As this blog is dedicated to all things anthropology a blog
post dedicated to how anthropologists conduct their work seems
appropriate. Today’s blog post is
dedicated to just such a topic, specifically the methods used by sociocultural
anthropologists. As sociocultural
anthropologists focus on the study of modern human groups and their cultures
their methods are tailored specifically to such pursuits and vary widely as a
result. This blog post will provide a
brief summary of the different options sociocultural anthropologists have
available to them in their pursuits of understanding the people and cultures
they study and work with.
 |
| Figure 1: Margaret Mead & Samoan Women (from the film Anthropology on Trial) |
One of the most common and popular sociocultural methods is
participant observation (Figure 1).
Participant observation is a characteristic
ethnographic technique in which the anthropologist joins in the events of daily
life of the people and culture he or she is observing, describing, and studying. The motivation for this method is that
one must experience the culture to truly understand the culture, and it is
believed that by doing so the anthropologist avoids any bias and ethnocentric
views in regards to the culture/group/community under study.
 |
| Figure 2: Anthropologist interviewing a Mongolian pastoralist (Image Source: Colorado State University Anthropology) |
Another method is to interview (Figure 2), or focus on
talking to locals to learn more about culture and research “problem”. When one uses this method the anthropologist
typically starts with simple questions and eventually moves on to more complex questions. There are several reasons for this, ranging
from the anthropologist gaining a better understanding of the language and
culture of the group they are studying to taking the time to gain the group’s
trust. In the pursuit of this methods anthropologists
will oftentimes employ an interview schedule, which is a means of creating a
formal interview structure that includes a series of questions and identifies
specific individuals one should talk with. This method allows for qualitative
and quantitative research to be collected, as well as provides options for discovering
side avenues of research.
 |
| Figure 3: Natalia Escobar acted as my key consultant when I worked in Chile in 2009. (Photo is my own) |
The last method anthropologists will also often times employ
is a key consultants/informant (Figure 3), which is an individual who has a
great deal of knowledge on local life and assists the anthropologist understand
that aspect. Key consultants/informants
are primarily used to help the anthropologist understand that specific aspect
of the culture under study, but these individuals are also useful in acting as
a gateway into the community and culture.
In this way the key consultant/informant is very helpful to anthropologists
in many ways.
In conclusion, sociocultural anthropologists have a wide
array of methods available to them. While
participant observation is both common and popular, the other two methods, the
interview and key consultant/informant, serve a purpose both in combination
with and separate from the participant observation method. Ultimately, none of these methods is best in
all sociocultural anthropological studies, and the sociocultural
anthropologists ultimately choose the method(s) that work best for their goals
and the culture they seek to understand better.
Works Cited
Gezon, L., & Kottak, C.
(2014). Cultural Anthropology
McGraw-Hill.
Welsch, R.L. & L.A.
Vivanco. (2015). Cultural Anthropology: Asking Questions About
Humanity. Oxford University Press.
