31 Demonstration of field methods in socio-cultural Anthropology

Dr. Aribam Bijayasundari Devi

Contents:

1. Introduction
2. Types of Field Techniques and Methods in Socio-cultural Anthropology
3. Stepwise demonstration or implementation of the Field Methods
4. Few ethical guidelines to follow in the field
5. Summary

Learning Outcomes:

After going through this module, you will be able to know:

•  meaning of fieldwork in socio-cultural anthropology;
•  importance of fieldwork in anthropology;
•  different types of techniques and methods used in socio-cultural field research;
•  how to demonstrate these techniques and methods in the field; and
•  ethical guidelines one must follow in the field.

1. Introduction

Fieldwork in Socio-cultural Anthropology refers to the study of people and their culture in their natural habitat. Anthropological fieldwork has been characterized by the prolonged residence of the investigator, his participation in and observation of the society, and his attempt to understand the inside view of the native people and to achieve the holistic view of a social scientist. Field studies have been the mark of Socio-cultural anthropologists since the nineteenth century when anthropologist first began to move out of the four walled room to explore the so called “untouched and mysterious” cultures and societies.

This module will be discussing about the different types of field methods or techniques used in the field by the Socio-cultural anthropologist. It will also try to highlight the demonstration of these field methods in a sequential manner, which type of field method is best suited for a particular type of situation and limitations one may face during the application of these field methods.

2. Types of Field Techniques and Methods in Socio-cultural Anthropology

As already mentioned above fieldwork is the first hand systematic exploration of the human culture by an anthropologist. Therefore, there are two approaches through which fieldwork can be conducted in socio- cultural anthropology viz., Ethnography and Ethnology.

Ethnography is a descriptive account of the lives of the people in a particular society. In this kind of research, the ethnographer is required to immerse in the culture and everyday life of the people who are the subject of study (britannica.com). Clifford Geertz, the famous American Anthropologist described ethnography as “thick description” to convey that it is both descriptive and interpretive. On the other hand, Ethnology refers to the comparative and analytical study of different cultures on the basis of the ethnographic data. Adam Franz Kollar who propounded the term ethnology described it as “the science of nations and peoples”. However, ethnographic study is considered to be one of the most important approaches for conducting field research in Anthropology so far since most of the other anthropological approaches depended on the ethnographical data.

For conducting an ethnographic field work, different methodology, methods, techniques and tools are demonstrated in the field for purpose of collecting data. It is imperative for every field investigator to have a deeper knowledge about the different types of methods and techniques and tools one would be implementing before landing to the field. The terms methodology, methods, techniques and tools have been used interchangeably many times and it is very difficult to clearly demarcate these terminologies at times. However, in ethnographic or ethnological fieldworks, each of these terms carry different and significant meanings. Here, the term method means the way of conducting and implementing research while methodology means science and philosophy behind all research (Adams John et.al., 2007). Methodology also means the systematic and theoretical analysis of the methods applied in a field of study. On the other hand a method could be the way of conducting and implementing research. A method is a combination of one or more techniques of research applied together to achieve a given end or task. For example, a Case Study or a Focus Group Discussion are methods since they make use of more than one technique such as observation, interview, questionnaire etc to collect the needed information. However, a technique, on the other hand, employment of a single way or manner so as to collect the necessary data or to achieve the target. For example an interview or observation if they are used alone are called as techniques.

A tool is a device or instrument that is required to use in a particular technique to study a particular aspect in the field. For instance, if a field investigator wants to use interview technique then interview guide or interview schedule becomes his or her research tool for collecting data in the field.

Socio-cultural anthropology fieldworks are based on the data collected through different methods and techniques such as observation, interview, administering of questionnaire, case study, focus group discussion, life history and genealogy. However, before starting with any of these techniques one needs to get familiar with the field situations and get acquainted and friendly with the people whom a researcher is going to study. This is called rapport establishment and it is the first and most crucial step of any ethnographic field work.

Rapport Establishment

It is the preliminary step before starting on a fieldwork. Rapport establishment or rapport building means trying to establish a friendly relationship with the people among whom the fieldwork is to be conducted. This includes building up of a sense of trust among the people about the investigator that his or her presence there does not pose any form of threat or harm to the people or community. Cultural anthropologists often strive to build rapport and trust with individuals in the community to carry out research more effectively and authentically before embarking on the field study.

