Covert Participant Observation

1065 Words3 Pages

Assess the usefulness of participant observation in sociological research. In this short essay I will give a skilled weighed argument of the usefulness and non-usefulness of a participant observation. I will back up the points made during this piece with sociologists I have studied. After, which I will then reach a conclusion where I will justify the argument in depth. Observation means watching behaviour in real-life settings. A covert participant observation is when the subject(s) you’re studying doesn’t know that you’re actually studying them. An overt participant observation means that the subject(s) you’re studying are aware of the fact that you’re studying them. There are many reasons …show more content…

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

More about Covert Participant Observation

Open Document