Another sociologist, Jason Ditton, also found that keeping the study a secret to the subject(s) helped him get the data he required to give him a valid, first hand answer as to why bread van salesman committed thefts during the course of their work. This study was, yet again, a covert participant observation and it just shows that when carrying out this particular observation the subject(s) being studied are not likely to change their behaviour as a result of being studied because they are unaware of the situation.
Further more if it is covert participant, the researcher is able to research the workings of deviant groups. The only downside to studying a deviant group is the risk of being caught and loosing all your data gathered as well as the possibility of getting hurt.
Three examples of studies with deviant groups are James Paterick, Elliot Liebow and Ken Pryce. These sociologists studied a gang, in which they hoped to gain a deeper insight to the different behaviour of these people towards society.
James Paterick studied a Glasgow gang under a false name for fear of his own life. This was a covert participant observation and relates to the point made about the risks of joining in with a deviant group and how it does have its advantages such as getting valid data, but there’s always a catch.
Elliot Liebow studied the black ‘street corner’ men in Washington DC. The idea was to win over the group leader Tally, but to also find out the gangs reasons for this issue about ‘reputation’. This was another covert participant observation and once more backs up the statement about the pro’s and cons of studying a deviant group as it illustrates that you are likely to form a bond if you go undercover and therefore be able to provide trustworthy data, but you need to be careful of knowing how far you can go before you’ve reached the maximum level of trust.
Ken Pryce is the perfect example for getting too involved in a study. He did a covert participant observation in which he studied West Indian life in Bristol. He found himself going to clubs and blues dances, drinking with and talking to local residents well past midnight. This just shows the dangers that can occur when you mix with a very risky group. Not only do you have to know what you’re doing, but you have to have the right attitude and personality for that particular study.
An overt participant observation can be very useful if used for the right topic. It is generally a good idea to use an overt participant observation when studying a particular subject that is very emotional and sensitive. This is because when looking at a topic very close to the heart you feel you don’t want to deprive them of their rights so it’s best to involve them more in what you’re doing.
Another two examples of this specific study is Beverley Skeggs and Howard Becker. Both sociologists picked a topic based on something very personal.
Beverley Skeggs studied female sexuality among students at a college. She chose to do an overt participant observation as she felt that she needed the permission from the students before she could continue with her work. This is a prime example of the point made about not wanting to damage someone’s feeling when studying a subject such as this. It shows us that sometimes things work better if you involve the person more in what you’re doing and get them to understand and trust the situation more.
Howard Becker studied the behaviour of medical students towards their patients. The reason for his choice of method is because he believed that they wouldn’t give him any harm or grief if he asked for their permission to study this topic and also that they would be more willing to help out more and provide more data for him if he did involve them. This also shares the same view made earlier as it indicates the importance of knowing your limits and making sure that you get the best possible results out of it.
However a participant observation does have its downfalls. One of these downfalls is that the researcher may get too involved and find it hard to stand back and objectively observe the group.
What’s more if it’s a covert participant observation as you can’t repeat the research so it lack reliability and therefore the researcher may find it difficult to remember all the events and accurately record them.
A further two example’s of this are William Foote Whyte and Simon Holdaway. These two sociologists did a study of a covert participant observation, which ended up with a few problems.
William Foote Whyte did a covert/overt participant observation in an Italian American slum. His problem was that his data lacked reliability due to not being able to record everything detail that happened whilst he was studying them. This provides proof that sometimes if you take part in a study you are more likely to forget some of the vital things that went on.
Simon Holdaway was a police officer and did a detached participant observation. It was covert however his setback was the fact that he was getting too involved with his study. Because he had been in the police force for a long time he would already have an opinion on the topic he was studying and therefore have biased data. This meant that he found it hard to be able to stand back and objectively observe without letting his views take over. This backs up the statement on how a sociologist can get too involved with their study, they need to be able to not let any own opinions stand in the way of getting provable data.
On the whole a participant observation has its up’s and downs. It is very useful if you wanted to get valid data as you can really get to know someone with a participant observation however you can only study a small sample so your data won’t be representative of the whole population not to mention the fact that you cannot repeat a participant observation and therefore it lacks reliability as well.
What’s more observations of all sorts can be very time consuming and expensive so you need to make sure that nothing can go wrong otherwise you would have wasted a lot of your time as well as others.
Although with a participant observation you know you’re getting first hand data, especially if it’s a covert participant observation as your subjects won’t know your studying them so the behaviour of your subjects can’t be influenced a certain way by the researcher.
