2002). Finally, the finish observer role entirely gets rid of the researcher from any type of develop of participation so that the objectives of the study are not revealed. All 4 roles are offered interchangeably and also can aid or impede data collection.

The role of the participant observer is influenced by his or her membership features (Delaney 1988). Age and sex will affect accessibility to teams (Whyte 1955; Patrick 1973). Gender, ethnicity, and also social class will likewise affect the perspective from which information are collected and also in some instances access will be granted to, or withorganized from, certain people in a social establishing (Golde 1970; Wax 1979; Roberts 1981; Easterday et al. 1977; Liebow 1967; Bell 1999). Participant observation likewise requires selection (Arcury and Quandt 1999). Many kind of participant observers use informants in their studies to take them right into social situations, explain the context in which observations happen, and also carry out a perspective on the social human being (Casagrande 1960; Gallmeier 1988). Participant observers have to take into consideration how informants are schosen as they influence information arsenal (Cohen 2000).

Participant observers document data and also keep in-depth field notes (Lofland 1971, 1974; Schatzguy and also Strauss 1973; Burgess 1982, 1984). Substantive area notes administer a record of the monitorings, conversations, and interviews that take area (Humphreys 1970). Methodological area notes illustrate the study procedure and record the individual impressions of the researcher (Geer 1964; Murray 2003), the impact of duties upon data, the selection of informants and also relationships via them, and an evaluation of research study endure. Analytic field notes record principle advance throughout an examination and also contribute to information evaluation and also the written narrative that constitutes the short article or monograph produced (Glaser and Strauss 1967; Glaser 1978; Atkinboy 1990; Ashworth 1995).

Several difficulties have been established as soon as conducting participant observation. Researchers should constantly remember that they are situated in a social setting for the purposes of social science. They are involved and yet detached. This will aid them to get over the risks of overidentifying with various other participants and also “going native” in the establishing by no much longer questioning the actions and tasks that are oboffered. The researcher needs to collect data that are trusted and also valid (Shaffir and also Stebbins 1991). Ethical troubles are additionally typically elevated for the researcher via being put in a marginal function through the result that anxiety and anxiety need to be regulated throughout a study. This is generally the situation in covert researches where the researcher is unable to take notes or to usage a variety of other approaches of research study and also often violates ethics of informed consent out, privacy, and also confidentiality (Citizen 1989; Lauder 2003). The participant observer therefore demands to control the study by being aware of the troubles encountered in the research procedure by engaging in instrumental self-reflection of the research experience (Bourdieu 2003) and by bringing the research to a successful close.

SEE ALSO Anthropology; Evans-Pritctough, E. E.; Malinowski, Bronislaw; Mead, Margaret


Adams, Richard N., and Jack J. Preiss, eds. 1960. Human Organization Research: Field Relations and Techniques. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.

Arcury, Thomas A., and Sara A. Quandt. 1999. Participant Recruitment for Qualitative Research: A Site-based Approach to Community Research in Complex Societies. Human being Organization 58 (2): 128–132.

Ashworth, Peter D. 1995. The Meaning of “Participation” in Participant Observation. Qualitative Health Research 5 (3): 366–387.

Atkinboy, Paul. 1990. The Ethnographic Imagination: Textual Constructions of Reality. London: Routledge.

Ball, Stephen. 1981. Beachside Comprehensive: A Case Study of Secondary Schooling. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge College Press.

Barker, Eileen. 1984. The Making of a Moonie: Choice or Brainwashing? Oxford: Blackwell.

Barker, Eileen. 1987. Brahmins Don’t Eat Mushrooms: Participant Observation and the New Religions. LSE Quarterly 1 (2): 127–152.

Becker, Howard S. 1958. Problems of Inference and Proof in Participant Observation. Amerihave the right to Sociological Review 23 (6): 652–660.

Bell, E. 1999. The Negotiation of a Working Role in Organisational Ethnography. Internationwide Journal of Social Research Methodology 2 (1): 17–37.

Beynon, Huw. 1973. Working for Ford. Harmondsworth, U.K.: Penguin.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 2003. Participant Objectivation. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 9: 281–294.

Bryguy, Alan, and Robert G. Citizen, eds. 1999. Qualitative Research. 4 vols. London: Sage.

Citizen, Robert G., ed. 1982. Field Research: A Sourcebook and also Field Manual. London: Allen and Unwin.

Burgess, Robert G. 1983. Experiencing Comprehensive Education: A Study of Bishop McGregor School. London: Methuen.

Burgess, Robert G. 1984. In the Field: An Overview to Field Research. London: Allen and Unwin.

Burgess, Robert G., ed. 1989. The Ethics of Educational Research. London: Falmer.

Cohen, Jeffrey H. 2000. Problems in the Field: Participant Observation and the Assumption of Neutrality. Field Methods 12 (4): 316–333.

Delaney, Carol. 1988. Participant Observation: The Razor’s Edge. Dialectical Anthropology 13: 291–300.

Easterday, Lois, et al. 1977. The Making of a Female Researcher: Role Problems in Field Work. Urban Life 6 (3): 333–348.

Evans-Pritctough, E. E. 1940. The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and also Political Institutions of a Nilotic People. Oxford: Oxford College Press.

Festinger, Leon, Henry W. Riecken, and Stanley Schachter. 1956. When Prophecy Fails. New York: Harper.

Frankenberg, Ronald. 1957. Village on the Border: Social Study of Religion, Politics, and Football in a North Wales Community. London: Cohen and also West.

Gallmeier, Charles P. 1988. Methodological Issues in Qualitative Sport Research: Participant Observation among Hockey Players. Sociological Spectrum 8: 213–235.

