Research that matters

I thought that this week’s reading was very useful in choosing an ethnographic research topic. Specifically, I enjoyed reading the author’s discussion of writing and rewriting to reveal the missing pieces that must be addressed and bringing up new ideas and questions, choosing a topic that you are personally committed to, consulting with others, bringing the local and specific into sharp focus, narrowing down a topic, participant observation and close observation, working in the interstices of the emic and etic and sorting through discrepancies between what people say and what they do and between different perspectives, knowledge versus behavior, and focusing on the nonobvious. I thought that these topics and advice, among others in the reading, were very useful and beneficial. I especially liked reading about the concept of the etic (outsider perspective) and the emic (insider perspective) as I have never heard those terms before. The author made it clear that is is important to involve oneself in the emic and the etic in order to work in the interstices of these and sort through discrepancies between what people say and what they do, between different perspectives, between what has been reported/described previously and what has been encountered, and more. I actually made a connection between this part of the reading and what we discussed in last week’s class about Margaret Mead. She worked hard on her research and conducted many interviews and made many observations. However, people later came out with books that tore down her findings and claimed that her research was inadequate. This is a perfect example of a discrepancy between what has been reported/described previously and what is encountered–which can be a point of conflict.

I always found the discussion about knowledge versus behavior quite interesting. While some ethnographers focus on either the behavior aspect or the knowledge aspect, experienced ethnographers work to intertwine both. Knowledge is accessed through informal and formal conversations and through implicit and non-discursive language that is portrayed through observation, imitation, and practice. On the other hand, behavior involves observing the activities of others and experiencing that behavior in action. Though it may be challenging, I hope that I can develop a research topic that allows me to combine both these elements.

I am not sure yet what I want to focus on for my ethnographic project. Since my primary interests are related to biology, conservation, and ecology, I was thinking about choosing a topic related to people at Vanderbilt’s perceptions of climate change and conservation efforts, potentially related to efforts that the Vanderbilt administration and student body has made as of now or plans to make in the future.

One of the things that I appreciated and valued most about this week’s reading was the importance that was stressed on having us, as ethnographers, interrogate why and how we want to conduct our ethnographic research just as much as looking into the actual topic we are researching. I think that because anthropology as a field has a certain association with being used as a means for students to visit some far-off or foreign society to them there are some instances where the topic itself is chosen because of the adventure it can provide the ethnographer. This is reflected in the issues with exploitative works that have been published in the past and the problems with ethnography that were acknowledged in Murchinson’s history on ethnography. However, in Murchinson’s readings, the ethical implications behind the topics we are choosing are stressed in a way that causes us to really think about why we want to study what we are studying. Murchinson challenges us to think about our motivations and truly be introspective before deciding to choose a topic to study and I think that is incredibly important. Furthermore, Murchinson’s thoughts on making sure that the ethnographic research we’re doing is culturally competent are also something I appreciated, especially after knowing more about the history of ethnography. Similarly, the how behind the ways we choose to do our research is also described as being informed by our strengths and weaknesses so that we can conduct research that is done to the best of our abilities, which was something that I had not thought about much before reading this section. Overall, these chapters strengthened some of my views on how important understanding your own biases is when approaching ethnographic work and also challenged me to spend more time on the topics that I was thinking about researching before coming up with an idea and jumping on it right away.

For my research topic, I think that I want to do some research on what Black womanhood is and how people fit into this definition. As a Black woman myself, I have noticed that oftentimes there is a sense of solidarity and shared experience that we can find together that greatly influences our understanding of life and especially the college experience. I would like to conduct interviews with different Black women on campus through organizations like STRANDS, the NAACP, and BSA to see what their thoughts or Black womanhood are and if/how they identify with the idea of being a Black woman. I would also like to interview faculty members at Vandy that are Black women to see if their ideas on Black womanhood are similar to those of the students that I would interview.

Aside from the methodology discussed in these two chapters, I really appreciate the inclusion of Internet and Ethnographic Research in the discussion because I do think internet is so important and crucial in modern day life. I am aware of the form of ethnography that takes place on the internet, so called “netnography.” It is interesting how Murchison mentions “but there are groups of people and interactions that exist only in that space,” which is valid because a person and both exist on internet and in real life.

