Field Research

Sociological Research SOCI 1306 Field Research Sociologists seldom conduct their research in small, constrained locations. Sociologists, instead, venture out into the world. Wherever individuals live, work, or play, they come into subjects. The process of collecting original data in a natural setting is known as field research. In order to carry out field research, sociologists need to be prepared to enter unfamiliar settings and watch, engage in, or experience those worlds. It is the sociologists who are out of their element in field work, not the subjects. While interacting with or observing individuals, the researcher collects data. The most important thing about field research is that it happens in the natural setting of the subject, which might be a hospital, airport, mall, beach resort, homeless shelter, tribal hamlet, coffee shop or DMV. The goal of the study is to observe particular behaviours in that context, even if field research frequently starts in that location. The best way to observe people's thoughts and behaviours is through field work. It aims to comprehend the reasons behind their actions. But when there are so many factors present in a natural setting, researchers can find it difficult to pinpoint cause and effect. Furthermore, although field research searches for correlations, it is unable to demonstrate a causal link between two variables due to its limited sample size. In fact, a large portion of the data collected in sociology identifies correlations rather than causes and effects. Researchers may pose questions like "What really goes on in the kitchen of the most popular diner on campus?" or "What is it like to be homeless?" at the start of a field study. If a researcher want to examine a particular setting from the inside out, participant observation might be a helpful technique. All field researchers want to do is watch and absorb. In this kind of environment, the researcher will precisely record all observations while being vigilant and receptive to whatever occurs. Questions will soon become more focused as patterns appear, observations will give rise to hypotheses, and theories will direct the researcher's data analysis and result generation. The goal of sociological researchers John S. Lynd and Helen Merrell Lynd's study of American small towns was modified while they were gathering data. At first, they intended to concentrate their research on how religion functions in American communities. As they gathered data, they came to the conclusion that this socioeconomic group's more pertinent concern was the impact of urbanisation and industrialization. The Lynds altered the goal of their study but did not alter their procedures. This influenced the format of their published findings, Middletown: A Study in Modern American Culture (Lynd & Lynd, 1929). The Lynds were clear about what their goal was. The residents of Muncie, Indiana, were aware of the purpose of the researchers' presence. However, some sociologists might rather remain anonymous. The primary benefit of covert participant observation is that it gives the researcher access to members of a group as they are acting in their genuine, everyday environments. Getting into a situation without upsetting other people's behaviour patterns is a difficulty, too. It takes time and work to become an insider in any group, organisation, or subculture. It is necessary for researchers to act someone they are not. The procedure could entail networking, role-playing, establishing relationships, or applying for a job. Some researchers pose as members of the group they are studying for months or even years after they are inside. They are unable to become overly involved, though, as spectators. They must employ the sociological viewpoint while keeping their goal in mind. In this way, they shed light on frequently overlooked societal tendencies. The majority of the data acquired by participant observation is qualitative, not quantitative, so the final products are frequently interpretative or descriptive. The researcher may write about what they saw and experienced and share their results in a book or article. Journalist Barbara Ehrenreich carried out this kind of investigation for her book Nickel and Dimed. Ehrenreich shared an idea to her editor one day during lunch. How can anyone survive on minimum wage labour? She pondered how lowwage people made ends meet. A study has to be conducted. Her editor surprised her by saying, "Why don't you do it?" Ehrenreich ended up falling into the working class as a result. She moved out of her lovely house for a few months and lived and worked with folks who, for the most part, lacked a college degree and employable skills. She applied for and worked undercover as a waitress, cleaning lady, carer for the elderly, and employee of a retail chain. She solely utilised the money she made from those jobs to cover her housing, food, clothing, and transportation expenses while she was a participant. She came to the evident conclusion that it is very difficult to survive on minimum wage employment. She also saw and saw sentiments that many people in the middle and higher classes seldom give any thought to. She saw directly how working class employees were treated. She seen the drastic lengths individuals would go to in order to live and make ends meet. She talked of coworkers who worked seven days a week, two or three jobs, lived in vehicles, couldn't afford to address long-term health issues, were fired at random, had to submit to drug testing, and came and went from homeless shelters. She shed light on certain parts of that existence by outlining the challenging working conditions and subpar treatment that low-wage employees endure. After returning to her actual job as a well-paid writer, she authored a book that has been extensively read and utilised in many college classes.