Social Science Research Issue of Identity - Essay Example

Social Science Research – Issue of Identity Introduction This paper attempts to study the concept of “Identity” from the perspective of social science. It would emphasize on various intricacies involved in appropriately comprehending the identity of different groups, as well as the resultant challenges being faced by the researchers. The paper would discuss about the highly relevant issue of role played by identity of the researcher, too. Identity – A Basic Understanding Understanding “Identity” from the angle of social science demands more effort than the one needed for defining the same (identity), as per biological sciences. All the biological characteristics can be clearly perceived, either by mere vision or by some scientific tests, whose results become irrefutable facts! For instance, it is very simple to identify a group consisting of people having the same blood group. Likewise, individuals with a particular skin texture can also be easily grouped together. But the process of coming out with an apt definition of social identity is much tougher than the one involved in specifying the aforesaid identities, based on biology and physiology. The reason for this is, it is a highly intricate mental process of an individual that makes them develop a specific social identity – it is a process starting from as early as the childhood. Here, many external social factors and influences also do come into play. To elaborate more, the identity that a person develops as belonging to a particular culture or religion and gender is attributable to exposure to the concerned influences, almost right from the time of birth. On the other hand, identities like those that speak of political affiliations, feeling of being a part of some organization, etc, are developed in the later stages of life. Generally, the identity obtained during the younger days, primarily due to family influence, is retained by an individual throughout their lifetime. Here, it needs to be added that, various experiences an individual faces in life, both pleasant and also otherwise, could make them adopt new identities, or discard the existing ones. Now, the focus would shift to the vital aspect of the manner in which social science researchers are necessitated to design the questions pertaining to their study, based on the identity of the group or people to be interviewed. Though the topic of research could be the same, yet, it is of paramount relevance that the questions and also the pattern in which they are asked need to be modified, in accordance with identities of the respondents. Non-conformity with this vital requirement, in all likelihood, would lead to the research in question ending up with inaccurate findings. And in some extreme cases, especially related to highly conservative groups, this non-adherence could potentially place the researcher in a high level of jeopardy. The contents discussed in the preceding paragraph are backed by a very strong basis, for the identities of a group, individuals or a community, would invariably include their sentiments, ideologies, convictions, beliefs, etc, of which they are staunch adherents. Likewise, some questions addressed to males just cannot be included in the questionnaires meant for female respondents, and vice versa! Any given set of questions totally acceptable to a particular group, could be offensive to the identity of members of another group. This is so because, the identities held are nothing but different facets of the individual’s ego, and defending which even to the extent of relying on some aggression is a primary instinct of human beings! Owing to all that, social science researchers are necessitated to leave no stone unturned in making sure that the questions related to their research are framed and modified, depending on the group or individuals to be approached. Relevance of Identity of Researchers Now, the relevance of the identity of people actually involved in field research would be dwelled upon. As a matter of fact, identity of the researchers throws light on many more tricky facets! Their complexity could be rated to be much bigger than the one pertinent to identity of groups/people interviewed. The question, whether the identity of a field researcher places them in a position of advantage, or does it pose bigger challenges, is a highly intricate one! It is almost impossible to be coming out with one simple answer successfully addressing this all-important question. The reason for this is, depending individual instances, the identity of a researcher could either be an advantage or a major impediment in gathering of accurate data. It is strongly argued by many that, when the researcher and the respondents share the same basic identity (such as the one related to gender, culture, ethnicity, etc), the former would be in a position of comfort, in terms of obtaining accurate and exhaustive information. And in a substantial chunk of cases, this popularly held opinion has indeed turned out to be a fact! However, there are indeed quite a number of instances, where even the above aspect of common identity could not prevent the researchers from confronting some challenges! This is so because, when the actual field visit commences, it is altogether an entirely new scenario that not always conforms to all theoretical aspects of “Study of Identity”! Many unforeseen possibilities come into play, as it is different types of people with whom interaction takes place, and they are unpredictable, with regard to sharing personal information with strangers! The following four examples would be going a long way in enabling a more thorough understanding of this vital and intricate subject of “Identity in Field Research”, along with emphasizing on points of high relevance for all social science researchers. Sometime