Tools of Data Collection | Anthropology Optional for UPSC PDF Download

Introduction
To understand human cultural and biological diversity, anthropologists have developed different methods, tools and techniques to carry research. In anthropological research, data is gathered with the help of various methods, tools and techniques by doing fieldwork and laboratory work. Contemporary methods, tools and techniques in anthropology are different from those used by anthropologists earlier.
To understand human cultural diversity, social anthropologists developed a method called ethnography. In ethnographic research, data collection is carried out primarily through fieldwork. In physical/biological anthropology, human evolution and human variation are the two main areas of research. To understand this they have certain well defined procedures by which biological traits are studied. In biological anthropology, there are methods by which certain traits are observed, some traits are measured, and others are chemically tested and so on. Accordingly, different types of apparatus, instruments and chemicals are used to carry out various observations and measurements in physical anthropology.
Social/cultural anthropologists go to field and gather data for their research by using appropriate methods, tools and techniques through direct observation.
Archaeological anthropologists also use various methods, tools and techniques to study man-made artifacts that are most times buried deep in the layers of the earth.
This unit discusses different types of methods, tools and techniques in anthropological research.

 Methods of Data Collection in Social/Cultural Anthropology
The terms method, methodology, approaches and perspectives have many times been used without much conceptual and operational clarity. It is difficult to demarcate each of these terms. A method is a way of conducting and implementing research, while methodology is the science and philosophy behind all research (Adams John et.al 2007). In a field-based research a researcher first needs to decide on the topic and based on the topic select appropriate methods, tools and techniques. Broadly the following are the main methods, tools and techniques for data collection in socio-cultural anthropology. They are
Observation (participant observation or non-participant observation)
Case study
Genealogy
Questionnaire
Interview
Schedule.
You will learn other methods, tools and techniques in unit six and ten. Let’s understand some important methods, tools and techniques in anthropology.
Observation as a Method
Observation is viewing a particular incident or phenomena or even interactions and interpersonal relationship between two or more people. However, this viewing to be a part of a scientific investigation needs to be systematic and contextual. For example, if you go to a community and observe a tree in the village, just to describe the tree, its location within the village is not enough. One needs to relate this tree to the activities of the community, how the people relate themselves to the tree, the significance of the tree in the lives of the community, if that is observed, recorded and reported, the tree becomes a part of the scientific observation. Observation is further divided into
(a) Participant observation
(b) Non-participant observation
(c) Quasi-participant observation
Some anthropologists also talk about direct participation observation and indirect participation observation.
Participant Observation Participant observation owes its subsistence to Malinowski whose study among the Trobriand Islanders of Papua New Guinea set the benchmark for fieldwork in anthropology. Malinowski had stated in order to participate in the everyday activities of the community, “one has to cut oneself off from the company of other white men, and remaining in as close contact with the natives as possible, which really can only be achieved by camping right in their villages” (Malinowski, 1922: 6). This was one of the classic ways to carry out observation and, to a certain extent, it is right to state that in order to connect with the people under study one needs to live the lives of those people. However, in the twenty-first century when the very definition of field has changed from an ‘exotic’ location far away from a researcher’s homeland, camping right in the middle of the community might not be possible, if the study area is an institution like school, non-government organization, corporate space. More so, anthropologists need not be far away from their own kind, as researchers today also conduct work among their own communities to have an insider’s view. Participant observation amounts to the researcher participating in the activities of the community under study where the researcher directly involves himself or herself to be a part of the community or activity.
Non-Participant Observation In non-participant observation the researcher observes the activities of the community under study from a distance without getting directly involved. Here the researcher is detached and does not experience the lives of the people under study. The researcher here records observations and data as an ‘outsider; viewing the activities in an objective manner, whereas, if the observer participates and gets involved both physically and emotionally, the observation becomes subjective in nature, where the observer not only records data on the basis of observation but also on their personal experiences.
Quasi-Participant Observation In most cases the observation conducted by researchers in the field is known as quasi-participant observation as complete participation in many cases is not possible. Many a times it is not possible for the researcher to get directly involved in the field situation. For example while studying the rites de passage in a community, a researcher may closely observe the initiation rituals being performed for the boys or girls, however, the researcher cannot in person go through the initiation rites. Thus, even though there is participation, yet it is not complete.

Case Study Method
Herbert Spencer was the first sociologist to use case material in his ethnographic work. A case study involves an in-depth research of a particular event, incident or phenomena where a community or a group of people are directly involved or affected. Let us take the example of the Bhopal Gas Tragedy which happened in Bhopal on 3rd December, 1984. One can study the aftereffects of the tragedy in terms of either of the following

• physical issues
• biological issues
• psychological issues

medico-legal issues. In such a study, the homogeneity of the group is described in terms of its association with the tragedy and how the individuals relate to the tragedy. Human mind has a way of remembering incidents and occurrences that are relevant to its own self. Thus, case studies of different people relate directly or indirectly to the incident when they can provide information on the same context, but from different perspectives or levels of memories and understanding of the event.
A case study is a holistic method that enables us to get an all-round perspective on a single incidence or event. Some anthropologists, like Max Gluckman and Van Velson, had also devised what was known as the extended case method. This was often used for analysis of conflicts and legal disputes and cases and basically consisted of following a case or an event over a long period of time, so that one could get an insight not only into structures and norms, but also into processes of social life.