But do we act the same on internet as we do in real life? I always think about that.

Internet violence became more and more common these days and many of my friends are strongly influenced by visual ideals spread on the internet. Aggressive comments and harmful judgements are everywhere on the internet. I sometimes wonder, people probably think that they don’t need to take any responsibility for their words on internet because those are somewhat anonymous.

Do internet do more good or harm? I then wonder.

Internet, being one of the most significant technology that formed the modern society, brought convenience, but also violence. This is when I started to think: are the moral standards of human allow them to take more advantage from the technology rather than creating more harm? Does the rate of change in the development in technology match with the rate of change in the development in the moral standards of human society? This is essentially why I did not choose math and science, but anthropology instead.

I appreciate how Murchison’s approach to outlining research topics and design comes to terms with the exploitative nature of past ethnographic studies. She puts emphasis on obtaining the perspectives of informants, their emic perspectives, and aligns with the theoretical position of Marvin Harris. Like Harris, Murchison suggests that in order to have research that gets at the bigger picture, as an ethnographer, one must consider both the emic and etic. Considering only one or the other, we are bound to succumb to preconceptions/biases and disregard possible solutions to the problems at hand. I think too that this stance lends to the hypothesis oriented research design Murchison speaks of in the sense that both assist us in coming to more scientific conclusions. I’m not set on the focus of my research project, but I’m interested in exploring homelessness in Nashville. More specifically, I want to know how our current set of services and non profit organizations assist those who are or have been homeless. As Murchison puts it, I want to get the “complex inner workings” of the structural causes of homelessness while maintaining focus on their lived experiences. I think it would be crucial to also explore the effects of covid, rising cost of rent, and gentrification.

The Murchinson reading showed the value of a more specific research question as incredibly general topics make it hard to generate meaningful research. A more specific research question can also help guide methodology, as being more specific can make it easier to know the information one is looking for in interviews and field studies.

For that reason, I am trying to make my research idea relatively specific, so I began thinking of online groups that were more narrow than conservative, liberal, or leftist but still have a decent number of followers. I have not decided on one for certain but one idea I had was studying online “Breadtuber” fanbases(Breadtubers are left-leaning internet content creators that have received both praises for deradicalization and criticism for a lack of diversity and in some cases platforming ) which would focus on trying to see if communities were inclusive and/or how much the communities focus is on the personalities of “Bread tube” compared to actual ideology. Most personalities appear to have subreddits and/or other fan forums where their community could be found, but potential struggles will be deciding which people/communities best represent bread tube and a potential sampling bias of people in forums as opposed to regular viewers that interact less.

The other two ideas are the online anti-work/work reform movement that recently had its image stained by a moderator of the subreddit that was the main platform had a poor interview on Fox News. A potential research question here would concern getting a more overall picture of the motivations and makeup of the movement. One movement I am still considering but will most likely not go with is antinatalism, which advocates strongly against childbirth as they believe it is unethical to bring someone into a world with the potential of that person suffering. I consider this group to be interesting and have thought of some research questions, but the largest antinatalist group I could find was the subreddit which is known to ban users who don’t explicitly agree with antinatalism, which makes it risky to try to interact with the community while being value-neutral.

I am still working on narrowing down potential questions and am not committed to the three options I mentioned

Despite taking a few intro anthropology classes, I sometimes still find the premise of ethnography somewhat complicated. This being said, I believe the Murchinson reading really helped to clarify some of the basic proponents of ethnography and helped delineate its purpose in the field of anthropological research. One aspect of the reading that aided in my understanding of how ethnography has come to be what it is today was the section that provided a brief history on the topic. When ethnography first emerged, it typically consisted of defining and describing various groups, gathering a series of wide-ranging accounts to compile in a sort of culminating definition. The problem with this is that many early ethnographies failed to address the “how” portion of research, and often assumed that a a few individuals could speak for the entire group being studied, neglecting the complexity of different factors such as gender, age, race, etc. Today’s ethnography has significantly evolved from what it one was, serving as a more accurate research strategy that allows for a more holistic examinations of the societies and cultures that contribute to our fundamental human experience. With various methods such as participant observation, ethnography has developed more immersive and comprehensive techniques that are able to better capture a wide variety of populations and societies.

