Assessing Trustworthiness in Naturalistic Consumer Research

7/25/2019 Assessing Trustworthiness in Naturalistic Consumer Research

1/23


2/23

researh provides novel, deep insi%hts. Certainly missin% are %uidelines for developin% interestin% ideas or

deep insi%hts. In fat, to $rovide suh a list of ?ho1'to? steps is likely to ne%ate the essential spontaneity and

serendipity that %uide %ood researh. It is our personal e@periene that suh ideas are muh more likely to

emer%e from playfulness and openness than from mehanisti proedures 7see Belk !"#(8. In spite of the

a6sene of a disussion of interestin%ness and insi%htfulness, 1e re%ard these as very important

onsiderations in evaluatin% researh, 6ut find them to 6e 6eyond the sope of this 1ork.

-ur purpose here is to disuss those researh proedures that esta6lish the trust1orthiness of the researh

enterprise, even thou%h they in no 1ay insure that the output is ?%ood? in an overall sense. rust1orthiness is

one omponent of %ood researh, 6ut is ertainly not enou%h 6y itself. In fat, it is our sense that merely

follo1in% the proedures 1e outline here 1ould likely produe a rather 6orin% output.

With these autions in mind, 1e 1ill proeed to disuss ho1 researhers, revie1ers, and readers of partiipant'

o6servation, ethno%raphi studies mi%ht ome to trust the onlusions reahed in suh researh.

In their fre5uently'ited 7!"#8 6ook entitled aturalisti! 'n7uir, /inoln and +u6a indiate that there are four

5uestions onernin% trust1orthiness that are important for any kind of in5uiry. he 5uestions that they raise

are

!. o1 do 1e kno1 1hether to have onfidene in the findin%s

9. o1 do 1e kno1 the de%ree to 1hih the findin%s apply in other onte@ts

D. o1 do 1e kno1 the findin%s 1ould 6e repeated if the study ould 6e repliated in essentially the same

1ay

(. o1 do 1e kno1 the de%ree to 1hih the findin%s emer%e from the onte@t and the respondents and not

solely from the researher

While 1e do not fully a%ree 1ith the ans1ers that /inoln and +u6a 7!"#8 provide for these 5uestions, 1e

a%ree that the 5uestions are %enerally appropriate to raise in evaluatin% naturalisti researh. We 1ould add a

fifth 5uestion that is an e@tension of the fourth one

. o1 do 1e kno1 1hether the findin%s are 6ased on false information from the informants

)ah researh pro%ram and philosophy of siene develops its o1n riteria and proedures for ans1erin%

these 5uestions. his definition of the %oals of a siene is foundational to the ondut of a self'ritial pratie

of siene. o1ever, it is essential that 1e do not assume that the epistemolo%y underlyin% these 5uestions is

the same for positivist and non'positivist in5uiry 7see Smith and eshusius !"#&, udson and -zanne !"##8.

/inoln and +u6a 7!"#&8 note that positivist in5uiry has developed a set of riteria for ans1erin% the first four

5uestions that fit 1ith its ontolo%ial and epistemolo%ial assumptions. hese riteria are internal validity,

e@ternal validity, relia6ility, and o6:etivity. hese riteria are 6ased on assumptions that link positivist

philosophy and positivist approahes to methodolo%y.

But these riteria are not appropriate 1hen the researh is 6ased on a post'positivist philosophy and employs

partiipant'o6servation, ethno%raphi methods. As /auden 7!"#(8 and Anderson 7!"#&8 note, philosophi aims

and empirial methods are ine@tria6ly linked. /inoln and +u6a assert that these four positivist riteria for

evaluatin% positivist researh methods are inonsistent 1ith a postpositivist philosophy of siene in the

follo1in% 1ays

!. Internal validity assumes a mirrorin% of researh 1ith a sin%le e@ternal reality 1hih is not assumed to e@ist

6y post'positivists.


