Participant observation

Participant observation is a special kind of observation, in which the researcher is not

a passive observer but a participant in the events being studied (Yin 2003). This

method includes joining a group, watching what goes on in everyday life situations

and settings, note-taking, and writing up findings (Bryman 2004).

The two main limitations of the participant observation approach are that the act of

146

observed in situations (Flick 2006). To reduce the influence of the researcher’s participation, triangulation of observations with other sources of data increase the

expressiveness of the data gathered. Openness is essential when collecting data based

solely on communicating with the observed; and in the participant observation used in

this study, the investigator tried not to express his own perspective when

communicating with informants, in order to reduce his influence over those whom he

observed.

In order to collect observational data, the investigator joined many social activities,

such as parties, dinners, and visits to informants’ homes. Specifically, the investigator joined more than 15 gathering parties, more than 17 dinners with friends and relatives,

and engaged on many occasions in causally chatting with friends and relatives during

the observation period. Two key schools, two common schools and one bad school

were visited, as were the homes of 11 teachers, 3 headteachers, and 12 families of

students. The researcher observed all people around him at any time, so it is difficult

to record precisely how many hours he spent on observation. The researcher wrote

field notes in the form of a diary almost every day from 10th _{June to 10}th _September,

completing over 35,000 words of field notes written in English.

What the investigator observed included some people (headmasters, parents, teachers,

147

some activities (the entrance exam, lottery activities). He also conducted many home

visits with gifts, which cost him around 4000 yuan in City A, and about 3000 yuan in

City B. The investigator visited some “cigarette and wine shops” to observe what kind of gifts they were selling, and how much the gifts cost.

The investigator took a part-time teaching job in two training centres in City A to

observe how the students studied there and how the training centres were organised.

This provided additional opportunities to interview some students and parents. The

investigator also observed the entrance exam for School A and School B on 14th July

2012, and visited some schools, including School A, School B, School E, and a poor

village school, to see what the facilities looked like.

A problem may occur if the observer loses his/her external perspective and

unquestioningly adopts the viewpoints shared in the field, thereby “going native” (Flick 2006, p223). Participant observation produces the dilemma between increasing

participation in the field, which can result in a greater understanding, and the

maintenance of a distance, which allows for understanding to become scientific and

verifiable. Recognising that it is not easy to maintain distance from the field as a

“professional stranger”, particularly when investigators stay in the field for a long period of time, the investigator tried to gain, so far as possible, an internal perspective

148

same time. In this research, steering and planning the observation, as well as

reflecting on the literature resources, reduced the danger of the researcher “going native” and adopting perspectives from the field unreflexively (Flick 2006). When the investigator interacted with the field, the object of research was most consistently

realised. When observing and taking notes, the investigator always reminded himself

of the research object, his own status, and the importance of remaining open minded

and value-neutral. In addition, it is worth noting that the researcher’s action in the

field is understood not only as a disturbance but also as an additional source, or

cornerstone, of knowledge, when properly exploited (Flick 2006).

The observation also included observing some physical artefacts, in the form of gifts.

These are mainly expensive bottles of wine, cigarettes, tea, and health care products

(such as ginseng, bird’s nest, etc). The investigator observed how and why some gift recipients re-sell expensive gifts to the shopkeeper, the price, the package of gifts, and

the etiquette of giving gifts. The investigator heard some stories of gift giving and

guanxi practice in the shops, but due to access problems, only one shop was observed

in City A and another shop in City B.

Taking field notes is an important part of the participant observation role. The

researcher usually wrote down some keywords on his mobile phone when observed

149

a part of the observation was covert, the investigator visited people’s homes to observe guanxi practice and wrote down the notes as soon as he left the scene, in

order to avoid memory failure. Afterwards, he took full observational notes in

English.

There are some potential dangers for both the observer and the observed. However,

for the researcher, the fieldwork did not take place in an alien environment with

hostile strangers, but amongst his guanxis, especially in City A. Besides, the research

did not always pose follow-up questions on the issue of corruption, because of the

importance of maintaining the safety of both the participant and researcher. This was

particularly the case for distant guanxi, who may not have so much trust toward the

researcher. The corruption cases that were observed in the field are kept strictly

confidential, and all the sites and people are protected by anonymity. The steps that

were taken to ensure anonymity are discussed later in this chapter.

In City B, only a small amount of observation was conducted, and most data was

collected by interview. As noted, the investigator has weaker guanxi in City B, and

conducting covert observation in that city may have presented dangers to him.

Frequent visits to the cigarette and wine shops, and to some officials’ homes, resulted

in a cautious and hostile atmosphere. Moreover, data collected by the observations in

150

The investigator eventually decided to stop observing and to interview instead, which

is a safer way to collect data.