I
will critique an article that deals with violence in a job role. Bouncers have
a reputation for violence and the following article investigates the bouncer’s
role using qualitative research. The method used is covert ethnography. I will examine
this article in terms of the methodological approaches, size of the sample, and
the moral and ethical problems with the method used; the use of deceit; the
possibility of using violence whilst working on the door and views on ethical
problems. I will investigate the strengths of the article and identify the
limitations of the article.
The
article ‘Get Ready to Duck: Bouncers and the Realities of Ethnographic Research
on Violent Groups’ (Winlow et al., 2001) researches bouncers as a ‘commercial
device’ (Winlow et al., 2001, pg536), getting paid to commit violence and
prevent violence occurring. It investigates this job to uncover the working
culture of bouncers and how violence and their physical appearance are
expressed. The theoretical position that underpins the methodological approach,
Interpretivism, can be seen in this study meaning that, ‘the objective nature
of the world is seen in a subjective or personal light by the individual observer.’
(Marcus and Ducklin, 1998, pg 27). The researcher identifies with the
participants view of the culture he is associated with, to understand why
bouncers commit violence they are paid to act out. Covert ethnography was
applied to view the subculture in an observational, personal light. The
ethnographer had previous experience working as a bouncer. He knew what was
expected, how to behave and had the physical attributes which made the research
possible. The ethnographer’s qualities gave strength to the research. The research
previously undertaken by Hobbs (1995) has shown that this employment was
‘grounded in violence’ (Winlow et al., 2001, pg536). The researchers wanted to
understand this culture from the observations and viewpoints of the bouncers
themselves, ‘we wished to explore the culture of a group which was becoming
increasingly demonized in both the media and common liberal discourse and was
therefore ‘topical’ in both common sense and academic terms’ (Lofland, 1976 in
Winlow et al., 2001 pg 537).
The
researcher was able to ‘experience’ the working life of bouncers, ‘much
ethnography is orientated to ‘naturalism’, with observation informed by a stance
of appreciation, of trying to see things from the member’s perspective’ (Gilbert,
2008, pg277). Using the anthropological method of investigating humanity, he
used a naturalistic method so they did not cause disruption to the natural
setting and the researcher could participate in their natural setting. Adler
(1985) states that
Ethnographies of deviant behaviour are amongst
the most popular within the sociological genre, identifying studies that
require a commitment to ‘personal observation, interaction, and experience [as]
the only way to acquire accurate knowledge about deviant behaviour’.
(Adler, 1985 in Atkinson et al., 2007, pg 204)
Advantages
of this approach are the researcher can see how the culture operates, and not
how people say it operates. With covert ethnography, detail can be gathered;
unlike with overt ethnography where the researcher is known and the
participants are aware they are being studied. This prevents the gathering of
‘true’ facts as the participant will not respond in the same ways they would in
their natural setting. Violent groups are not willing to be studied due to
potential illegal activities that could occur. A few activities Winlow states
are,
There
were cigarette and beer importation scams, fake designer clothes, handbags,
perfume, jewellery, currency, drugs, anabolic steroids. Stolen ‘everything’,
from videos to razor blades, goods bought on hire purchase which would never be
paid, the produce of credit card scams, shoplifting and commercial burglary.
Whatever commodity was on offer, bouncers were the ideal conduit.
(Winlow, 2001 in Hobbs, 2003, pg 226)
Ethnographic
research has no need for a hypothesis, the researcher creates their article
from field-notes; they may report on a different subject area of the subculture.
This is an advantage; there is no set question as in questionnaires. Once you
have sent out a questionnaire, the subject and research direction cannot be
changed. Therefore the decision to conduct covert ethnographic research was the
right decision in this case. The disadvantages of this research; the researcher
becoming overwhelmed by the amount of information he has to take in. It is
easier to write field-notes for overt research but for covert it is more
difficult, especially in this case study as bouncers do not carry a pad and pen
around with them to write notes on incidents. In this study the researcher wrote
his notes the following morning, and he may have forgotten vital information
and evidence.
