Handbook of Methods in Cultural Anthropology

400 Pages·1998·26.36 MB·English

by  H. Russell Bernard

Zripadoceskri Um.Verz.lta
<
v Plzni
Fknaktultn. 1w.~l~lll.t.nJ.(~h RtudH
edra socwlni a kulturni
antropolo!,rie
nIi IF'"
Handbook of Methods in
If
Cultural Anthropology
I
~\J
Upadoee.k8 unlv
Pmu
Fakulta hum .el"Zita v
Katedra Boct...:l amtnfch studif
akult
Tylova /1:8I., 301 2" antropologie
tel 5 Plzeti
.;019/ 7322466
l
I
Handbook ofMethods in Hanclli~~ 9t~4t1Iods)in
l
Cultural Anthropology
Cultural Anthropolog~
l
EDITOR:
H. Russell Bernard, University ofFlorida l
EDITORIAL BOARD
l
Carol R. Ember, Human Relations Area Files tI
•
Michael Herzfeld, Harvard University
lane H. Hill, University ojArizona 1
Roy A. Rappaport, deceased
Nancy Scheper-Hughes, University ojCalifornia, Berkeley
Thomas Schweizer, University ojCologne l
,--\(;'-1
cj~"
II
H. Russell Bemard
editor
l
l
(7)~)
l
,ALTiy\I\IRA
PRESS
l
A Division ofSage Publications, Inc.
Walnut Creek. London. New De/hi
1918
Copyright © 1998 by.Alta.Mirarress
", <J ..<.... , .~.. '
All rightsreseered.No partofthis'book maybereproduced orutilized in anyform byany
means, electronic ormechanical,includingphotocopying,recording, orbyanyinformation
storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Contents
For information address:
AltaMiraPress Preface 7
ADivisionofSage Publications, Inc.
H.RUSSELL BERNARD
1630 North Main Street, Suite 367
Walnut Creek, California 94596 USA I. Introduction: On Method and Methods in Anthropology 9
[email protected] tt. RUSSELL BERNARD
http://www.altamirapress.com
Part I: Perspectives
Sage Publications, Ltd.
2. Epistemology: The Nature and Validation of 39
6 Bonhill Street
Anthropological Knowledge
London, EC2A 4PU
United Kingdom TlIOMAS SCHWEIZER
3. In Search of Meaningful Methods 89
Sage Publications India Pvt. Ltd.
lAMES FERNANDEZ and M1CHAEL HERZFELD
M-32 Mnrket
Greater Kuilash I 4. Research Design and Research Strategies 131
New Delhi 100 048 JEFFREY c. JOHNSON
India
5. Ethics 173
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGlNG-IN-PUBLICATlONS DATA CAROLYN FLUEHR-LOBBAN
6. Feminist Methods 203
CHRISTtNE WARD GAlLEY
Handbook ofmethods in cultural anthropologyI H. Russell Bernard,
editor. 7. TransnationaI Research 235
p. cm. ULF HANNERZ
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Part II: Acquiring Information
ISBN 0-7619-9151-4 (cloth)
I. Ethnology-Methodology, I. H. Russell (Harvey
8. Participant Observation 259
Russell), 1940-
KATHLEEN M. DEWALT and BILLlE R. DEWALT,
GN345 .H37 1998
with CORAL B. WAYLAND
305.8'OOI-ddc21 98-25423
CIP 9. Direct Systematic Observation of Behavior 301
ALLEN JOttNSON and ROSS SACKETT
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OFAMERICA
10. Person-Centered Interviewing and Observation 333
ROBERT I. LEVY and DOUGLAS W. HOLLAN
98 99 00 01 02 03 04 7 6 5 4 3 2 I
II. Structured Interviewing and Questionnaire Construction 365
SUSAN C. WELLER
Editorial Production: Carole Bernard/ECS
12. Discourse-Centered Methods 411
Cover Design: Joanna Ebenstein
sSJ_~:~1 BRENDA F.'RNElL and LAURA R. GRAHAM
(:::-/1
13. From Pictorializing to Visual Anthropology 459
FADWA EL GUlNDI
14. Fieldwork in the Archives: Merhods and Sources 513
in Historical Anthropology
CAROLlNE B. BRETTELL
Part III: Interpreting Information
~
15. Reasoning with Numbers Preface I
549
W. PENN HANDWERKER and STEPHEN P. BORGATTt
16. Text Analysis: Qualitative and Quantitative Methods 595 "I
H. RUSSELL BERNARD and GERY W. RYAN I
17. Cross-Cultural Research 647
CAROL R. EMBER and MELVlN EMBER 'l
Part IV: Applying and Presenting Anthropology
18. Methods in Applied Anthropology 691 CaroleBernardandIlivedin Cologne, Germany, for ayearin 1994-1995. Thomas
ROBERT T. TROTfER. 11 and JEAN J. SCHENSUL Schweizer,directoroftheInstitute for Ethnologyatthe UniversityofCologne,had
19. Presenting Anthropology to Diverse Audiences 737 invitedmeto be anAlexandervonHumboldtresearchscholarthere. Itwasthe sort
CONRAD PHILLlP KOTTAK ofopportunity scholars dream about: the chanceto do nothingbut read, write, and
l
reflect, and to do all this while interactingwith graduate students and colleagues.
About the Authors 763 No classes. No committeework. Paradise.
Author Index 775 This handbook is partly aproductofthatyear. Ihave been interested in social
Subject Index 795 research methods for as long as I can remember, so I took the opportunity in l
Cologneto readandread,andthenreadsome more. My goalwastobecomebetter
I
grounded in the range ofmethods used by scholars across the social sciencesand
to understandtherolethatanthropologistshadplayedin the developmentofsocial
l
researchmethods.
The idea for this handbook emerged in conversations about all this bye-mail,
with Mitch Alien, editor of AltaMira Press. It seemed like a good time to take
stock. The last handbook, edited by Raoul Naroll and Ronald Cohen, had been l I
published in 1970. The contentofthe discipline ofcultural anthropology and the
demography ofthe profession had gone through big changessince then. In 1970,
most anthropologists went into academicjobs. Today, most are in nonacademic
l
jobs. Fewer graduate students do fieldwork in small, isolated communities now.
They couldn't, even ifthey wanted to, for such communities are an endangered
,
social species. In 1972, women received just 32% of the Ph.D. degrees in
,
anthropology in the V.S. In 1995, women received 59% ofthe doctorates. "I
Therewas also the resurgenceofthe greatepistemologydebatethathas so long
pervaded the social sciences. Each side claims support from an indisputable
observation: On the onehand, peopleconstructtheirown realities, andthe process
7
8 PREFACE
H. RUSSELL BERNARD :.
is dynamic, ever-changing;on the other, there are regularities in human behavior
andhuman thought. While rhetorical energy is spent arguing that (a)the first fact
renders impossible the pursuit ofthe second or that (b) the second fact renders
irrelevantourworrying about the first. working scholars ofall persuasionsare out
theredoing empirical research. The coreofthe discipline, it seemedto me, was in
the fact that nearly all cultural anthropologists choose from the same awesomely
Introduction
large kit oftools.
My goal, then, from the beginning has been to put together a handbook that On Method and Methods
would be useful to academic anthropologists and practicing anthropologists; to
in Anthropology
interpretivists and positivists; to idealists and materialists.
No project ofthis magnitude can be managedalone. Six colleaguesgraciously
agreed to join this project and serve as a board ofeditors: Carol Ember (HRAF),
MichaelHerzfeld(Harvard), Jane Hill (Arizona), Roy ("Skip")Rappaport (Michi
gan; deceased), Nancy Scheper-Hughes (UC-Berkeley), and Thomas Schweizer
(Cologne). When Ithought about seniorpeople whose work was respectedby col
leaguesacross the field, Rappaport'snamecame immediatelyto mind. Tragically,
he didn't live to see the end ofthe project.
Right from the beginning, the members ofthe editorial board contributed ideas
about chapters that needed to be included in the handbook and about who might This introduction has two parts. In Part I, I offersome remarks about the history
writethosechapters.Theyreadthechaptersandofferedcriticaladviceand support. andscopeofmethods in culturalanthropology. Later, in Part2, Idescribe in some
Three ofthem (Ember, Herzfeld, and Schweizer)contributed chapters themselves. detail what is in the various chapters.
I am grateful to all.
Over the years, I have come to expect nothing less than the best ofeditorial
guidance from Mitch Alien. He never disappoints, neverholds back, neverpulls Part I: On Methods in Anthropology
punches. I am alsograteful to the following colleagues(in alphabeticalorder)who
Method is about choice-thechoiceoftaking a verstehenorapositivist approach;
readvariouschaptersofthehandbookin draftandprovideddetailedreviews:Devon
the choiceofcollectingdatabyparticipantobservationor in the archives,bydirect
Brewer,KarenBrodkin,EdwardBrnner,DouglasCaulkins, GarryChick, VictorDe
observationorby interviewing; thechoiceofmaking quantitativemeasurementsor
Munck, WilliamDressier,DamaDufour,RobertV.Kemper,DavidKertzer,Maxine
collecting oral, written, or visual text. The authors in this handbook deal with all
Margolis, and Alvin Wolfe.
these choices, and more.
Special thanks go to Ronald Cohen, my colleagueat the University ofFlorida.
I will have a lot more to say later about the content of the chapters in this
His was a pioneering effort in 1970 when he and Naroll put together that first
handbook. In this first part ofthe introduction, though, I want to make clearwhy
handbook ofmethods in cultural anthropology.
this book is important-for all social scientists, not just for anthropologists.