For my research topic, I had two potential ideas in mind. One of them I was looking into was to dive more into an increasingly problematic issue not just on Vanderbilt’s campus but on college campuses nationwide– sexual assault. I’ve done preliminary looks into this specific problem for other classes, but haven’t really gotten the chance to delve farther into researching the process of reporting and the flaws with university response or lack thereof. Another potential topic would be the different experiences of student athletes on Vanderbilt’s campus, and potentially more specifically– how they are treated differently in the classroom. Between these two topics, I’m most likely more passionate about the first, but recognize it might be difficult to gather data on such a sensitive topic that would require a high level of vulnerability. This being said, I would love to get some advice on which direction would be best for me to go!

The Munchinson reading for this week helped me understand the significance and value of ethnography. Specifically, in ethnography’s goal of looking at the non-obvious to establish themes around human existence. I could readily see from a historic point of view the value of having such detailed descriptions and analysis of every day life for certain groups of people, but was having difficulty in figuring out its relevance for the future. I feel like scientists and other people who make use of information from social scientists, only really care about numbers and less about one individuals interpretation of things. I understand that if a source of a problem within a community was identified through ethnographic study the knowledge could then be applied to help solve the problem, but it seems like especially given ones agenda the results of one study can be argued back and forth and never have any use. In looking up why ethnography matters, the importance of looking into the non-obvious, makes more sense. Like I said those little things can point out the source of some unaddressed issue.  It’s not that I discount the value of ethnography, I just don’t like thinking about how other scientists would discount its discoveries because its qualitative research. I was discussing ethnography with my older sister Lily, a recent graduate from Duke, and she was telling me how when the pandemic really started ramping up it was the work of anthropologists they greatly contributed in predicting the course of the disease and educating the public about it. However, all her biology professors refused to look into the anthropological insights, because it was a social science. It’s just kind of discouraging, as I don’t want to have to constantly defend why this research matters if I pursue a career in an anthropological field/do interdisciplinary work. I guess it just comes down to the people that get it get it, and the people that don’t, don’t.

As far as my research I originally wanted to look into sororities because Greek life is so interesting to me, even though I’m not a big fan of it. I feel like the issues with Greek life and how problematic it is, is already discussed immensely. As of now I want to look into how Vanderbilt accommodates its students with invisible disabilities and if they are doing an adequate job. I could go to the Vanderbilt Alliance on Disability and Condition meetings and make observations. I also want to interview students who’ve interacted with Student Access, and talk to the Student Access specialists. Looking into what training the specialists go through and assessing their understandings of invisible disabilities and how they decide accommodations would be very interesting.

The idea that stood out most to me in chapters 1 and 2 of the Murchison reading was how to approach people and observe and interact with others while simultaneously making sure not to intrude, make anyone feel uncomfortable, or take away the authenticity of such meetings and encounters. As I have always been interested in ethnographic studies, and particularly direct interviews with the subjects involved, I found Murchison’s tips to be helpful and eye-opening in understanding both the role of an anthropologist and how I can utilize these approaches in my own research study.

The research proposal I am considering is how external environments impact Korean American college students’ perception on beauty. I am focusing on Korea as the country has gathered the most fame in its obsession with appearance and beauty standards. While I am not worried about making any “intrusions” or making people feel uncomfortable, I do feel I may find difficulty in knowing how much of my own experiences and ideas I am allowed to include. Would there be too much bias in including my own personal experiences on Korean perceptions of beauty? Would this be overstepping the boundaries of the role of an anthropologist and what he/she should be able to contribute? Murchison makes it clear that a researcher be clear in his or her identity in approaching the subject, and I want to allow this clarity to shine through in how I interact with those I will be interviewing. In conducting this study, I am planning on reaching out to the variety of Asian American communities/organizations on campus to find interested participants who are willing to share their ideas as a Korean American college student.

