Participant Observation

   Covert P.O has led to some safety risks. Researchers have become involved in criminal and dangerous activity. Also, “going native”, when a researcher stops studying the group and simply becomes a part of the group can cause problems for the lifestyle of them and the group. Studies such as, “The tea-room Trade” by Laud Humphreys, “Street Corner Society” by W.F Whyte and, “All day everyday” by Sallie Westwood have shown us the insight that Covert P.O can give into situations or activity that are heavily stigmatised or prejudiced in society. Its effects can be positive or negative but they are usually factual and so have a direct influence on solid stereotypes.

Covert P.O is an important tool for sociologists. It offers powerful and reliable information. The flipside to the coin though is that where does our right to knowledge come from, who says the importance of Sociology give us the right to deceive groups to find out the workings of their private lives? Furthermore in Covert P.O you normally would be researching a narrow angle in contrast to the full spectrum. If the sociologists found out they were the subjects of Covert P.O on how sociologist treat the world I would expect them to be upset so why should they be allowed to it’s a bit of an arrogant way to behave.

Overt P.O is a far more honest from of research than Covert P.O. This means that groups can elaborate on details that they feel comfortable with that you do not intrude into privacy. It also is a lot easier and less expensive you don’t have to lie or keep up a charade to protect yourself and you can maintain your own personal beliefs so being able to discuss issues amongst a group and giving personal input. In the observation of a Glasgow gang James Patrick had to keep a very high level of secrecy with the group and came close to being discovered several times which could have led to sever trouble for him. His study also had to be released for his safety after two years. In “When Prophecy Fails” by Festinger he had to record his data in the toilets!

The consequences of relying on memory for data means that elements of your research might be sketchy that data is recorded precisely and this would lead to unreliability. “Going Native” means that a researcher becomes more involved than maybe they originally intended with the group. This can lead to biased and subjective research. This can also impact the lifestyle of the group and can change the environment, hierarchy or set-up of a group. So in conclusion it could be said that both covert and overt P.O have advantages and disadvantages. The choice is up to the sociologists and their ethics….