Participant Observation In Sociological Research

All sociological research methods involve observation, however, participant observations is defined by when the researcher themselves participates in the activities of those he or she is observing and studying. Hughes (1976), describes participant observation as, ‘ When the researcher becomes part of a daily round, learning languages and meanings, rules of impersonal, relations… and in short, living the life of the people under study. Participant observations come in two forms, overt participant observations, in which, the researcher informs the group’s members about the purpose of the research and other details, and there is covert participant observations, in which, the researcher joins the group without informing the members, the research
Firstly, the results are derived from one group, just a small sample; it is not a representative sample. As a result, researchers cannot say that the results from that particular group can be generalised to other social groups around the world, the studies results is limited to itself, any results found can just be stated as results from that group. This leads onto problems of replication. Replication is essential in a sociological study, as it allows the results to be fully accurate, the same or another researcher can repeat the study again,, and if the results from the first study are indeed accurate, then same findings will be found when the study is replicated. This cannot be done with participant observations, as it cannot be replicated under the same conditions, there are no fixed procedures, things happen and then observer just follows, therefore these random events won’t occur again. An example is given from Robert Redfield’s study (1930), in the village of Tepoztlan in Mexico. He found a close-knit society in which everyone was cooperative and everyone had a strong sense of belonging. When Oscar Lewis conducted the study seventeen years later in the same village, he found society was, ‘divided by fear, envy and distrust.’[6] These differences show that results from participant observations are not the same all the
It’s lack of replicability, affects the reliability of results, the risks involved can be dangerous as illustrated by Harlambos Chicago study, while also affecting the researchers personal lives as they have to sacrifice important aspects such as family and friend contact and lead a, ‘double life’, giving up their own time and money, in which the results may not even be accurate. Furthermore, results cannot be generalised, so therefore how exactly does the results help society, if the results can only be put into affect when talking about just that one study. Besides, when using covert observations, you are, ‘infringing on basic human rights’ (Tony Bilton 2003),[7], by invading the groups privacy. What right has the researcher got to lie to the group and its members just for their study? Zeiller (1956), states that, ‘The researchers decision to use the sociological method of participant observations is not always a wise one. In the end, the researcher must ask themselves if the means really do justify the means, or would the study demonstrate more valid results if another primary sociological method was