My thanks also go to the Alexandervon Humboldt Stiftung, Bonn, and to the
Conventional wisdom notwithstanding, anthropology has always been about
CollegeofLiberalArts and Sciencesatthe UniversityofFlorida forsupportduring
methods, from the earliest days ofthe discipline right up to the present. Anthro
1994-95.
pologists have been prodigious consumers and adapters ofresearch methods, and
I know that I cannot thank sufficiently my partner, Carole Bemard, for her
they have made important contributions to the big social sciencetoolkit as well. I
support all alongthe wayand specificallyforherwork copyeditingandproducing
am going to document this and put it in perspectivehere.
the final product. But I can try.
There has always been a certain tension between those who would make
H. Russell Bemard anthropologyaquantitativ~scienceandthosewhosegoal itistoproducedocuments
Gainesville, FL
July 20, 1998
9
10 BERNARD Introduction 11
I
i
that con~ey the richness-i~d~ed,. the uniqueness-ofhuman thought and experi (and last) edition was published in 1951 andwas reprinled five times until 197I.
ence. Enc Wolfcaptured this In his wonderful aphorism that "Anthropology is the Thatfinal edition was editedby BrendaSeligmannand"acommitteeofthe Royal l
most humanistic of the sciences and the most scientific of the humanities" Anthropological Institute" Ihat included Ihe likes ofE. E. Evans-Pritchard, Daryl
(1964:88). Studentsofcultural anthropologymay beaskedearlyin theirtrainingto Forde, Raymond Firth, Meyer Fortes, and W. E. Le Gros Clark-and is must
take a stand for interpretivism or positivism, humanism or science, qualitative or readingforanyoneinterestedin learningaboutfieldmethods. Stripawaythe quaint
l
quantitative research. language andthe vestiges ofcolonialism-uasporting rifle and ashotgun are . ..
Readers of this handbook will find no support for this polarized vision of ofgreatassistancein many districts wherethe natives may welcomeextrameat in
method. Instead, they will find scholars laying out the methods they use in the shapeofgamekilledby theirvisitor" (RAI 1951:29~and thebook is still full
practlcmg their craft-a craft rooted, for every author in this book, in one ofthe of useful, late-model advice about how to conduct a census, how to handle l
most essentially empirical traditions in all of science: participant observation photographicnegativesinthe field, whatquestionsto askaboutsexualorientation,
fieldwork. Some authors are identified with interpretivist methods, some with infanticide, food production, warfare, art .. .The book isjust atreasure.
quantitative methods for the collection and analysis of data but none dismiss In the 19205, leading sociologists were concernedwith moving their discipline
l
humanism orscienceandnone asktheirreadersto chooseonce'andforall between away from an emphasis on social refonn-awayfrom the study ofwhat ought to
expressing their findings in words or in numbers. be and towardthe study ofwhat is. Ifthe public were everto trust social science,
saidCarlTaylor,thentheemphasishadto beon"exactandquantitativeexpressions
andmeasurements"(Taylor 1920:735). This, he said, required"technologieswhich
Romancing the Methods willreduceobservationstoacomparativebasis"(p. 753). Thetechnologyofchoice,
said Taylor, was the social survey, a method dating at least to John Howard's
John Whiting and some ofhis fellow graduate students at Yale during the 1930s monumental, comparativestudy ofprisons (1792).
askedabo~t.havl2gase~maron m~thods. "LeslieSpierinfonnedus disdainfully," Taylor's idea ofwhat a surveyshould be was much broaderthanjustquestion l
recallsWhiting, thatthiswas asubjecttodiscusscasuallyatbreakfastandwasnot naires."Thesurveymethod," he said,"isnothing whateverbut the recognizedand
worthy subjectmatterfor a seminar"(Whiting 1982:156). Try quoting Whiting at accepted comparative method of all science," and he concluded that uwhat ...
a ~onve.ntlo~ of anthr?pologlstS. Chances are, you will discover that everyone surveyscandoand have done in the field ofanthropology andethnology,they can l
chimes In with a favonte story ofthe same ilk. do and probably are destined to do for anybody ofknowledgeor field ofresearch
It's allwell and good for anthropologists to romanticizefieldwork-vulcanolo to which they are applied (1920:752-753).