The first task in every successful research is to attempt to build rapport. Establishing rapport is all about matching ourselves with another person. For many, starting a conversation with a stranger is a stressful event; we can be at loss of words, awkward with our body language and mannerisms. Creating rapport at the beginning of a conversation with somebody new will often make the outcome of the conversation more positive.

One of the main point for rapport establishment with people under study is knowing a little bit of their language such as how they greet each other or say ‘hello’ to any new person and to have some knowledge about their cultural pattern. Many times, it proves that hearing single word in their own language even if it is broken in form may open up a floodgate of ‘love’ towards the researcher. It also means that field investigator must be careful about how or when he or she visits a household instead of landing at somebody’s house at a very odd timing. Talking politely and maintaining rapport subconsciously through matching non-verbal signals, including body positioning, body movements, eye contact, facial expressions and tone of voice with the other person are some off the steps to be kept in mind by the researcher.

In an ethnographic fieldwork, a researcher should not be too concern about how much time she or he spends in just freely mingling with the people because the success of the entire fieldwork depends on how much fieldworker and respondent are comfortable about each other. However, one should be careful about not getting over friendly with the respondent, this might lead to biases on the part of the researcher.

Techniques for fieldwork in socio-cultural anthropology Observation

Observation is the first step and the technique used for data collection in the field. It is one of the most extensively used techniques in anthropological fieldwork. Not all observations are scientific and it should be differentiated from mere looking and seeing. As Srivastava supposes that observation may be defined as a systematic viewing which is intentional and planned (Srivastava, 2004). Here the observer is aware that he or she is systematically viewing the unit under study. In this, the observer needs to prepare an observation guide which will help him or her to record and collect the required data. It is one of the most effective techniques through which a social researcher can collect a treasure house of data non-verbally.

In a natural setting, observation starts as soon as the researcher lands in the field starting from the landscape of the area, the infrastructures, the setting of the houses and routine activities of the people. However, in a laboratory setting observations are done under four wall of the laboratory or through the keen eyes of the doctors while observing the patients. Socio-cultural anthropologist conducts fieldworks in the natural settings most of the time.

Certain preliminary understandings are to be kept in mind by the researcher while carrying out observation such as establishing a good rapport with the people under study. In other words, the researcher needs to have a friendly relationship with the local people. He or she should be paying proper attention to jot down every minute details of the situations in life there in the field. The things which are observed should be noted down exactly as it is without interpreting it else it might dilute the real meaning of the situation.

There are many types of observations which are implemented in the field according to the situation and the context.

Participant Observation

One of the main techniques Social anthropologist use is the participant observation and is most of the time the only ethnographic technique used. It is sustained, intensive, extended or of a broad range (Srivastava, 2004). The term ‘participant observation’ was first used by Edward Linderman in his publication called Social Dictionary (1924). It became a very popular and effective technique of field study in anthropology after Malinowski’s extensive study among the Trobariand Inslanders (Argonauts of the Western Pacific) and trend is still continuing. In participant observation, the researcher gets first hand experience of the people and their culture under study. The researcher tends to live with the people, eat with them and also participates in every activity that is happening as a person belonging to that culture.

In this kind of observations, the people under study are more comfortable in opening up continuing with their normal behaviour without any self-consciousness and also without raising any suspicion. This helps the observer to gain greater depth about the social phenomena and also to gather extensive data.

Nevertheless one should be cautious and aware of the problems of bias and reactivity in participant observation. In this technique, the events are interpreted through the single observer’s eyes therefore, his/her personal viewpoints can easily come into play. Again, since the researcher is so involved with the community and the people being studied, chances are that the objectivity might be lost in the process. Besides, as the researcher is a participant in the activities and events being observed, it is easy to influence other people’s behaviour, thereby raising the problem of reactivity influencing what is being observed (online source).

Quasi-participant Observation

In this kind of observation, the researcher role is confined to that of a researcher and he/she declares openly that he/she is a researcher instead of adopting the role in the community itself. Here, the observer actively participates in some of the ordinary activities and observes passively from distance in others. Many anthropologist therefore resort into this practice as only a quasi-participant observation gives thee observer perform both the roles ‘the observer’ and ‘the observed’ instead of disguising himself completely from the people. Therefore, this technique can avoid the demerits of participant observation since it is not always possible for the researcher to take part in every activity of the people under study. As Srivastava (2004) also elaborates that the choice of the field worker and the likes and dislikes should not be compromised while maintaining humility and respect for the people. This situation can be averted in case of quasi-participant observation technique.