I often find it difficult to pin down a topic to explore in research. It’s not that I can’t find anything of interest to me but rather that I find that TOO much interests me. I often write down interesting topics in a note entitled “i’d like to think about that more” but many of these ideas are incomplete or too broad. Reading Murchison this week reminded me of how important it is to choose a topic that can sustain your attention and interest while also being focused and attainable. Out of all the reading, I think the most helpful piece to me was the suggestion to consider the gatekeepers who may impede upon your ability to access the information you would like to collect. I believe this aspect is often overlooked. I wish I had this resource before starting some of my previous research endeavors!

My initial research interest was centered on exploring the dimensions of women’s reproductive health and pregnancy. However, the gatekeepers here are the covid19 protocols that have been keeping students out of the hospital. Instead, I am taking a different approach. It may sound backward, but for this project, I first envisioned the type of participant-observation that I would like to undertake then consulted my notes to see if any of the topics would fit with my desired method of observation. I like the idea of apprenticeship and have been wanting to take an art or fitness class either on campus or here in Nashville. I think it would be interesting to explore the impacts these have on health and wellness as well as the gendered dimensions within them. Things still to consider are time commitments and accessibility. Either way, I’d like to focus on a topic that will also offer a new experience.

When reading “A Mushroom at the End of the World”, I was happy to see it covered a topic I was interested in, the connection between capitalism and the climate crisis. One of the reasons capitalism cannot work is because it is an economic system based on infinite growth with a world of finite resources. I feel like Tsing really exemplified this when she repeated how within capitalism it is a constant cycle of promise and ruin. Another idea that I really liked was her criticism’s on the term Anthropocene. One of the main tenets of capitalism is focusing on the individual rather than the community, that it is the individuals job to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and find a way to make it. As long as you work hard enough you’ll be able to get rich. Of course this is not true, there are so many barriers ingrained within our society that make it extremely difficult for one to improve their socioeconomic standing. The entire field of sociology exists to look into these structures that dictate and play an immense role in the way ones’ life will turn out. Thus, I really agree with her statement that it should be a name more focused on the system that lead these changes to happen, rather than the people who have no choice but to live in it.

The way Tsing ends the chapter with the realization that many people realized the “progress” that we are told to strive for and the lives we are told to live doesn’t make sense (or at least that’s how I interpreted it). I feel like this applies greatly to the sort of reckoning that occurred during the pandemic. Many people no longer want to spend the majority of their lives working a job they don’t like, getting paid way less than they should. The progress that we are supposed to make throughout the course of our lives in pursuit of the American dream, is not at all what its cut out to be. For the first time I think everyone really got a sense, that the world around us and the structures that the world consists of are beginning to fall apart.

After reading these chapters, I began to understand the importance of participant observation in ethnographic research. I think Murchison’s suggestion of finding a regular meeting to attend is particularly salient for research on a college campus, as many affinity/interest groups host open weekly meetings. Another really important point the author makes is establishing one’s identity and being transparent during these types of encounters. On one hand, you want the meeting to feel authentic, not changing tones of topics simply due to your presence there. On the other hand, you want to be truthful in your motivation for being there. It seems like a very difficult line to toe, and something I will be constantly thinking through during the course of my own research. What is the best way to go about establishing one’s identity, particularly in the context of sensitive or secretive research questions?

One potential research topic that really interests me is the dating experience of LGBTQ+ students vs that of straight students on Vanderbilt’s campus. Although Vanderbilt itself may seem like an accepting place in which all students can freely be themselves, it is important to think about the greater context of attending school in Tennessee, a southern, conservative state. I recognize that this is a very sensitive subject for many students, which may pose difficulties when attempting to gather information. This makes choosing interview questions and locations all the more challenging, but important. In addition, I was thinking about attending weekly Lambda meetings as part of my participant observations. It is also important not to tokenize students that are freely open with their identities. I’d really love to dive into this topic as I think it is often overlooked; however, it will require lots of careful planning and consideration to make it come to fruition. I’d love to hear any feedback anyone has on going about a sensitive topic such as this one.