gistsdo it, too-particularlyfor ~eldwork inplacesthattakeseveraldaysto getto, Taylorsingledoutthe systematicstudy ofvision, hearing,andpainthatCharles
t~e locall~ngu~ge htera~.traditi~n, l
where hasno andwherethechancesofcoming and Brenda Seligmann (191I) had done on the Veddas of Sri Lanka. (Charles
down with asenous Illness are nontnvtal. Socialresearchreally is harderto do in Seligmannwasanethnologistandphysician.)Their422-pageethnographicaccount
some places than in others. But the fact is, there is a long, noble tradition of covered family life, religion, the arts, property, and inheritance-andan 18-page
concernwith researchmethods in anthropology---quantitativeandnonquantitative reportoftheresultsofsomepsychologicalteststhattheyhadusedintheirstudy of l
humanistic and scientific. '
Vedda senses. Some of those tests had been devised by W.H.R. Rivers, an
Kathleen and Billie DeWaltquote at length in Chapter8 what is surely one of experimentalpsychologistwhobecameinterestedin anthropology in 1899whenhe
t~emost-citedearlydiscussIOnsofmethodsinanthropology:Malinowski'sintroduc was invited to join the Torres Straits expedition and saw the opportunity to do
tIOnto Argonauts ofthe WesternPacific(1922). It isjustlyfamous because asthe comparativestudies ofnon-Westernpeople (Tooker 1997:xiv). l
DeWalts say, it establishedthe importance of long-tenn participantobserv;tion as Rivers, of course, developed the genealogical method-highly detailed, ego
astrategic method for field researchon other cultures.No peeringoffthe veranda centeredgraphsfororganizingkinshipdata.Thegenealogicaltablesheproducedin
at the natives for Malinowski.
his study ofthe Murray Islanders were singled outby Taylor as an exampleof"as
Participaut obsen:ation is an important method in anthropology but, as the perfectascientificcompilationas couldwell be imagined" (Taylor 1920:753. See
DeWalts POlOt out, It IS one. of many methods used in fieldwork. By the time Rivers's work in Volume VI of Haddon 1901-1935). These works by anthro
MaltnowsklweuttotheTrobnands,NotesandQueriesonAnthropology-thefield pologists, saidTaylor,were examplesofresearchto which all social sciencecould
w~rk manual produced by the Royal Anthropological Institute (RAI) of Great aspire. Anthropologists continue to this day to work on improved methods for
BntamandIreland-was10 its fourth edition(thefirst cameoutin 1874).Thesixth representingcomplexkinship structures(see White and Jorion 1992).
1
12 BERNARD Introduction 13
\
Rivers continued his work in anthropology and his development of the pelto (1970; and Pelto and Pelto 1978), by John Brim and David Spain (1974),
genealogical method with his research on the Todas of India (Rivers 1906). He by AlIen Johnson (1978) and by Michael Agar (1996 [1980]) contain a wealth
developed what he called the "method of indirect corroboration." This method of information and wisdom. In writing my own textbook (Bernard 1994 [1988])
involves "obtaining the same infonnation first in an abstract fann and then by I depended heavily on the work of all these predecessors and on the work of
means ofa number ofconcrete instances" (p. 11). Here is Rivers explaining the colleagues across the social sciences.
method with referenceto his study ofthe laws ofproperty inheritance: Methods, in fact, are us, and the book you are reading-this 1998 handbook
replaces nothing. It adds to a growing body ofwork about methods ofinquiry in
Ifirstobtained an account ofwhat wasdone in the abstract-ofthe lawsgoverning
cultural anthropologyand to methods in the social sciencesin general. That is one
theinheritanceofhouses,thedivisionofthe buffaloesandotherpropertyamongthe
ofthe reallynicethings about researchmethods: Thereare more and more ofthem
children, etc. Next I gave anumberofhypothetical concrete instances; Itook cases
as time goes on.
of men with so many children and so many buffaloes, and repeating the cases I
found that my informant gave answers which were consistent not only with one
another but also with the abstract regulations previously given. Finally I took real
personsand inquired into whathad actually happened when AorBdied, and again Methods Belong to All ofUs
obtained abody of information consistent in itselfand agreeing with that already
obtained. (p. It) Anothernicethingaboutmethodsisthatdisciplinescannotownthem. Justas itwas
never true that only sociologists did surveys, it was never true that only anthro·
Rivers discussed his selection of informants, how he came to know that one
pologists did participant observation fieldwork. Ofcourse, these days, everybody
of his informants had lied to him, the pros and cons of paying informants for
knows that everybodydoes everything. Methods reallydo belong to everyoneand
theirtime, the need forgetting information from many informants ratherthanjust
this does notjustgo for methods-as-lechniques.1t goesjust as much for methods
from a trusted few, and the importance of using the native language in field
as~approach,methods-as~commitment,andmethods-as-epistemology.Neitherquan·
research.
titativenorqualitativeresearchershavethe exclusiveright to strive forobjectivity;
Taylor must also have known about Lewis Henry Morgan's study, Systems of
neither humanists nor scientists have a patent on compassion; and empiricism is
Consanguinity andAffinityofthe Human Family(1870). It was a massive, cross
as much the legacy of interpretivists and idealists as it is of positivists and
cultural survey ofkinship systems. Morgan collecteda lot ofthe data on various
materialists.