Many social research these days are conducted through quasi-participant observations because this gives more freedom to the researcher to learn as a participant when he/she needs to get involved and could be an inactive observer when he/she needs to restrain himself or herself.

Non-participant Observation

In this technique, observation is conducted without active participation of the fieldworker. In this the researcher simply observes the activities of the people as a total outsider. Non-participant observations are useful and are being used by many researchers, however it’s usefulness is questioned in simple societies where it may not be possible to keep a distance from the people. At the same time, pure non-participant observation becomes extremely difficult in certain social situations. One cannot penetrate into the heart of a matter without proper participation in it. One cannot imagine a kind of relationship, when the researcher is always present but never participates. This situation is hardly conducive for both the observer and the group. Kurt Lewin (2012) in his research paper “Field Observation In Social Research” says that there is always a danger of subjective interpretation and there is the likelihood that an inactive or casual observer can misread the social atmosphere or mindset of the people and start characterising them with the observer’s own values rather then of those who are immediately involved. Nevertheless, non-participant observation in its own right can fetch a lot of valuable data. As Warner and Lunt (1939) also suggested that a variety of social situations can be studied by using the technique of inactive observation. These include study of certain factories, retail stores, sacred and secular rituals issues of unemployment and so on (Young, 2012). In non-participant observation, the objectivity or neutrality can be maintained. The observer in this type of observation gives a detached and unbiased view about the group. Besides, very often many people feel shy to share or disclose their secrets to a known person but share it freely to an unknown stranger thinking that it may not have any long lasting impact, non-participant observers therefore get the advantage to catch hold of these information.

Structured Observation or Controlled Observation

According to Srivastava (2004), in structured or controlled observation, the frequency of the occurrence of peculiar features of a particular thing is counted. This kind of observation is carried out according to a definite prearranged plans which also may include considerable experimental process (Young, 2012). Thus, it is difficult to make an objective study and keep the observation free from biases and prejudices. It is normally difficult and also ethically wrong to impose control over the people or the phenomena in anthropological field research, generally controls are imposed on the observer. This helps the observer to have a precise idea about what he/she wants to observe and information collected is reliable and undiluted.

One of the most famous Controlled or structured observation was conducted by Dorothy Thomas among the nursery school children for observing the behaviour of the children (Thomas et al., 1933). This technique can be used for studying various social behaviours in different social situations.

Unstructured Observation or Uncontrolled observation

Unstructured or uncontrolled observation simply records what is naturally occurring in the field setting (Srivastava, 2004). In other words, uncontrolled observation is form of observation which is made in the natural environment without being influenced by any external factor or it is not pre-determined. Most of the information about any social phenomena are gathered through randomly observing the natural environment of the community or the normal and routine activities of the people. Here, the observer does not have any list of items to be observed. Socio-cultural anthropologist mostly indulges in collecting information by randomly observing certain social situations however, this often leads to lose of focus and wasting of long duration of time without much meaningful result.

Interview

Interview is a procedure of collecting data where two or more people come face to face and have verbal interaction with a purpose. It involves at least two people: an interviewer and a respondent. There is distinction between everyday conversation and interview (Kvale,1996). According to Young (2012), interview is “the conversation of gestures”. He also elaborated that interviewing is not a simple two way process between interviewer and the respondent. Voice inflections and halting statements play as much role in the conversation as the facial expressions, body gestures, glances and pauses in between. Goody and Hatt (2006) says interviewing is ‘fundamentally a process of social interaction’. In an interview, the researcher defines and controls the conversation and he/she can direct the flow of communication according to his/her requirements. The interviewer’s personality may often play a role in the interview process such as ethnicity, sex, social status, age, physical appearance, clothing and grooming and overall demeanour give an impact in many ways (Srivastava, 2004). In the initial phase of the fieldwork, ethnographers mainly depend on ‘interview guide’. This is list of topics which guide the interviewer to channelise the interview in the right direction, however this interview guide does not have any structured questions as such. Therefore, these type of interviews are basically like free flowing conversations and is mostly informal in nature.

