Revisits

An Outline of a Theory of reflexive ethnography

Bibliographic Data

ID3103418
AuthorsM Burawoy (0000-0002-7195-7278, University of California, Berkeley, corresponding author)
Year2003
Volume68
Issue5
Pages645-679
Publication date2003-10-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueAmerican Sociological Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0003-1224 • E-ISSN: 1939-8271
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/000312240306800501
OpenAlexW4385886549
LanguageEN
Citations received380
References cited128

This paper explores the ethnographic technique of the focused revisit-rare in sociology but common in anthropology-when an ethnographer returns to the site of a previous study. Discrepancies between earlier and later accounts can be attributed to differences in: (1) the relation of observer to participant, (2) theory brought to the field by the ethnographer, (3) internal processes within the field site itself, or (4) forces external to the field site. Focused revisits tend to settle on one or another of these four explanations, giving rise to four types of focused revisits. Using examples, the limits of each type of focused revisit are explored with a view to developing a reflexive ethnography that combines all four approaches. The principles of the focused revisit are then extended to rolling, punctuated, heuristic, archeological, and valedictory revisits. In centering attention on ethnography-as-revisit sociologists directly confront the dilemmas of participating in the world they study-a world that undergoes (real) historical change that can only be grasped using a (constructed) theoretical lens

Epistemology · Ethnography · Field (mathematics · Participant observation · Reflexivity · Relation (database · Sociology · Anthropology · Computer Science · Management and Organizational Studies · Mathematics · Philosophy · Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics · Social and Cultural Dynamics

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub