Ethnography's Warrants

Bibliographic Data

ID2331789
AuthorsJ Katz (0000-0002-2649-610X, University of California, Los Angeles, corresponding author)
Year1997
Volume25
Issue4
Pages391-423
Publication date1997-05-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueSociological Methods & Research (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0049-1241 • E-ISSN: 1552-8294
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0049124197025004002
OpenAlexW2091739935
LanguageEN
Citations received89
References cited47

Assuming your argument is empirically sound, so what?' Ethnographers are especially vulnerable to this question because their warrants are commonly diffused throughout their texts, because they aim to describe what is obvious to their subjects, and because such rude questions usually are raised only silently. Perhaps the most common warrant for ethnography is a claim that social forces have created a moralized ignorance that separates research subjects and the research audience. The author discusses several dilemmas that plague ethnographers when they attempt to bridge the gap, and then he describes the strategy of naturalistic ethnography. Last, he briefly addresses a broader range of warrants, identifying five additional, frequently used, complementary justifications for ethnographic studies

Argument (complex analysis) · Bridge (graph theory) · Epistemology · Ethnography · Ignorance · Naturalism · Sociology · Warrant · Anthropology · Anthropology: Ethics, History, Culture · Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice · Philosophy · Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access