Besides, there are many forms of interviews which are used in anthropological research. These are structured interview, unstructured interview, personal interview, group interview, focused interview, in-depth interview, clinical interview and repeated interview (Young 2012, Srivastava, 2004).

Structured interview

In structured interview the interviewer prepares a set of questions in advance and seeks the answer of those questions from the respondents. In this type of interviews, the interviewer asks each respondent the same series of questions with very small modifications, the questions mostly have limited sets of response categories, majority of the questions are pre-tested and standardised. While interviewing, the use of words and paraphrasing of the questions as well as the order of questions are kept consistent as far as possible. Besides, the interviewer plays a neutral role and does not try to insert his or her opinion to the respondent.

This type of interview can yield qualitative as well as quantitative data. Therefore, it is widely used for collecting ethnographic data. The advantage of using structured interview is it maintains uniformity and precision. In this the interviewer’s bars can be reduced to a great extent and it is also easy to administer the people under study. However, the interviewer has to remind the respondent from time to time if the flow of the conversation deviates from the original topic. This might sometimes annoy the respondent and it would depend on how skilfully an interviewer handles the situation.

Unstructured interview

In this technique, the interviewer does not have a pre decided set of questions. Therefore, the interviewer has greater freedom and flexibility in the number and sequence of questions. The researcher can come up with any question related with the situation on the spot and also may probe further on it according to the requirements. In this type of interview, the purpose is given more importance than the framework the interview.

Unstructured interview can elicit a lot of general as well as insightful information. However, it could be very time consuming and very often the focus of the interview might be shifted. The interviewer probes the respondent from time to time otherwise the flow of interview might go entirely in a different direction. For collecting deeper qualitative data on a particular social issue or aspect, unstructured interview is mainly used.

Personal or individual interview

When an interview is confined to an individual informant, then it is called as personal or individual interview. This interview is conducted mainly to get information from the key informants in the community such as the traditional healers, priest, village head, mid-wife etc. In this kind of interviews, the availability and willingness of the respondent play an important role.

Group interview

When a group of people is interviewed for ascertaining their opinions or views about a particular social issue, then it is called as group interview. This interviews are conducted to yield a general idea about the people’s perception concerning a particular issue. In this type of interview, a set of questions is prepared by the interviewer and it is ask to the particular group and the response are either recorded or noted down.

Focused interview

Focus interview takes place with an individual known to have been involved in a particular situation (Srivastava, 2004).

In-depth interview

In this technique, the interviewee is encouraged to express freely his/her understanding about an issue related to her/him or ask to share a personal experience in detail. If this interview is repeated after a certain interval of time then it is called as repeated interview.

Clinical interview

The interviews which are taken in order to gauge a person’s physical health or psychological status is called as clinical interview.

Life History

Life history is a qualitative research technique which shows the overall pictures of the respondent’s life and all the important life events. It is also known as life history interview technique since all the informations are collected by interviewing the respondent. The main purpose of this interview is to be able to describe what it is like to be this particular person meaning the person who is being interviewed. Life history not only reveals certain facts about a person’s life experiences but at the same time it uncovers the social situations and issues which could have impacted the person at different point of times. In this technique, many a times the respondent is asked to narrate his or her experiences instead of asking close ended questions. These forms of telling one’s own story in his or her own way is called narrative method.

Life histories most often focuses on a specific aspect of a person’s life, such as work life or a special role in some part of the life of a community or else it focuses on specific historical event, issue, time, or place (cited from Gubrium and Holstein, 2002). Through life histories, person keeps the worthwhile memories, experiences, and collective values alive by telling others about them or putting them in a form that may last longer than ourselves. In a life story interview, the interviewee is a story teller, the narrator of the story of his or her own life; the interviewer is a guide, or director, in this process. The two together are collaborators, composing and constructing a story the teller can be pleased with (Gubrium and Holstein, 2002).

However, in this type of interview, the quality of the interview depends highly on the type of relationship the interviewer shares with the interviewee. There is high chances that when you are asking somebody to tell his or her life story or history about certain events, the person might deviate from the original incident and may not maintain its authenticity instead he or she may reproduce into something which he or she thinks you might like to hear or you might be looking for.

