The document outlines the methodologies and practices involved in field research, emphasizing direct observation and qualitative interviews as key data collection methods. It details various roles of the observer, strategies for gaining access to subjects, and the importance of recording observations to enhance validity. Additionally, it discusses the strengths and weaknesses of field research, noting its ability to provide deep insights while facing challenges related to reliability and generalizability.

1. 1
Field Research

2. OUTLINE
 Introduction
 Topics Appropriate to Field Research
 The Various Roles of the Observer
 Asking Questions
 Gaining Access to Subjects
 Recording Observations
 Linking Field Observation and Other Data
 Illustrations of Field Research
 Strengths and Weaknesses of Field
Research

3. 3
•Field research encompasses two different
methods of obtaining data:
•Direct observation
•Asking questions
•May yield qualitative and quantitative data
•Often no precisely defined hypotheses to be
tested
•Used to make sense out of an ongoing
process

4. 4
•Gives comprehensive perspective – enhances
validity
•Go directly to phenomenon, observe it as
completely as possible
•Especially appropriate for topics best
understood in their natural setting
•Street level drug dealers to distinguish
customers
•Ethnography: Focuses on detailed and
accurate description rather than explanation

5. 5
•Complete participant: Participates fully; true
identity and purpose are not known to
subjects
•Participant-as-observer: Make known your
position as researcher and participate with the
group
•Observer-as-participant: Make known your
position as a researcher; do not actually
participate
•Complete observer: Observes without
becoming a participant

6. 6
•Qualitative Interview: Is based on a set of topics
to be discussed in depth rather than based on the
use of standardized questions
•Field research is often a matter of going where
the action is and simply watching and listening
•Also a matter of asking questions & recording
answers
•Field research interviews are must less
structured than survey interviews
•Ideally set up and conducted just like a normal,
casual conversation

7. 7
•Begins with initial contact: Sponsor, Letter,
Phone Call, Meeting
•Access to formal organizations
•Find a sponsor, write a letter to executive
director, arrange a phone call, arrange a
meeting
•Access to subcultures
•Find an informant (usually person who works
with criminals), use that person as your “in”
•Snowball sampling is useful as informant
identifies others, who identify others, etc.

8. 8
•Controlled probability sampling used rarely;
purposive sampling is common
•Bear in mind two stages of sampling:
•To what extent are the situations available for
observation representative of the general
phenomena you wish to describe and explain?
•Are your actual observations within those
total situations representative of all
observations?

9. 9
•Note taking, tape recording when interviewing
and when making observations (dictation)
•Videotaping or photographs can make records of
“before” and “after” some physical design change
•Field notes: Observations are recorded as
written notes, often in a field journal; first take
sketchy notes and then rewrite your notes in
detail
•Structured observations: Observers mark
closed-ended forms, which produce numeric
measures

10. 10
•Useful to combine field research with surveys
or data from official records
•Baltimore study of the effects of
neighborhood physical characteristics on
residents’ perceptions of crime problems
(Taylor, Shumaker, & Gottfredson, 1985)
•Perceptions: Surveys
•Physical problems: Observations, actual
population and crime information - census
data & crime reports from police records

11. 11
•Counted only when offense is seen; takes place
only in certain locations; crime of stealth and not
confrontation
•Prevalence defined as ratio of shoplifters:
shoppers
•Subjects selected by systematic sampling, e.g.,
every 20th shopper was followed by a field observer
•Other research staff were employed as shoplifters
to measure reliability of observers’ detections
•Could adjust prevalence rate with reliability
figures

12. 12
•Rate of use: # of people wearing: # of cars
observed
•Stationary observers at roadsides rather than
mobile
•Placed at controlled intersections
•Sampled cars on three dimensions: Time of day,
roadway type, observation site; stratified sites by
density of auto ownership (correlated with
population)
•Emphasized marking “U” when uncertain

13. 13
•Alcohol has a disinhibiting effect which can lead to
aggression and subsequent violence
•Researcher set out to learn how situational
factors promote or inhibit violence in Australian
bars/nightclubs
•Observers in pairs stayed 2-6 hours multiple
times at 23 sites, “complete participant” –
narratives written later
•Correlates: Violence in bars frequented by
working-class males; discomfort & boredom,
drinking patterns, management issues (cover, food
availability, bouncers)

14. 14
•Provides great depth of understanding
•Flexibility (no need to prepare much in advance)
•More appropriate to measure behavior than
surveys
•High validity; quant. measures – Incomplete
picture
•Low reliability– Often very personal
•Generalizability – Personal nature may produce
findings that may not be replicated by another
•Precise probability samples can’t normally be
drawn