Indian tribes himself, but he also sent questionnaires to missionaries and Indian
Ofcourse, new methods develop within particulardisciplines, but any method
agents.AndTaylorsurelyalsoknewaboutEdwardBurnettTylor'skeycontribution that seems useful will get picked up and tried out, sooner or later, across the
to the literature on cross-culturalsurveys (see Tylor 1889). disciplines. Projective tests, like the Rorschach and the TAT, were used by
Contrary to popular wisdom, then, anthropologists have been keen survey anthropologistsinthe 1940s(DuBois 1944; Gladwin andSarason 1953; Henryand
methodologistsfromtheearliestdaysofthediscipline.Unlikesociologists,however,
Spiro 1953), werequitepopularforawhile(seeLindzey[1961]andHsu [1972J for
anthropologists studied small, remote groups ofpeople."Thesegroups," observed
reviews) and continue to be used by some anthropologists to this day (see Paul
RobertLynd in 1939,"were'primitive,' accordingto WesternEuropeanstandards,
1989; Tsatoulis-Bonnekessen 1993; Boyer at af. 1994). The consensus model of
and therefore the older social sciencesdid not much care what anthropology did
culture was developed in the 1980s by two anthropologists and a psychologist
with them" (p. 14).
(Romney et af. 1986) and has already started showing up in psychologyjournals
The point is, thatbythe timeA HandbookofMethodinCulturalAnthropology (Johnson etaf. 1992;Van Raalteetaf. 1992).Asolution totheecologicalinference
was published in 1970, the concernfor methods in anthropologywasalreadyquite problem (inferring individual behavior from aggregate data) was worked out
venerable. That volume, edited by Raoul Naroll and Ronald Cohen, was an recently by a political scientist (King 1997) and will have wide application in
enormous compilation-I,OOO pages and 49 chapters by 46 authors (Naroll and sociology, criminology, and demography. Field experiments were developed by
Cohen wrote 6 ofthe chapters and participatedin several others),including 5 that socialandeducationalpsychologists(seelheclassicvolumebyCookandCampbeIl
were reprinted from journal articles. The chapters in that handbook, as well as [1979] and Boruch [1997] for a review of more recent work) but some anthro
all the chapters on methods in Anthropology Today (Kroeber 1953), and in the pologists also do field experiments(see, for example, Harris et af. 1993).
Handbook ofSocialandCulturalAnthropology(Honigmann 1973), are as useful And of course, participant observation-the sine qua non of anthropological
today as they were when they first appeared. The pioneering textbooks by Pertti fieldwork-is no one'sproperty. I'veheardtalkatanthropologyconventions about
/4 OERNARD
Introduction /5
how the discipline somehow"lost" the method ofparticipantobservation. 1could Anthropology: The Humanistic, Positivistic,
not disagreemore. Anthropologists continue to make consistent use ofparticipant
Interpretive Science, Etc.
observation fieldwork, butwe didnot inventthatmethodbyourselves. Sociologist
BeatriceWebb was doing participantobservation-completewith real note taking Anthr.opology was built by empiricists, including many who understood that
andinformantinterviewing-inthe 1880sandshewroteatlengthaboutthemethod reducmgpeopletowordswasnobetterthanreducingthemtonumbersandwho did
inher 1926 memoire(Webb 1926). Just aboutthen, the longtradition in sociology both with aplomb. Franz Boas took his Ph.D. in physics from the University of -,
of urban ethnography began at the University ofChicago under the direction of KIel,wIth mathematIcsandgeography ashis minors. Whenheturnedhis attention
I
RobertPark(oneofthe many participantobserverstrainedby Parkwas his son-in toanthropology,he advocatedahistorical,particularizingapproach,buthe didnot
law,RobertRedfield).Thattraditioncontinuestoday inthe pagesoftheJournal0/ abandon numbers. Nor did most of his students. Alfred Kroeher, for example,
Contemporary Ethnography, which began in 1972 under the title Urban Life and analyzedmeasurementson300yearsofdataonskirtlength,waistheight,anddepth l
Culture. of decolletage to look for long-tenn patterns in style (Richardson and Kroeber
Participantobservationtodayisabsolutelyubiquitousinthesocialsciences.Ithas 1940).
been used in recentyearsby politicalscientists(Fenno 1990; Glaser 1996), social RobertLowie,Clark Wissler,EdwardSapir,MargaretMead,RuthBenedict,and
l
psychologists (Weisfield and de OIivares 1992; Smith and Inder 1993), psycho E1SIe ClewsParsonsconSIderedthemselvesscientists.One ofBoas'sstudents Paul
analysts (Perry 1985; Hirsch 1990; Hegeman 1995), students of management Radio, :amously r~jecte.d his mentor's scientific bent. He accusedBoas ofbeing
(Gummeson 1991; Weick 1995; Watson 1996), researchersin nursing (De Valck naturwtssenscha/tlzch.emgestellt, or science minded, of treating ethnology as a
andVan de Woestijne 1996; Woodgate and Kristjanson 1996), education(Woods branch of natural sCl~nce and named his cofreres-Sapir, Kroeber, Mead-as
1986; Rovegno and Bandhauer 1997), social work (Lawler and Heam 1997) and examplesofthe badthmgs that happento culturalanthropologists who follow the
expertsystemsengineering(Meyer 1992),aswellas by legionsofsociologists(see ; path ofquantification(Radin 1933:10).