Research Tools used for fieldwork in socio-cultural anthropology Interview Schedule

An interview schedule is a research tool used for collecting qualitative as well as quantitative data in the field. It is a standardised set of questions which are already pre-tested well in advance before administering it to the field. In this, the researcher and the respondent are in face to face contact and the interview schedule is filled by the researcher himself or herself and interprets the questions as and when necessary.

Here, Goody and Hatt (1952) defines interview schedule as “a set of questions which are asked by an interviewer and is filled in on the spot in a face to face interaction with another person”. From this definition, it is quite clear that the questions are asked and filled right there in the field as the interview proceeds. This provides good opportunity for the researcher to make the respondent understand the questions if there is any doubt. Therefore, the data yielded through this research device are quite accurate and trustworthy. There is also very less room for incomplete interviews since the interviewer can always go back to the same respondent and complete if there is any partially filled interview schedule according to the convenience of the respondent. Besides, interview schedule can be used on both literate and illiterate people since the interviewer is going to be around during the time of interview to help.

However, this interview tool could be very expensive for the researcher since it needs a lot of physical documentation of the facts and also incurring of personal cost. After collecting the data on papers, the researcher has to fit it electronically for accurate analysis, these might consume a lot of time and prove time consuming. As the interview is going to be through personal contact with the respondent, the quality of data you receive will often depend on the ability of the interviewer.

Questionnaire

A questionnaire is a tool for collecting and recording information about a particular issue of interest in anthropological research . It is mainly made up of a list of questions which include clear instructions and space for answers or administrative details. Questionnaires do not involve face to face interaction between the interviewer and the respondent unlike interview schedule. The questions are mostly closed ended or answer categories are already provided as options. The questionnaires are generally sent through mail or by post to the informants to be answered as specified in a covering letter, but otherwise without further assistance from the sender. Postal and electronic questionnaires are also known as self-completion questionnaires since the respondents complete them by themselves in their own time.

For administering questionnaires, the respondents are made aware of the purpose and the objective of the research before filling up the questionnaire and also made them known about the expected time for receiving back the completed questionnaires. Many a time, it happens that the researcher has to remind the respondent to send back the completed questionnaire. Therefore, the researcher needs to send or administer the questionnaires well ahead of the expected time limit. In other words, the researcher needs to keep a good amount of time between the administration of questionnaires unto the collection of the completed questionnaires. Again, there could be a lot of discrepancies in the way the questionnaires are filled and very often questionnaires are found incomplete or only partially filled. Apart from this, many questionnaires might not come back on time or might not come back at all and the whole process of administering the questionnaires, following up and the final collection might consume a whole lot of time. However, questionnaire is cost saving and easy to use and convenient and the data are fairly unbiased.

Research methods used for fieldwork in socio-cultural anthropology Case Study

As described by Srivastava (2004), case study is a detailed account of the generic development of an individual, a group, an institution, an association, a community or the total society. In this method both interview and observation techniques are used to collect the necessary data. Anthropologist may present the case studying the form of a monograph for instance the study of Coorgs by MN Srinivas and Evans Pritchard’s study of the Nuer Tribe. Another way of presenting case study is by comparing a number of cases pertaining to the same phenomena aiming to arrive at certain submissions (Srivastava, 2004).

A case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon in depth and within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident (Yin, 1984). In other words, you would use the case study method because you wanted to understand a real-life phenomenon in depth, but such understanding encompassed important contextual conditions because they were highly pertinent to your phenomenon of study (Yin and Davis, 2007). Now a day, case study method has become one of the major modes of social science analysis including anthropology. Case study usually has a double purpose: on one hand, it attempts to arrive at a comprehensive understanding of the group under study and on the other hand, it attempts to develop a general theoretical statements about regularities in social structure and process. It is useful for collecting detailed qualitative accounts which not only helps to explore or describe the data in real-life environment, but also helps to explain the complexities of real- life situations which may not be captured through experimental or survey research. Besides, in case study, the examination of the data is most often conducted within the context of its use, that is, within the situation in which the activity takes place (Zainal, 2007).

Along with the numbers usefulness of a case study method, it is not free from certain forms of difficulties in application. As Yin (1984) has rightly noted “too many times, the case study investigator has been sloppy, and has allowed equivocal evidence or biased views to influence the direction of the findings and conclusions”. Case studies provide very little basis for scientific generalisation since they use a small number of subjects, some conducted with only one subject. The question commonly raised is “How can you generalise from a single case?” (Yin, 1984). Besides, case studies are often labelled as being too long, difficult to conduct and producing a massive amount of documentation (Yin, 1984). In particular, case studies of ethnographic or longitudinal nature can elicit a great deal of data over a period of time. The danger comes when the data are not managed and organised systematically (Zainal, 2007).

