In order to critically research and measure the strengths ; restrictions and jobs associated with the methods employed within Z. Parveens survey conducted in Les Minguettes in 2011. we must foremost non merely sketch these cardinal active research methods. yet besides provide an overview of the important impressions and findings from within the paper. Parvez seeks to obtain a qualitative apprehension of Islamic motions in France by carry oning an ethnographic survey crossing over 10 months in the “overwhelmingly working-class” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 294 ) suburb of Venissieux merely outside the 2nd largest metropolitan metropolis ; Lyon. She undertakes the bulk of this research in two mosques and her topics to a big extent are adult females whom chiefly belong to the Salafist subdivision of Islam.

The chief motivation from within the paper is the statement that following marginalisation from an intrusive province. a civilization in which these adult females do non prosecute in a signifier of political relations yet into a signifier of antipolitics has been born. She argues that through their pattern. instructions and erosion of the Burka they look to spread out their private sphere as opposed to shouting out for justness and equality. turning to each other for moral support while puting greater accent on their “spiritual province and repose over material life” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 308 ) . The units of analysis for the survey would be persons. as research workers tend to explicate and depict societal groups by sketching and aggregating the behavior of persons as opposed to analyzing the administration as a whole.

Parvez undertakes the usage of theoretical and snowball sampling. typical of a qualitative research worker endeavoring for profusion as opposed to transferability within their research. The greatest strength of sweet sand verbena sampling would be the cogency of the information. and due to the fact their is no bound on the figure of respondents ; one can go on to snowball until she feels theoretical impregnation has been reached. and adequate informations for in-depth analysis has been obtained. However. positive sociologists would reason that this trying method is non representative of all Muslims and hence the illations the research worker following her findings can easy take to the ecological false belief consequence “qualitative findings tend to be oriented to the contextual singularity and significance of the facet of the societal universe being studied. ” ( Bryman. 2008. p. 378 ) . Even though theoretical sampling may so be really utile in order to open up a subject for farther geographic expedition and supply a clearer penetration into a smaller group of persons jobs do so originate when positive sociologists question the objectiveness. transferability and generalizability of the sampling method.

The cardinal research method employed in this ethnographic survey is participant research. in the signifier of Participant-as-Observer: whereby people are cognizant of the research workers presence and intent. and the research worker is involved in everyday group state of affairs. The purpose of Participant observation is to let the research worker to see things through the eyes of their participants “Entering into the field as a participant research worker. I intended to take the positions of female gamblers. to see the universe through their eyes. to experience what they feel. and to see what they experience” . ( Li. 2008. p. 103 ) . The research worker triangulates participant observation: complementing it with the usage of semi constructions interviews. Epistemic interpretevist sociologists such as Max Weber as opposed to more positive sociologists such as Durkheim would so prefer the methods in inquiry as they look to understand the significances behind societal actions instead than quantify and retroflex.

The most cardinal research method of participant observation employed within the survey does so hold several strengths. The fact that the research takes topographic point in the natural scene is critical for sociologists whom undertake an epistemic position upon research “knowledge or grounds of the societal universe can be generated by detecting. or take parting in. or sing ‘natural’ or ‘real-life’ settings” ( Mason. 2002. p. 85 ) . Research that is conducted in natural milieus arguably provides the most rich. valid and in depth informations particularly in the context of vulnerable group as opposed to the usage of other research methods as non all participants would hold the ability to unwrap information eloquently or in a manner in which it is intended. Additionally. this type of research therefore allows the topics to experience at easiness leting the research worker to obtain a true contemplation of their behaviour and interactions. This point is reiterated in Li’s survey ( 2008 ) where she takes chancing adult females in the US under the microscope “It has long been acknowledged that. when analyzing non-mainstream groups in society such as the marginalized and the stigmatized. research workers must orient their informations aggregation methods to both the sensitiveness of the research subject and the exposure of research subjects” ( Li. 2008. p. 101 ) .

This impression of a normal scene coupled alongside the fact Parvez spends 10 months working in the field is so more likely to supply a multi-dimensional deep apprehension in contrast quantitative methods such as questionnaire’s which are frequently really superficial. foregrounding the suitableness of the chosen method in the context of this survey. Another advantage of participant observation is the chance the research worker has to construct a resonance with participants in order to derive a true apprehension of societal actions. Making a footing of trust frequently consequences in research topics going more likely to open up and as a effect supplying a more elaborate Insight into their behavior “Participant observation has the greatest potency to bring out contextualized. honest information. otherwise unaccessible. it ontologically and epistemologically underpins human pursuits for understanding multiple worlds of life in context” ( Li. 2008. p. 105 ) . The fact that the research worker is Muslim and can “participate in supplication. mosque activities. fasting during Ramadan and reading Arabic” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 295 ) provides her with a foundation from which this resonance can be built.

This is highlighted through her interactions with Student Amina. Following their meetings in the mosque Amina becomes comfy in conveying really personal information “I’m depressed. I don’t have a occupation. I’m entirely so I sit around the house all twenty-four hours and chain-smoke” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 301 ) . The fact that Amina is willing to smoke in forepart of Parvez. within a community in which smoke is highly frowned upon every bit good as relay information that she is shortly traveling to hold to last on “state aid of 450 euros a month” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 301 ) underlines the extent to which this method can construct resonance. This allows the research worker to explicate rich. detailed informations. which can supply a true penetration into behaviour’s and interactions doing it effectual in the survey of a marginalized group while conforming to the chief end of cogency interpretevist sociologists strive for. However. a unfavorable judgment of this statement would be the impression that all persons are histrions and merely let others what they want them to see making a front stage/backstage consequence and accordingly Amina could be tactfully relaying this information in order for understanding from the research worker and perchance fiscal commiseration cognizing she is from a more flush middle-class background.