Covert
ethnographic research violates ethics; the researcher befriends the participant
to understand the social activities of the culture. The researcher may be
overpowered with decisions of what to record, and how to ask questions. If the
bouncer did not let someone in, how would you ask them for their reasons, would
you just express your query, ‘’ why didn’t you let them in?’’ or would you keep
quiet and act as if you knew their reasons. Covert research is time-consuming
and is carried out over a considerable period of time to get true and reliable
results. This can cause problems for the researcher due to time, financial and
family constraints. The researcher has to be available at short-notice, entry
to this group is difficult, and the employers want to know you are ‘available’
at all times. Another disadvantage is keeping ‘identity’, regulating the way
you speak and act, making sure you do not make them aware they are being
studied. This type of research is subjective; the observations and feelings are
the researcher’s towards incidents and the culture. This type of qualitative
research is positive as it can give a true picture of activities that take
place, unlike quantitative research that is vague.
Compared
to quantitative data, qualitative data are usually seen as richer, more vital,
as having greater depth and as more likely to represent a true picture of a way
of life, of people’s experiences, attitudes and beliefs.
(Haralambos and Holborn, 2000, pg971)
There
is a risk of ‘going native’ (Gilbert et al., 2008, pg271); that is, the
researcher embracing the culture and becoming indoctrinated. This study uses
one nightclub for their study of bouncers, this restricting the view as it only
represents one nightclub and one group of the culture. The research would have
been more representative of the culture if they had studied numerous nightclubs-
this may have been more time consuming, but it would produce a substantial
representation of the culture that exists.
Ethical issues involved in covert
research, one being of safety, the researcher could be exposed, and this could
result in violence. When the research ends the ethnographer will leave the
setting and will need to be done with caution. One of the safety precautions
taken was the ethnographer in this study lived a considerable distance away
from the research area. There is also the risk of being attacked by one of the
customers of the nightclub for example
As
one experienced bouncer explained, ‘I have had my arms slashed with a knife and
I can’t straighten this finger. I’ve had stitches and somebody take a hammer
out, have a go at my back and legs while I was held down on the pavement’
(Steve South). (Winlow et al., 2001, pg539)
In
order to see the culture from the bouncer’s point of view, the researcher had
to ‘become’ the bouncer; this involved committing violence in order to keep the
peace. Madison specifies that,
Ethics
is concerned with the principles of right and wrong. Questions of morality and
what it means to be honourable, to embrace goodness, to perform virtuous acts,
to generate good will, and to choose justice above injustice constitute the
study of ethics.
(Madison, 2005, pg80)
I
agree with this statement and committing violence may go against their own
morals and beliefs, but it is essential to see the culture from the bouncer’s
point of view. The researcher may witness events affecting him emotionally for
example the incident he reported on in the article. Eventually the researcher
will have to end their study and leave friendships they have forged with the participants;
this could result in a feeling of guilt. Participants may also be affected by
their sudden discersion, if the participant had forged a friendship with the
researcher. In the article the researcher states that ‘slowly but surely close
friendships were constructed and a complex understanding of the environment and
culture quickly followed (Winlow et al, 2001, pg543).
There
is the ethical issue of inflicting harm if the participant became aware of the
deceit. Deceit is an issue raised in covert research. In overt research
‘informed’ consent is needed from the participants throughout the research. In
covert research the principle of ‘informed’ consent is violated, therefore an
invasion of privacy. The participant is not aware you are observing them, they
see you as a colleague, and this is partially true as the researcher is
employed by the nightclub. Anonymity and confidentiality is important in this
case as there has been no ‘informed’ consent. The participant’s names and the establishment
name have to be changed in order to keep their identities confidential. Observations
of illegal activities may be made; the only time confidentiality is breached is
if the field-notes have to be disclosed to the police. In my opinion the
research is ethically acceptable, as the culture of bouncers is stereotyped in
the media as unethical and bouncers are thugs that get paid to be violent. The
research shown in this study proves that stereotype wrong, but this study was
surrounding the activities of one nightclub.
