Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
source of this information. Similarly, individuals involved in illegal activity—
ranging from handling venomous rattlesnakes in a religious ceremony to sell-
ing heroin in East Detroit to build a gang empire—have a legitimate concern
about the repercussions of the researcher's disclosing their identity.
The use of pseudonyms is a simple way to disguise the identity of individ-
uals and protect them from potential harm. Disguising the name of the village
or program can also prevent the curious from descending on the community
and disrupting the social fabric of its members' lives. Similarly, coding confi-
dential data helps prevent them from falling into the wrong hands.
In some instances, pseudonyms are not very helpful. Tribal villages have
only one chief as a rule, schools have one principal, and social programs have
one director. Pseudonyms, however, can still protect these individuals from the
researcher's larger audience.
The ethnographer must exercise judgment in every instance in which an
individual's identity becomes public. The ethnographer must decide whether
the information is sufficiently important to justify effectively revealing the
identity of the individual, whether the same information can be presented in
another way by using other sources, or whether the finding must be abandoned
because of the clear and present harm it represents to the participants. In addi-
tion, in many cases the culture or the program is public knowledge. In others,
participants request that the researcher use their names (Booth, 1987). In these
cases, ethnographers must use their judgment without being paternalistic.
Reciprocity
Ethnographers use a great deal of people's time, and they owe something in
return. In some cases, ethnographers provide a service simply by lending a
sympathetic ear to troubled individuals. In other situations, the ethnographer
may offer time and expertise as barter—for example, teaching a participant
English or math, milking cows and cleaning chicken coops, or helping a key
actor set up a new computer and learn to use the software. Ethnographers also
offer the results of their research in its final form as a type of reciprocity.
Some circumstances legitimate direct payment for services rendered, such
as having participants help distribute questionnaires, hiring them as guides on
expeditions, and soliciting various kinds of technical assistance. However,
direct payment is not a highly recommended form of reciprocity. This
approach often reinforces patterns of artificial dependence and fosters inap-
propriate expectations. Direct payment may also shape a person's responses or
recommendations throughout a study. Reciprocity in some form is essential
during fieldwork (and, in some cases, after the study is complete), but it should
not become an obtrusive, contaminating, or unethical activity.