Genealogy

The genealogical method is the process by which a researcher a collection of data about the kinship, family and marriage which are prepared through the techniques of observation and interview. In this a detail kinship lineage is traced about a person termed as ‘Ego’ which includes tracing both ancestors and descendants as long as ego could recount from his or her memories. Then, this is expressed graphically in a document called genealogy that shows family connections the ego or the respondent. This document is housed in a graphical representation of social and historical situation, making it possible to give an overview showing their members in generations. Here ego is the person through which the genealogy is being traced or ‘the person of reference’.

The genealogical method was invented by W.H.R. Rivers (1864—1922) during the Torres Straits Expedition of 1898-99. According to Rivers, its primary purpose was to improve the analysis of social organization, i.e., the concrete actuality of interpersonal relations and living arrangements. Later on, Malinowski(1922) defined genealogy as “synoptic chart of a number of connected relations of kinship”.

The genealogical method has been used in the present times by combining with ego-centred network analysis. It has also been foundational in studies of the migration of ethnic groups to the United States. Most striking has been its application in medical anthropology where the history of a disease could be traced in a certain group of people or a population (Srivastava, 2004). Besides this, when a fieldworker prepares genealogies, he or she not only prepares a genealogical chart but respondents can also keep an account of their kins and affines. The kinship chart, therefore, is an analytical tool as well as an ensemble of rules according to which the participants are expected to behave (Barnes, 1978).

However, in spite of the best efforts of the fieldworker, this method is entirely depended on the respondent’s recalling power. In other words, many times the respondent might not be able to recall all the names and other details of their ancestors beyond a certain number of generations and these might lead to incomplete genealogy. Again as the given information is entirely from a person’s memory, it also poses a threat to the reliability of the data obtained.

Focus Group Discussion

A focus group is a planned, facilitated discussion among a small group of stakeholders designed to obtain perceptions in a defined area of interest in a permissive, non-threatening environment (USAID, 2008). Focus group interviews are interactive events guided by a skilled moderator (interviewer) whose ability to stimulate participation, guide discussion, and probe directly affects both success in meeting research objectives and the quality of the data obtained. Focus groups are good for initial concept exploration, generating creative ideas, testing ideas and determining difference among various groups of people. This also helps in understanding the beliefs, and perceptions of a specific group or population, which are then communicated to policymakers and program planners. This method is dynamic and process driven and attempts to maintain the interaction predominantly within the group rather than between the participating individuals and the interviewer/moderator.

Focus groups typically consist of 7-10 people drawn from a population that the researcher is interested in. It is best to select a group that is relatively homogenous in order to reduce inhibitions and facilitate interaction. It is also important for the discussion moderator to create an environment where everyone is expected to participate and no perspective will be favoured. The moderator poses some open-ended questions to guide the discussion, taking notes and recording the session so that the information can be analyzed later (USAID, 2008).

Ideally, either two moderators or one moderator and an assistant should be available to facilitate the focus group. Moderators should be mentally alert, free from distractions, skilled at listening to others in group situations, and able to listen and think at the same time. Effective time management is another essential aspect here and also the ability know when a topic is exhausted and when to wrap up the discussion (USAID, 2008).

These days tape recorders are being used for recording focus group discussions however they are prone to pick up background noises. The moderator can attempt to make notes or an assistant can try to capture exact phrases and statements made by participants without interfering the course of discussion.

Notes should be complete and useable in the event the tape recorder stops working (USAID, 2008).

In spite of all the usefulness a focus group discussion has, this method is not free from certain applicational issues. United States Agency for International Development (2008) noted that the multiple voices of the participants during a focus group discussion and also the flexibility in process structure often results in limited control by the researcher. Alternatively, if facilitation is poor and/or the group participants are not well selected, the results of the discussion may reflect only the views of the most dominant participants.

Notes Taking and research aids

Taking notes is an extremely important aspect of fieldwork. It includes writing down details of observation, producing transcript of conversations and interview sessions, describing the experience of living in different culture and describing the usefulness of the techniques and methods in different field situations and improvising it according to the needs (Srivastava, 2004).