Denzin and Lincoln 1994). ;:;(, But even Radio was an arch empiricist. His passion against quantification was
l
Amongthesalutaryresultsofallthis isacontinuallygrowingbody ofliterature, ii):surpas~ed byhiscOffi",litmenttothe·continualcollectionoftexts. ItwasRadiowho
"r
including alot by anthropologists, about participantobservation itself. There are ade It clear for all tune that, while theories come and go original texts in Our
highly focusedstudies, fun ofpracticaladvice.and there are poignantdiscussions I'n~"f,or,mants' 0Wn Ilanguages. ~re aval'1able for every genera'tion to analyze, anew,
of the overall experience of fieldwork (Agar 1996, Wolcott 1995, Smith and' •ptred by Boas s efforts WIth George Hunt (a Kwakiutl) Radin handed Sam l'
Komblum 1996). ) ..;1-. 0suWa eka(Wmn'ebago) a pad and a pencil-an act th'at produced one of
The boundariesbetweenthe disciplinesremain strong, but those boundariesare jlhroPOlogy'S most famous texts, Crashing Thunder: The Autobiography ofa
no longer about methods-if they ever were-or even about content. Anthr~' ,nnebago lndian--and establIshed a model for emically oriented ethnography
pologists today are more likely to study anny platoons (KilIworth 1997) or con; low,nake 1920).' l
':~bove
sumer behavior (Sherry 1995) or the mean streets of big cities (Bourgois 1995i all, the distinction betweenquantitative and nonquantitative must never
Fleisher 1998)than they areto study isolatedtribal peoples.Today,the differenc~~,. ",¥Sed as COver for talking about the difference betweenscienceand humanism
within anthropologyandsociologywithregardtomethodsaremore Importantth~ " ofscientistsdo theirworkwithout numbers; andmany scientistswhose work
Ighly " .
the differences betweenthe socialsciences. There is an irreducible difference.f~r t' quantitativeconsIderthemseIvesto behumanists.Humanism isoften used
example,betweenthose ofus for whom the first principle ofinquiry is thatre~U,. "•.synon.ym ~or humaO.lta.nan or compassI.Onatevalues andacommitmentto the
horati.o~
is constructeduniquely byeachperson andthose ofuswho startfrom the pnnclpla ofsuffering. The myth that science is the absence ofthese values is
1
thatexternalreality awaitsourdiscoverythrough aseriesofapproximations.Th~ "pernIcIOUS.Jane Goodall said recentlythat part ofherwork thesedays is not
~~h
is also an important (though not incompatible)differencebetweenthose ofusw chimps, but to correct the mistaken idea that science has to be
seektounderstandhumanphenomenainrelationtodifferencesin beliefsandv~.~. lonate."Iam0ften askedto talk aboutthe softerkind ofscience"she says
and those of us who seek to explain human thought and behavior as the .~ way ?f bringing children back into realizing that [science] i;not abou; l
thtn~s
sequenceofexternal forces. ' g up and being totally objective and cold" (Holloway 1997:44).
Whateverourepistemologicaldifferences,however,theactualmethodsby'!!. !pustrejectaculturethat equatesobjectivity with being cold. Counting the I
we collectand analyze our data belong to everyoneacrossthe socialsciencas ~.~.ratelyinRwa,ndaI.Soneway-nottheonlyway-topreserveoutrage.We l
, not less,SCIence,lots and lots more, andmorehumanisticallyinfonned
1
16 BERNARD Introduction 17
science, to contribute more to tbe amelioration ofsuffering and the weakening of byanyorall ofthesedefinitions. Wheninsightandunderstandingareachieved,we
false ideologies-racism,sexism, ethnic nationalism-in the world. may call it knowledge. The fact that knowledge is tentative is something we all
Humanismsometimesmeansacommitmenttosubjectivity-thatis, tousing our learn to live with.
I i
own feelings, values, and beliefs to achieve insight into the nature of human The practice that we associate today with the positivist perspective in social
experience.This kind ofhumanism is, ofcourse, the foundation ofmany clinical science,however, is not thepositivism ofAuguste Comte, ofAdolphe Quetelet,of
disciplines as well as the foundation ofparticipantobservation ethnography (see John Stuart Mill; nor is it even the logical positivism ofthe Vienna Circle. None
BergandSmith [1985] for areviewofclinicalmethods in socialresearch).It is not ofthese is the tradition that so many today love to hate.
somethingapartfrom socialscience.Itisamethodusedbyidealistsandmaterialists That honor belongs to what Christopher Bryant (1985:137) calls"instrumental
alike.