Gans, Herbert J. 1999. Participant Observation in the Era of “Ethnography.” Journal of Conmomentary Ethnography 28 (5): 540–548.

Geer, Blanche. 1964. First Days in the Field. In Sociologists at Work: Essays on the Craft of Social Research, ed. Phillip Hammond, 322–344. New York: Basic Books.

Glaser, Barney G. 1978. Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, Barney G., and Anselm L. Strauss. 1967. The Discoexceptionally of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.

Gold, R. 1958. Roles in Sociological Field Observation. Social Forces 36 (3): 217–223.

Golde, Peggy, ed. 1970. Woguys in the Field: Anthropological Experiences. Chicago: Aldine.

Hoguy, Roger. 1978. Interindividual Communication in Pentecostal Meetings. Sociological Review 26 (3): 499–518.

Hong, Lawrence K., and also Robert W. Duff. 2002. Modulated Participant-Observation: Managing the Dilemma of Distance in Field Research. Field Methods 14 (2): 190–196.

Humphreys, Laud. 1970. The Tearoom Trade: Imindividual Sex in Public Places. London: Duckworth.

Junker, Buford H. 1960. Field Work: An Review to the Social Sciences. Chicago: College of Chicearlier Press.

Kluckhohn, Florence R. 1940. The Participant Observer Technique in Small Communities. Amerihave the right to Journal of Sociology 46 (3): 331–343.

Lauder, Matthew A. 2003. Covert Participant Observation of a Deviant Community: Justifying the Use of Deception. Journal of Conmomentary Religion 18 (2): 185–196.

Liebow, Elliot. 1967. Tally’s Corner: A Study of Negro Streetcorner Men. Boston: Little, Brown.

Lofland also, John. 1971. Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis. New York: Wadsworth.

Lofland also, John. 1974. Assessing Qualitative Data: First Human Accounts. American Sociologist 9 (3): 101–111.

Lynd, Robert S., and also Helen M. Lynd. 1929. Middletown: A Study in Conmomentary Amerihave the right to Culture. New York: Harcourt.

Lynd, Robert S., and Helen M. Lynd. 1937. Middletown in Transition: A Study in Cultural Conflicts. New York: Harcourt.

Malinowski, Bronisregulation. 1922. Argonauts of the Western Pacific. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1935. Coral Gardens and Their Magic: A Study of the Methods of Tilling the Soil and of Agricultural Rites in the Trobriand also Islands. 2 vols. London: Allen and also Unwin.

Malinowski, Bronisregulation. 1948. Magic, Science, and Religion, and also Other Esstates, ed. Robert Redfield. Boston: Beacon.

Malinowski, Bronisregulation. 1967. A Diary in the Strict Sense of the Term. Trans. Norbert Guterman. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Mead, Margaret. 1977. Letters from the Field, 1925–1975. New York: Harper.

Murray, Susan B. 2003. A Spy, a Shill, a Go-between, or a Sociologist: Unveiling the “Observer” in Participant Observer. Qualitative Research 3 (3): 377–395.

Park, Robert E. 1952. The City: Suggestions for the Investigation of Person Behaviour in the Urban Environment. In Person Communities: The City and Person Ecology, 13–51. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

Patrick, James. 1973. A Glasgow Gang Oboffered. London: Eyre Methuen.

Pollert, Anna. 1981. Girls, Wives, Factory Lives. London: Macmillan.

Roberts, Helen, ed. 1981. Doing Feminist Research. London: Routledge and also Kegan Paul.

Roth, Julius A. 1963. Timetables: Structuring the Passage of Time in Hospital Treatment and Other Careers. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.

Roy, Donald. 1970. The Study of Southern Labour Union Organising Campaigns. In Pathmeans to Data: Field Methods for Studying Ongoing Social Organizations, ed. Robert Habenstein, 216–244. Chicago: Aldine.

Schatzguy, Leonard, and Anselm L. Strauss. 1973. Field Research: Strategies for a Natural Sociology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prtempt Hall.

Shaffir, William B., and also Robert A. Stebbins, eds. 1991. Experiencing Fieldwork: An Inside View of Qualitative Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Stacey, Margaret. 1960. Tradition and Change: A Study of Banbury. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Warner, W. Lloyd. 1959. The Living and also the Dead: A Study of the Symbolic Life of Americans. New Haven, CT: Yale College Press.

Warner, W. Lloyd, and Paul S. Lunt. 1941. The Social Life of a Modern Community. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Warner, W. Lloyd, and also Paul S. Lunt. 1942. The Status System of a Modern Community. New Haven, CT: Yale College Press.

Wax, Rosalie H. 1979. Gender and Era in Fieldwork and also Fieldoccupational Education: No Good Thing Is Done by Any Man Alone. Social Problems 26 (5): 509–522.

Whyte, William F. 1955. Street Corner Society. 2nd ed. Chicago: College of Chicback Press.

Wolcott, Harry. 1973. The Man in the Principal’s Office: An Ethnography. New York: Holt.

Wolcott, Harry. 1982. Mirrors, Models, and also Monitors: Educator Adaptations of the Ethnographic Innovation. In Doing the Ethnography of Schooling: Educational Anthropology in Action, ed. George Spindler, 68–95. New York: Holt.

See more: Why Does My Dog Lick Up My Nose ? Why Your Dog Keeps Licking Their Nose

Zablocki, Benjamin. 2001. Vulnerability and also Objectivity in the Participant Observation of the Sacred. Toward Reflexive Ethnography: Participating, Observing, Narrating 9: 223–245.