On the other manus. the method does besides arguably keep many restrictions. First and foremost is the practicality of this type of research. which can so be drawn-out. expensive and distressing for the research worker “ You are likely to happen the procedure more ambitious and wash uping than carry oning interviews because scenes. state of affairss and interaction can be notoriously mussy and complicated” ( Mason. 2002. p. 87 ) . These restrictions are apparent within the survey whereby the research worker must go to France for a ten-month period in which she spends her clip in a scene. which is wholly foreign. Other practical issues of linguistic communication and disbursal may besides hold existed yet are non mentioned within the paper.

Furthermore. participant observation can besides be said to be limited on the evidences of dependability and representativeness ; the two cardinal ends. which positivist sociologists endeavour towards. Positivist sociologists would reason that any method of observation including the one used by Parvez is impossible to retroflex and is in kernel merely the sentiment of one research worker and hence for this ground the information. which is obtained. is subjective and really limited. This conjugate alongside the intricate nature of participant observation intending it is was merely possible to analyze a little group of persons whom were all likewise from “North African immigrant families” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 294 ) every bit good as keeping a Salafist position of Islam make the findings unrepresentative. Positivist sociologists would hence. on these evidences argue that this method is limited in its suitableness as non merely can it non be replicated it is unfair to do illations in respects to a wider spectrum of people utilizing this information as it is non really representative.

Parvez besides triangulates the method of participant observation by utilizing semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews allow the research worker to be after a nucleus group of inquiries from which they seek replies from participants yet can still inquire unscripted follow up inquiries and if successful this method can so unite construction with flexibleness while supplying rich valid informations “Semi structured interviews combine the flexibleness of the unstructured. open-ended interview with the directivity and docket of the study instrument to bring forth focussed. qualitative. textual information at the factor degree. ” ( LeCompte. 1999. p. 149 ) . However. in the survey Parvez was non able to enter the informations from the semi-structured interviews due the wants of her respondents typical of overt. ethical research.

There are besides many jobs associated with trying to carry on an ethnographic survey “Where scenes are evidently ‘private’ in some manner. you will necessitate to negociate entree with the relevant gatekeepers but once more. as with public settings” ( Mason. 2002. p. 91 ) as experienced by Parvez in the survey. She states that she ab initio faced “mistrust and legion barriers to entry” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 294 ) due to utmost caution in relation to foreigners from her participants every bit good as “being American and a researcher” Parvez. 2011. p. 294 ) . Although. she does finally interrupt down the barriers and manage to derive entree to the mosques following a “painful. backbreaking procedure. thanks to old ages of constabulary surveillance and security efforts” Parvez. 2011. p. 295 ) she by no agency additions entree to all the topics whom she would hold liked to analyze. Furthermore. it can besides be argued research workers experience a broad scope of dangers while carry oning ethnographic research particularly within a hostile scene “Fieldworkers have encountered iilness. hurt. or decease in the class of fieldwork due to natural and condemnable causes” ( Herman. 1995. p. 146 ) .

In the context of the survey there is so grounds to back up these impressions as non merely is the fieldwork conducted in the vicinity of Les-Minguettes. the vicinity where the states “first seeable low-class public violences erupted” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 294 ) . the country is “overwhelmingly working class” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 294 ) with high Numberss or unemployment and a history of condemnable activity. She states the part is “known for its ill will to foreigners. research workers. and journalists. who on juncture had rocks thrown at them” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 296 ) . The uninviting scene alongside the fact the research worker is so a middle-class American research worker whom is openly “wandering around the lodging projects” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 294 ) could hold been a formula for catastrophe.

Not merely due to the bitterness towards foreigners and Americans yet besides bitterness in footings of societal mobilisation in an country in which merely two constructions remain “the drug traders and the mosques” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 297 ) . These dangers alongside the illustration in which a cafe proprietor “proceeded to shout at me for several minutes” ( Parvez. 2011. p. 294 ) every bit good as an case whereby she covertly records a mosque discourse non merely underline the job of safety in footings of utilizing participant observation in a hostile scene. Yet besides bring to the surface ethical jobs in what is acceptable and unacceptable in the name of obtaining valid research. In decision. the inquiry of whether they are so suited or non all depends on the theoretical position from which you are inclined towards. and whether it is cogency or instead dependability or representativeness or even still a mixture of both at the top of your precedence list.

Bibliography

Bryman. A ( 2008 ) . Social Research Methods. 3rd erectile dysfunction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 378. Herman. J. N ( 1995 ) . A Symbolic Interactionist Approach. London: General Hall Inc. 146. LeCompte. D. M ( 1999 ) . Essential Ethnographic Methods: Observations. Interviews. and Questionnaires: Observations. Interviews. and Questionnaires ( Ethnographer’s Toolkit. Vol 2 ) . 2nd erectile dysfunction. Centennial state: Rowman Altamira. 149. Li. J. ( 2008 ) . Ethical Challenges in Participant Observation. a Contemplation on Ethnographic Fieldwork. The Qualitative Report. 13 ( 1 ) . 101-105. Mason. J. ( 2002 ) Qualitative Researching Sage. London. Chapter 5. Parvez. F. Z. ( 2011 ) . Debating the Burqa in France. the Antipolitics of Islamic Revival. 1 ( 1 ) . 208-309.