Upon reading Chapter Two in particular, I found Murchison’s discussion of internet fieldwork especially interesting in considering the possibilities of deception. How does one account for the potential of catfishing and the role it may play in their work? Perhaps recognizing this in the work is enough, but it certainly presents a new challenge to various Internet-based projects. I did consider doing research on Spanish-based, Latinx Facebook groups. This would provide an interesting field site, but it requires a different set of skills as an ethnographer. For example, one would need to be able to understand Spanish as it written out and used in informal settings (e.g. understanding that x stands for por as an example that has confused me a time or two on WhatsApp!). As Murchison explains, this would be an essential skill to have in order to “carry out effective research.” Additionally, when preforming research online, how can an ethnographer make their presence known as to not breach the privacy rights of those in such a Facebook group? Would an ethnographer need to post about their presence, or would this perhaps change how people then utilized the group?

In reference to finalizing my project idea, I am having a difficult time establishing a research question that is feasible within the scope of this semester. I am really interested in indigenous languages from Latin America and the experience of these speakers in the United States. Recently, I have been looking through data from the 2020 Census, and there seems to be a serious lack of information on the presence of these languages and speakers throughout the country—even though they are rapidly growing in numbers. I was considering exploring the experience of indigenous language speakers in local public schools or, if this proves to be too difficult in terms of finding indigenous language speakers, I would also be fascinated to learn more about the experience of Spanish speakers in English-dominated school settings. What do these students need? Is the school system able to respond to the cultural and social needs of its linguistically diverse students? It would be fascinating to sit in on ESL classes at some local schools and interview some of these ESL teachers (as I am not sure I would be able to talk with the students themselves if they are under 18 without parental consent). If anyone has any sort of thoughts to further this idea, please do not hesitate to share. Thank you!

One of my favorite quotes from this week’s reading is when deciding on your research topic “if you truly already know what you will find, then the research is unnecessary (26).” My research question is do more socially integrated youth who recently exited the juvenile system have a lower rate of depressive symptoms? In my research, I typically have assumptions about the depression symptoms of youth reentering into their communities from the juvenile legal system. However, this could bias the interview questions I develop which not only skew the results but also obscure the non-obvious. The goal should be the inner workings. In my research, the obvious factors include home life, education, and the income of guardians. However, the non-obvious include family networks, friend networks, or other motivations.

A lingering question I have of this week’s readings includes the terms etic or emic. The etic view is the outsider perspective of behaviors or attitudes of those being studied while the emic view focuses on the intrinsic cultural distinctions that are meaningful to the members of that culture/situation. Although I find these two categories useful, they operate in the binary. I am concerned that it is possible to have both an emic and etic view. For example, youth of color tend to be overrepresented (due to structural racism) in the juvenile legal system. As a researcher, I would have both a shared understanding of the issues facings the youth, however, I would still be an outsider to their lens. Yes, this means I have both the pros of each view, however, so do I possess the cons of each viewpoint. Thus, I am still debating how to minimize or counter the cons of each viewpoint.

I genuinely enjoyed Tsing’s writing style in this book – I tend to enjoy narrative ethnographies more so than formal observations as I believe it is more engaging and offers clearer insight into the role of an anthropologist.

Tsing’s use of the matsutake to speak on the importance of post industrial survival and economic renewal is a unique metaphor that represents the resilience of the mushroom itself. The mushroom’s inability to be domesticated by humans demonstrates its strength in the face of human exploitation and overharvesting of resources. However, it seems that the economic nature of our current society has fallen so low that it offers very few other choices. For instance, those who are in the career of extracting resources from the earth need to do so as a living – they are individuals who perpetuate this exploitation, but the overall problem lies in corporations and capitalistic conflicts.

In this context, I once again find the role of the anthropologist intriguing – in an anthropology class I took last year, we discussed whether it was “morally correct” for an anthropologist to passively observe their area of study, even in the face of injustice, or see such injustice happen and actively take a stance in the problem at hand. Here, it seems that Tsing has not only observed the unique context of the Japanese mushrooms, but also inserts her opinion on what it represents and how human agency can dictate the direction of our future. This leads me to wonder, should anthropologists only distribute such information to others, or should they take a stance in what they believe and mobilize people towards doing what is “right?”