In
the case of ethics, I consider this article an ethical and unethical piece of
research. It manages to sustain confidentiality by using pseudonyms. Yet the
unethical issues that are shown in covert research are the absence of
‘informed’ consent and the safety of the researcher. Gilbert recounts that,
As
a general principle, the use of deception in research has been condemned, and
the concealment of the fact that one is a researcher has attracted criticism.
But there are many situations in which it is not possible to be completely open
to all participants and sometimes a full explanation of one’s purposes would
overwhelm the listener. So it is recognised that there are degrees of openness
and concealment possible in social research.
(Gilbert, 2008, pg 154)
Deception
in this case ensured the ethnographer’s safety, as this group do not like being
studied. The ethnographer took their place as a bouncer, in order to make the
participants unaware they were a researcher they dealt with any violent
situations that arose. The researcher had to ‘protect’ the research, and the
participant’s best interests as knowing you are being researched could cause
wariness and antisocial behaviour if the participants did not agree with the
research that was taking place.
Covert
research was effective for this subject of inquiry; as if overt research was
used the ethnographer would not have had ‘hands on’ experience and would not be
able to correctly put forward the views and dangers of working in this field. Gilbert
states that
A
common defence of the use of covert methods of research is to argue that,
although some criticisms of it have force, covert methods do not cause harm to
those studied if the identities and location of the individuals and places are
concealed in published results, the data are held in anonymised form and all
data are kept securely confidential.
(Gilbert, 2008, pg157)
I
am aware of the ethical implications involved in covert research, but I am
confident in saying that covert research was the correct method for researching
this field due to hostilities that could arise if the research was overt. The researcher
is the ‘representative’ for the culture of the bouncer; they had to acknowledge
their own views, values and perspectives. This was a benefit to the research as
‘second hand’ information would not have been sufficient. The results from
ethnographic research are valuable results; you cannot ignore the dangers involved
in this type of study. My argument is that the benefits of this kind of
research outweigh the risks that could occur with researching this culture.
I have evaluated the methodological approach
used in this study and believe that it was the most sensible way to conduct
research on this violent group. The ethical issues raised are minor concerns
considering the amount of detailed information this study has accumulated. One
problem that arises is that when someone reads the article, they have no way of
validating what the ethnographer is reporting, unless they conduct their own
research. The safety precautions taken were to study a nightclub a substantial
distance from the ethnographer’s home town, in order to ‘disappear’ after the
research is finished. The researcher’s personal safety was compromised on
occasion due to the nature of the study, yet he was unharmed. The ethical issue
of emotional damage may have occurred for the ethnographer as he had to witness
various disturbing events.
Bibliography
Atkinson,
P., Delamont, S., Coffey, A., Lofland, J. and Lofland, L., (2007) Handbook of Ethnography (eds.) London:
Sage.
Bulmer,
M., (2008) ‘The Ethics of Social Research’ in Gilbert, N., (ed.) Researching Social Life, (third
edition). London: Sage, Pg 145-161
Fielding,
N., (2008) ‘Ethnography’ in Gilbert, N., (ed.) Researching Social Life, (third edition). London: Sage, pg 266-284
Haralambos,
M., Holborn, M., (2000) Sociology: Themes
and Perspectives. London: Collins.
Hobbs,
D., (1995) Bad Business. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Lofland,
J., (1976) Doing Social Life. New
York: Wiley
Madison,
D., (2005) Critical Ethnography.
London: Sage.
Marcus,
M. And Ducklin, a., (2000) Success in
Sociology. London: John Murray Ltd.
Winlow,
S., Hobbs, D., Hadfield, P., Lister, S., (2003) Bouncers: Violence and Governance in the Night-Time Economy.
London: Oxford University Press.
Winlow,
S., Hobbs, D., Hadfield, P., Lister, S., (2001) ‘Get Ready to Duck: Bouncers
and the Realities of Ethnographic Research on Violent Groups’, British Journal of Criminology, 41,
536-548.
By Lea Weller BA
No comments:
Post a Comment