positivism." In his 1929presidentialaddress to the AmericanSociologicalSociety,
Humanism sometimes means an abiding appreciation of and search for the Wiiliam F. Ogburn laid out the rules. In turning sociology into ascience, he said,
unique-the unique in human experienceand the unique in culture. Ifthe rest of "it will be necessaryto crush out emotion." Further, "it will be desirable to taboo
social sciencewas the searchfor regularities,then anthropology wasthe searchfor ethics and values (except in choosing problems); and it will be inevitable that we
exceptions. It is a truism that one cannot fully know someone else's life without shall have to spend most ofour time doing hard, dull, tedious, and routine tasks"
,~- living thatperson's life. Giving birth, surviving hand-to-hand combat, living with (1930:I0). Eventually, he said, there would be no need for a separate field of
AIDS ... in some way, all experienceis surelyunique. Butjustassurely, thereare statistics because"allsociologists will bestatisticians"(p. 6). This kind ofrhetoric
commonalitiesofexperience.To write astory aboutthe thrill orthe pain ofa suc just begged to be reviled. There were challengesto Ogburn's prescription, but, as
L_ cessfulor failedbordercrossing, asuccessfulorfailedjobhunt, awinning orlosing Oberschall (1972:244) concluded, it was Ogburn's commitment to value-free
i
strugglewith iIIness-ortowritesomeoneelse'sstory for them, asanethnographer scienceand to statistics that won the day.
might do--theseare notactivitiesopposedto anaturalscienceofexperience.They "It is certainlydesirableto be precise,"said Robert Redfield (1948:148), "butit
I, are the activities ofanatural scienceofexperience,whether or not they are done is quite as needful to be preciseaboutsomething worth knowing." We are all free,
in service to explanation or understanding, to nomothetic or idiographic goals. ofcourse, to identify ourselves as humanists or as positivists, but it's much more
Humanism is sometimespittedagainstpositivism, which is said to be linked to fun to be both. The scientific component of anthropology demands that we ask
support for whateverpower relations happen to be in place. Historically, though, whetherourmeasurementsaremeaningful, but the humanisticcomponentforcesus
positivism was linked to the most criticalstance. TheSubjection ofWomen (1869) to ask ifwe are pursuing worthwhile ends and doing so with worthwhile means.
by John Stuart Mill was a radical work in its day, advocating full equality for In the end, the tension between scienceand humanism is wrought by the need
,I,, women. AdolpheQuetelet,theBelgianastronomerwhosestudyofdemographyand to answer practical questions with evidence and the need to understand our
criminology carried the audacious title Social Physics (1969[1835]), was a com selves-that is, the need to measure carefullyand the need to listen hard.
,~
mitted social reformer. The legacyofpositivism as avehicle for social activism is
clear in Jane Addams's work with destitute immigrants at Chicago's Hull House
(1926), in SidneyandBeatriceWebb'sattackontheBritish medicalsystem(1910), Permanent Methodological Eclecticism
L_
In CharlesBooth'saccountofthe conditions underwhichthepoorlivedin London
(1902), and in FlorenceNightingale's(1871) assessmentofdeathratesin maternity While anthropology has always been an eclecticdiscipline with regardto methods,
hospitals.' the adoption by anthropologists of the full range of social research methods has
The central position of positivism as a philosophy of knowledge is that acceleratedsince 1970. Thiswasnotarandom even!: In 1970,mostanthropologists
experienceis the foundation ofknowledge. Werecordwhatweexperiencevisually, went into academicjobs; by 1975, most did not.
auditorily, and emotionally. The qualityoftherecording, then, becomesthe keyto A generation earlier, in 1950, just 22 Ph.D. degrees were awarded by U.S.
knowledge. Can we, in fact, recordwhat others experience?Yes, ofcoursewe can. universities in anthropology. In 1957, the Soviet Union launchedthe first orbiting
Aretherepitfalls in doing so? Yes, ofcourse thereare. Forsomesocialresearch'''s satellite-Sputnik. The arms race that followed, with its MAD (mutually assured
thesepitfallsareevidencefor natural limits to social science,while for othersthey destruction)strategy,producedbillionsofdollarsforexpansionofU.S. universities.
are a challengeto extend the current limits by improving measurement. Whether And this growth wasn',just for lOath and the natural sciences.All those engineers
theyrallyto the idealistorthe materialistflag, allsocialscientistscanbehumanists and physicists needed courses in English, philosophy, history, and the social
sciences. Combined departments of sociology and anthropology separated, and
18 BERNARD
Introduction 19
Ph.D.-granting anthropology programs proliferated. When I began graduate study
directions. In the absence of, say, a few thousand new academicjobs for anthro
atthe UniversityofIllinois in 1961, it hadrecentlyseparatedfrom sociology. Four
pologists, the continued move toward sophisticated methodological eclecticism is
years later, the department awarded its first Ph.D. degree.
permanent.