I found Murchison chapters 2 and 3 really helpful for considering research questions and methods as we embark on our own ethnographies this semester and beyond. I especially found the research question section helpful (38), because I often wonder about how to navigate the transition from descriptive or “exploratory” research into analytical research. I’m starting to think about my research questions for my dissertation, so this was helpful by way of thinking about where to begin. I also like the reminder that your questions will evolve and to not worry as much about a hypothesis at first, as that may actually limit the kind of information you take in. With grant writing, though, it is essential to have some kind of hypothesis in mind, as they do note on page 40. I find myself sometimes falling into the hypothesis mode–wanting to control my questions and outcomes from the start, and I want to practice leaving that open, especially during preliminary research.

While I think it’s a good idea to consider and engage in research using multimedia forms, I’m not sure maps and charts are the most effective for me (44). I personally would like to experiment more with art, sounds, and music to capture different aspects of life and ideas. During my prior field research, I started recording different moments of sounds–community soccer games, birds chirping in the morning, the singsong of the garbage truck (yes, the garbage trucks played music), and the sound of the gravel crunching underneath my feet as I walked to the bus stop. I’d like to figure out how to incorporate “soundscapes” into my research and more analytical questions going forward.

One thing I’m thinking about ethically is how to make sure that people know you’re in the observer/researcher role in large, public spaces. While it’s easy to make this known in small group settings or for interviews, I wonder how feasible that is when attending a large community event, festival, or rally. While I understand that ethically, these events are public, I still struggle with the idea that I may be observing something private. Another ethical concern in my research is that I often interview people who are not literate, so obtaining a signature does not make sense, and in some cases, signing forms has been associated with coercion (like forced sterilization after women “signed” forms from the government that they did not read nor understand). I want to make sure that I’m able to convey my research goals and interests and obtain consent, without scaring anyone away from participating. How to walk that line is one question I’d like to explore more.

In Tsing’s profoundly symbolic writing The Mushroom at the End of the World, she juxtaposes the human notion of progress with the idea of capitalism and the generally uncertain future that we face. What I found interesting in Tsings description of “progress” is that she clearly conceptualizes it as a process that doesn’t always mean betterment— even though its connotation in colloquial terms is often as such. We typically associate progress with improvement, going towards a desired future result. However, Tsing examines our future through the lens of the rigid phenomenon of capitalism, and how the progress of capitalism has contributed to an ambiguous future reality. She utilizes the mushroom trade as a symbol to show how capitalist tendencies today strive to make everything a commodity for business success. She expresses this frustration evidently when she describes that the human desire for concentration of wealth has historically made “both humans and nonhumans into resources for investment” (page 20). By reducing living objects to “resources for investment” in this line, Tsing has illustrated the exploitative nature of capitalist tendencies and leaves the reader with an ominous, and overtly precarious, vision of how this could potentially have ramifications for our future.

In attempting to relate the Tsing reading to the other readings about ethnography and research methods, I found that Tsing does an excellent job of attention to detail that is so characteristic of ethnographies as outlined by Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw Chapter 1. Tsing’s impactful choices of detail include descriptions from both the past and the present in her documentation of the mushroom trade. Not only does she provide context for her claims through the historical analysis of the significance of the mushroom and its Japanese roots, she also provides analogous symbols such as the railroad and logging industries mentioned at the very beginning of the chapter. Tsing also effectively conveys her information in a way that reinforces her central juxtaposition— ecology versus economy, and how this will come to affect and contribute to the future of the human race on earth, and what role the notion of progress has in this uncertainty. 

From the reading, I am left wondering about how Tsing will further the mushroom analogy throughout the book to illustrate the abuses of modern day industry and how human greed for wealth has affected our future. So, if I had to formulate a question— How has the human drive for progress created uncertainty in our future… What are specific examples of this that we witness in our everyday lives? In what ways have we seen “progress” be representative of something that didn’t necessarily improve?

(Posted late as I just received access to the “new post” feature, as activated in class).