Research methods ‐‐ researching peers and familiar settings

Abstract

Abstract This paper presents a review of the research methods literature examining the benefits and pitfalls of doing research in familiar settings and amongst peers, and encompasses educational literature, and material from the disciplines of anthropology and sociology within which very similar problems are encountered. The advantages of researching in familiar settings, for example the relative lack of culture shock or disorientation, the possibility of enhanced rapport and communication, the ability to gauge the honesty and accuracy of responses, and the likelihood that respondents will reveal more intimate details of their lives to someone considered empathetic are juxtaposed with the problems that proponents of insider research nevertheless acknowledge. In addition to the oft‐cited problems of over‐familiarity and taken‐for‐granted assumptions, large amounts of impression management may be required of the insider researcher in order to avoid manifesting out‐group or undesirable characteristics. There may be greater expectations of an insider than of a stranger, particularly with regard to active participation in the social world of those under study. The relativity of insider status is also discussed, for researchers need to be aware of the partialness of their insider knowledge and to be wary of assuming that their views are more widespread or representative than is the case. The strategies employed by researchers in order to deal with problems of researching familiar settings are outlined, together with the costs incurred, for while strangers may risk 'going native', there are also dangers in the obverse possibility of a native 'going stranger'. The second section of the paper deals with the problems of researching peers. In contrast to the relative abundance of literature on researching in familiar settings, there is scant literature on this related area. The specific difficulties of undertaking this kind of research are highlighted, including the blurring of roles of researcher and researched, and deciding which role to adopt: researcher, friend, or a combination. A particular problem of conducting research on trained social scientists is their tendency to offer a version of the world already filtered through the lens of their particular discipline. The potential discomfort of being subjected to peer assessment confronts those who research their peers, who are therefore open to professional scrutiny of their research competence. The impact of structural differences between researcher and researched is discussed, together with problems of antipathy towards the researcher. Given the relatively small and closed occupational world of academia, confidentiality, both in relation to researcher and researched, is an important issue also examined. Additional informationNotes on contributorsJohn Hockey John Hockey is Lecturer in Sociology in the Faculty of Economics and Social Science, University of the West of England, Bristol.