T~e expansion was irrepressible. By 1970, the number ofanthropology Ph.D.s
hadJumped to a heady 195, but that was just the beginning. By 1974, all those
new Ph.D.-granting departments were filled with assistant professors training
Part 2: What's in the Handbook?
th~usands of graduate students-and awarding over 400 Ph.D. degrees per year
(Glvens and Jablonski 1996). With the expansion complete, all those assistant This handbook has 19 chapters by a total of 27 active researchers. Chapters 2-7
professors were in placeand there were no new jobs in the academy (D'Andrade cover epistemology, methods in the search for meaning, research design, ethics,
et a1. 1975).
feministapproaches,andapproachesfortransnationalresearch.Chapters8-14cover
The attraction of anthropology for new students, however, remained undim specificstrategiesand techniques ofdata collection including participantobserva
i~i~hed..The number of Ph.D. degrees awarded annually by institutions that par tion, direct observation, person-centered interviewing, structured interviewing,
ticipate m the survey ofthe American Anthropological Association has remained methodsfor thecollectionandanalysisofnaturaldiscourse,methodsforthe collec
on average, 413 since 1974. In total, aboul 11,000 Ph.D. anthropologists wer~ tion and analysis ofvisual data, and methods ofhistorical anthropology. Chapters
produced from 1970-1998 (Givens and Jablonski 1996). 15-17 describemethods ofdataanalysis includingnumericalmethods,methods for
Demographybeingmore-or-Iess destiny,thosewho hadparticipatedin Ihegreat the systematic analysis oftext, and methods for testing cross-cultural hypotheses.
1960sexpansionbeganto retire in the mid-1980s. From 1985-1994, an averageof Chapter 18 deals with the range of methods used in applied anthropology, and
331 academicjobswerelistedintheAnthropologyNewsletter(GivensandJablonski Chapter 19 is a discussion of methods for presenting anthropology to various .~ ;
1996). ~ut with all thos~ anthropologists from previous years still applying for audiences.
academIC Jobs, the opeOlngs were (and remain) far fewer than the number of Readers should come away from this book with a sense of the richness in the
available candidates.
methods availableto allofus becauseofthe diversity in perspectivethatwe bring
Not that all those Ph.D.s were out ofwork. Thejoblessrate for anthropologists to the researchcraft.
was 1.6% in 1993, the last time the NSF looked (Givens and Jablonski 1996). Thomas Schweizer sets the tone for the book in Chapter 2, tracing the
Durmg all the tough yearsofthe 1970sand 1980s, young anthropologistsknocked "centrifugal and centripetal tendencies" that emerge from anthropology's special
on, and eventually opened, many doors (Koons et a1. 1989). They rewrote their location between the humanities and the sciences. The method of empathic
n,sum~s an~competedsuc~essfully forjobs in medical schools and other parts of reasoning and the method ofdisplay, through prose, ofthat reasoning is as strong
the uOlverslty. But ~ost lmpo~antly, they competed for jobs in industry and as ever in the humanistically oriented segment ofour discipline. It plays well for
?o~emme~t.TheyJomedconsult~ngfirms andopenedtheirown firms, specializing all ofus becausewe can all resonateto a good story abouthow peopleexperience
ml~tematlOnalmarketresearch,mtrainingexecutivesfor overseasassignments, in their lives, their bodies, their illnesses, their children.
rapid rural assessmentfor healthcare deliveryprograms, in developingecotourism On the otherhand, as Schweizermakes clear,our discipline is equallyrooted in
-the list is as big as the hunger and imagination ofthe pioneers themselves. By positiVism-in the "method of hypothesis testing as a general procedure for
1986, for the first time in the history ofthe discipline, more anthropologists were generating and validating scientific knowledge." In the end, says Schweizer, "the
empl~yed in no~academicjobs than in academe (see Fluehr-Lobban 1991:5). differencein kindbetweenthe presenceofthehermeneuticcircle inthe humanities "I
. ThIS same thmg happ~ned, ofcourse, in sociology, but the effects were quite at one extreme and the lack of it in the natural scienceson the other becomes a
I
dIfferent. As anthropologIsts competedfor nonacademicjobs, they were forced to mere difference in degree."
be more explicitabout their methods. Program administratorswereaccustomedto Recently, as Schweizerpointsout, two approaches-postmodemismandradical
T
hiring social scientists whose methods and products were known commodities. It constructivism-have developed as altematives to both classical positivism and
was the anthropologists who had to make the adjustment, not the sociologists classical hermeneutics. Postmodemism, says Schweizer, "questions systematic
psychologists, and economists. '
approachestotheproductionofcumulativeknowledge(whichradicalconstructivism
By and large, the result was a synthesis of qualitative and quantitative does not reject), and posttnodemism and radical constructivism both adopt a rel
approaches-a synthesis that we see today coming into academe from many ativistic stance that stresses the creative power of scientists to invent 'reality'."
Schweizer sorts through these epistemological alternatives-positivism,