Genealogy Method
Genealogy helps in tracing the line of descent. It forms an integral part of anthropological fieldwork as it connects the past to the present. Genealogical studies have also unveiled the myths and beliefs associated with ancestors and ancestor worship. For example, during a genealogical study in a Karbi village, it was seen that many people in the family shared the same name. The genealogy revealed that newborn in a family could be named only after those ancestors for whom the chomangkan (ritual related to ancestor worship) ceremony had been performed. As the chomangkan ceremony required a huge amount of funds and finances, the Karbis have almost stopped performing this ritual and in the village the last chomangkan had taken place some twenty years ago, when the study was being conducted in the late nineties.

Tools and Techniques
In order to conduct an interview we need to have a systematic approach. Questions are formulated so that the researcher is able to acquire relevant information from the informants during an interview. Different types of interview schedules and guides are prepared as per the requirement of the research work. For a direct interview, either a structured interview schedule or unstructured interview guide is prepared by the researcher. (what is the difference between a schedule and guide?)
Interview schedule Interview schedule is the format used by the researcher during an interview. An interview schedule can either be structured or unstructured. A structured interview schedule has a fixed format of questions that the researcher uses while conducting an interview, which is mainly used for conducting surveys, or for gathering quantitative data. Census data is normally collected using fixed structured interview schedules. In most cases such quantitative data needs to be compiled, tabulated and analyzed.
Interview guide Unstructured interview guide is used for taking interviews where a strict format is not followed. It is mainly used for qualitative data. The interview guide helps in structuring a few basic questions regarding the topic that have relevance and need to be questioned during an interview, which might not be in any set framework. These questions help in maintaining the flow in a conversation and also guide the interviewer to bring the conversation back to the topic whenever the informant gets too carried away and moves astray from the topic. An interview using an interview guide can be free flowing such as while gathering information for a life history or case study.
Questionnaire When the researcher is not physically present, a questionnaire can be sent to the informant who fills up the information. A questionnaire can be used in the virtual space too, for example, a survey can be posted online on asocial networking sites that allows a respondent to fill up the same online without having to take a print out. The difference between an interview schedule and a questionnaire is this: an interview schedule is administered by the interviewer himself/herself in the field, who fills up the information in the sheet, while for a questionnaire the researcher is directly not present with the informant when she or he fills up the answers.
The sequence of questions is very important for a questionnaire. One begins with simple and forthright questions that can be easily answered followed by more difficult and reflective questions. Often one can give multiple-choice questions where one has to choose from several options. Also one needs to place what are known as test questions. To assess the reliability of answers to vital questions, one may have to frame multiple questions to get at the same information.
For a questionnaire to be administered, the key informant has to be literate enough to fill up the form, a drawback that is not there while administering an interview schedule.
Interview Interviewing, according to Goode and Hatt (1981), is fundamentally a process of social interaction. In a field situation, it is not enough to observe. Observation needs to be linked to questioning of phenomena, incidents and events. There are many ways of conducting an interview as there are many types of interviews. The basic interview techniques are:

• Direct interview: the researcher meets the informant and conducts a
  face-to-face interview.
• Indirect interview: the researcher can either send the interview questions
  to the informant via mail/post, email or conduct a video, web or
  telephonic interview.

Direct interview may be either formal or informal. In a formal interview, a researcher needs to follow certain protocols, such as the following 

• take prior appointment with the person to be interviewed,
• take consent of the informant,
• decide on a space and time for the interview.

In many cases, the length of the interview time is also pre-decided. Such interviews involve key stakeholders, like government officials or renowned persons in their field for whom time is of the essence.
However, in afield situation in a village, most interviews are informal and, at times, impromptu. When a researcher is staying with the people she or he can conduct interviews while working with the community people, helping out with some community work or even while sharing a cup of tea in the village tea stall or at someone’s place. This is has been called ‘deep hanging out’ by many anthropologists (Fontein, 2014). During fieldwork, direct interview is the norm, either formal or informal. Consent of the participants, be it verbal or non-verbal, is of essence while conducting any type of interview.
The advantages of direct interview over indirect interview is that while interviewing, it is not just what is being said that is important but how it is being said. People may say one thing or say it in a way that what they mean is different from what they speak. Also a silence or reluctance to speak is also data in its own way. Facial expressions and emotional responses are recorded along with what is actually just spoken. Thus for anthropologists, face-to-face as well as open-ended interviews are a much preferred technique than formal structured and restricted interviews. What we call open-ended interviews also allow free flow of ideas and information, that give rise to a rich depth of data that is not possible in structured formats.