in the early 1960s, in the US, two researchers adopted an approach that was rather revolutionary in that era, for their research related to the issue of poverty. The two professionals involved in the field research, Elliot Liebow and Carol Stack, directly mingled with the black people reeling under severe poverty. This was diametrically opposite to the then prevailing practice of approaching a community solely through the concerned heads or leaders. Despite the fact that the pattern chosen by Liebow and Stack was defying the established standards, yet, they were highly successful in coming out with the most accurate projection of the diverse key facets of people struggling with poverty. Some of those are strong familial bonds, cultural perpetuation of poverty and compelling need of having a job, etc. Also, this innovative research by both of them highlighted the utmost reliability of ethnographic mode of interview, in relation to study of poverty-related aspects. (1) (Mitchell Duneier, March 2003). At a subsequent point of time, there was an instance where even similarity of gender identity between the respondent and the interviewer could not prevent both an inaccurate response, and also a serious altercation amongst the two (interviewer and respondent). To elaborate more, a lady Anglo interviewer interacted with two women – one of them Puerto Rican and the other Anglo. The topic in question dealt with marital discord. The lady interviewing managed to obtain precise details from the Anglo respondent. But in case of the Puerto Rican woman, she (interviewer) was unable to comprehend the narration, which was based on her culture, and this eventually led to grave misunderstanding amongst both. (2) (Catherine Kohler Riessman, ND). In the 1980s, a women-centric research came out with its highly key findings. They strongly suggested that qualitative pattern of research is of utmost importance while studying about diverse experiences of womenfolk. The reason being, women are hesitant to vividly elaborate most of those experiences, in the form of words. This research also made a note of the fact that, all the prior methodologies, even those targeted at women respondents, were designed by men who were insensitive towards the constraints of women. Also, the study stated that, for the purpose in question, it is just that some modifications need to be made to traditional methods, without discarding them altogether. (3) (Marjorie L. Devault, February 1990). In the US realm of Sociology of the late 1970s, there was an increased focus on the aspect of “minority research”, with added emphasis on the premise that, for hassle-free study assuring accurate findings, this type of study needs to be carried out by a researcher belonging to ethnic minority group. Based on various related studies, including those involving Chicanos, it was stated that, a researcher sharing the same ethnic identity with respondents starts from a position of noteworthy advantage. An observation was made that some previous studies in the avenue (minority research) not conforming to this aspect of similar ethnic identity, resulted in inexact findings, as well as in exploitation of the minorities, by the researchers. (4) (Maxine Baca Zinn, ND). Interpretation and Conclusion The first of the aforesaid instances strongly stress on the importance of being constantly innovative in the realm of social science research. It conveys that when researchers mingle freely with the respondent group, the same is treated by it (the group) as a respect for their identity. Then, the chances of an unhindered study process and precise feedback are more or less assured. The second instance shows that the mere presence of similarity of gender identity between the researcher and the interviewee becomes insufficient, when the former is unaware even of the rudiments of the latter’s culture and customs. Here, the eventual misunderstanding between both the parties needs to be made a special note of. The next example speaks volumes about the importance of evolving new research methodologies, conforming to rapidly changing times, for being consistent in coming out with details aptly projecting the actual scenario. Probably, the last of the instances conveys one of the most vital points in the sphere of field research – similar ethnic identity amongst researchers and the study group is always advisable. Overall, it can be concluded that countless factors, which are based on numerous researches, need to be scrupulously studied by the realm of social science in general, and the field researchers in particular. This is mandatory for exactness of study results, for any serious deviation, in this connection, would lead to gross misrepresentation and distortion of the real scenario. And that would destroy the very purpose of sociology and related research. The subject of this paper is an extensive one warranting volumes of writings for encompassing all its aspects. It is just not possible to be dwelling on all the pertinent points, in a brief paper such as this one. Yet, a sincere attempt has been made to cover most of the important facets. Sources 1) Mitchell Duneier, March 2003. On the legacy of Elliot Liebow and Carol Stack: Context-driven fieldwork and the need for continuous ethnography. Retrieved from ttp://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/focus/pdfs/foc251e.pdf. 2) Catherine Kohler Riessman, ND. WHEN GENDER IS NOT ENOUGH: Women Interviewing Women. Retrieved from jstor.org/pss/189947. 3) Marjorie L. Devault, February 1990. Talking and Listening from Women’s Standpoint: Feminist Strategies for Interviewing and Analysis. Retrieved from jstor.org/pss/800797. 4) Maxine Baca Zinn, ND. FIELD RESEARCH IN MINORITY COMMUNITIES: ETHICAL, METHODOLOGICAL AND POLITICAL OBSERVATIONS BY AN INSIDER. Retrieved from jstor.org/pss/800369. Read More