File:Problems of Evidence in Ethnography. A Methodological Reflection on the Goffman-Mead Controversies (With a Proposal for Rules of Thumb).pdf
From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Size of this JPG preview of this PDF file: 423 × 599 pixels. Other resolutions: 169 × 240 pixels | 339 × 480 pixels | 542 × 768 pixels | 1,239 × 1,754 pixels.
Original file (1,239 × 1,754 pixels, file size: 244 KB, MIME type: application/pdf, 25 pages)
File information
Structured data
Captions
Summary[edit]
DescriptionProblems of Evidence in Ethnography. A Methodological Reflection on the Goffman-Mead Controversies (With a Proposal for Rules of Thumb).pdf |
English: The contestation of ethnographic authority in the post-truth era revolves around the credibility of ethnographic evidence. This doubting of ethnographic evidence is usually explained as the consequence of postmodern relativism coupled with political opportunism and the social impact of the internet. I argue, however, that evidence in ethnography comprises a much older unresolved methodological problem that arises because: 1. ethnographers' unique observations are difficult to marry with the scientific ideal of replication, but what other tests are then available to support direct observation?; 2. social proximity to the community studied is essential for making direct observations, but how does that correspond to the ideal of outsider verification?; 3. facts are considered central in credibly reporting ethnographic thick description, but is it possible to write ethnography in an interesting way without resorting to the instruments of fiction? These methodological challenges are explored by juxtaposing two ethnographic controversies: Margaret MEAD's "Coming of Age in Samoa" (1973 [1928]) and Alice GOFFMAN's "On the Run. Fugitive Life in an American City" (2014). I conclude with a proposal for methodological rules of thumb for conducting ethnographic research in the 21st century in a way that is (hopefully) both effective and convincing. |
Date | |
Source | https://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/3567 |
Author | Joost Beuving |
Licensing[edit]
This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.
- You are free:
- to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
- to remix – to adapt the work
- Under the following conditions:
- attribution – You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
Date/Time | Thumbnail | Dimensions | User | Comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
current | 12:48, 14 January 2024 | 1,239 × 1,754, 25 pages (244 KB) | Koavf (talk | contribs) | Uploaded a work by Joost Beuving from https://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/3567 with UploadWizard |
You cannot overwrite this file.
File usage on Commons
The following page uses this file:
Metadata
This file contains additional information such as Exif metadata which may have been added by the digital camera, scanner, or software program used to create or digitize it. If the file has been modified from its original state, some details such as the timestamp may not fully reflect those of the original file. The timestamp is only as accurate as the clock in the camera, and it may be completely wrong.
Author | Katja Mruck |
---|---|
Software used | Writer |
Conversion program | OpenOffice.org 3.2 |
Encrypted | no |
Page size | 595 x 842 pts (A4) |
Version of PDF format | 1.4 |