Again using research aids s extremely important. Research aids means audio visual instruments or devices use for enhancing the deeper understanding of a culture and also to retain the original memory of the people and the different experiences. This includes tape recorder, video camera, digitised camera etc. These help in capturing the original voice and producer of interview sessions and also the people and the area in their original settings. It gives vivid memory of the things happened there and remains for a long time. Ethnographic films are being made these days and these are possible because of these feel aids.

3. Stepwise demonstration or implementation of the Field Method

    Step 1: Reviewing of all the available literatures through online searching or by visiting libraries

Step 2: Formulation of a Research Problem and deciding on the relevant of the research and keeping of clear cut goals of the research

Step 3: Deciding on the place of fieldwork and also doing a back ground check about the culture and language of the place

Step 4: Reaching the field place and making arrangement for staying which can also be prior to reaching the field

Step 5: Seeking permission from the local authorities like the District Collector, Village Head, Village Chief, Sarpanch (Head of the village panchayat) or any organisation functioning at the place and whose permission is required

Step 5: Rapport establishment or trust building with the people of the area and gaining their trust and letting them known about the purpose of this fieldwork and also identifying the key informants

Step 6: Implementation of the field techniques such as observation and befitting interview techniques or administration of interview schedule or questionnaires on the topic of study and later on collecting the questionnaires

Step 7: Application of different field methods such as case study, genealogies or focus group discussions

Step 8: Taking field notes and using of aides including video taping, recording the interviews and taking photographs simultaneously with data collection

Step 9: Wrapping up of the fieldwork after obtaining the required information

Step 10: Fitting the data electronically and analysing it manually or through social research different softwares like Atlas.ti

Step11: Writing of the final report

4. Few ethical guidelines to follow in the field

A big issue in anthropological fieldworks is the question of ethics. It basically that addresses questions about morality, including good and bad, right and wrong, justice and virtue, etc.

Few Ethical Guidelines during fieldwork

Getting informed Consent

A respondent should be informed about the purpose of research and the probable outcome. Writing down the informations, recording or videotaping and taking photographs should be with the consent of the respondent.

Respect for Persons

Individuals must be treated as free and autonomous. This means that participants must freely agree (in writing) to participate in your study with no coercion or harmful consequence should they elect not to participate. Participants must also be free to end their participation in your study at any stage during its development.

Participants with diminished capacity must also be respected and protected. The ability for self-determination can become limited due to illness, mental disability, or physical circumstances. Therefore, investigators must protect the welfare of people who participate in their research. This includes maintaining confidentiality in terms of their participation and the data collected from their participation (Watkins, 2016).

Beneficence

Beneficence means not harming the participant physically, emotionally or psychologically, The investigator needs to maximize the benefit and minimize any harm or risk to the participants in the study.

Justice

The principle of justice applies to the population that you choose for your study. You should not choose a population just because they are easily available, in a compromised position, or because they are open to manipulation. The burden for research should be fairly distributed and related to the problem being studied. In addition, participants have a right to know the purpose of the research. Thus, truthfulness is a necessary ingredient of the research design.

Integrity

One should be forthright in describing to your participants the nature of your research, spelling out the duration and nature of your relationship with them. Further, you must treat the data you gather honestly, only drawing from it those conclusions that can be legitimately justified (Watkins, 2016).

Summary

The module Demonstration of field methods in socio-cultural anthropology will help the learner to understand the meaning of fieldwork and its importance. Fieldwork plays a major role in social and cultural anthropology in providing information about the societies and cultures which are never studied. This module also highlights the different types of techniques, methods and tools used in conducting a socio-cultural fieldwork. The techniques of fieldwork include observation such as participant observation, quasi-participant observation, non-participant observation, structured and unstructured observation. Different types of interviews are also discussed in this module. The interviews are namely structured interview, unstructured interview, personal interview, group interview, clinical interview, in-depth interview and focus interview. Besides, this module also discusses about life history as a form of interview and the research tools like interview schedules and questionnaires. Fieldwork methods like case study, genealogies and focus group discussion are also elaborated here so that the leaner may be able to implement them in the field. The present module also throws a light to the different steps a fieldworker should follow while conducting a field study. Towards the end it discusses about the ethical guidelines one should follow and maintain in every field research.