3/23

9. )@ternal validity onflits 1ith post'positivist notions that 5uestion the %oal of %eneralizea6ility.

D. Relia6ility assumes sta6ility and replia6ility that do not fit 1ith the use of emer%ent desi%n to respond to the

human as an instrument attemptin% to understand a dynami and su6:etively shaped phenomenon.

(. -6:etivity assumes an independene 6et1een kno1er and kno1n 1hih naturalisti in5uiry takes as

impossi6le.

herefore, instead of employin% positivist ans1ers to the four 5uestions onernin% trust1orthiness, /inoln

and +u6a su%%est as su6stitute riteria

!. Credi6ility 7ade5uate and 6elieva6le representations of the onstrutions of reality studied8

9. ransfera6ility 7e@tent to 1hih 1orkin% hypotheses an also 6e employed in other onte@ts, 6ased on an

assessment of similarity 6et1een the t1o onte@ts8

D. =ependa6ility 7e@tent to 1hih interpretation 1as onstruted in a 1ay 1hih avoids insta6ility other than the

inherent insta6ility of a soial phenomenon8

(. Confirma6ility 7a6ility to trae a researher2s onstrution of an interpretation 6y follo1in% the data and otherreords kept8

hese are meant to ans1er the same underlyin% 5uestions as the riteria employed in positivist researh, 6ut

to address them 1ithin the tenets of postpositivist philosophy of siene. 0Also see irshman 7!"#&8 for

ela6oration of these four riteria.4 We su%%est a fifth riterion that orresponds to the additional 5uestion raised

a6out findin%s 6ased on false information from informants

. Inte%rity 7e@tent to 1hih the interpretation 1as unimpaired 6y lies, evasions, misinformation, or

misrepresentations 6y informants8.

In this hapter 1e 1ill outline speifi tehni5ues 1hih an 6e used 6y researhers for assessin% the e@tent to

1hih their researh meets eah of these five riteria. /inoln and +u6a su%%est several researh tehni5ues

for assessin% fit 1ith their riteria 7and, 1e su%%est, inte%rity as 1ell8 in naturalisti researh 1hih inlude

a. prolon%ed en%a%ementEpersistent o6servation

6. trian%ulation of soures, methods, and researhers

. re%ular on'site team interation

d. ne%ative ase analysis

e. de6riefin%s 6y peers

f. mem6er heks

%.seekin% limitin% e@eptions

h. purposive samplin%

i. refle@ive :ournals

:. independent audit


4/23

he use of these tehni5ues ena6les researhers 1ho are ondutin% as 1ell as those 1ho are readin% the

output of naturalisti in5uiry to evaluate the ompleteness 7or, alternatively, 1hat /inoln and +u6a all

?sloppiness?8 of the researh proedures used and the human instrument employed.

In the remainder of this hapter, 1e 1ill desri6e the tehni5ues appropriate for assessin% trust1orthiness on

eah of these five riteria and the lo%i that motivates their use. o1ever, 6eyond this desription, 1e 1ill

evaluate these tehni5ues 6ased on our use of them in researh stemmin% from the Consumer Behavior-dyssey, a field researh pro:et on onsumption onduted in the summer of !"#& 6y a rotatin% team of t1o

dozen aademi researhers travelin% aross the U.S. in a rereational vehile 7Wallendorf and Belk, !"#>8.

We 1ill employ e@amples from our researh primarily 6eause it is the 1ork 1hih 1e kno1 6est and therefore,

1e are 6est a6le to provide details onernin% its ondut 1hih are not usually availa6le in 1ritten 7realist8

presentations of researh results 7Fan Maanen !"##8.

It is not the intention of this hapter to present a ?ne1 orthodo@y? 1hih suppresses variety and

responsiveness in the desi%n and implementation of interpretive researh. A6ove all, 1e support the idea that

researh desi%n should 6e responsive to the nature of the researh fous, and the tehni5ues employed

should address the 5uestions presented a6ove 1ithin the varieties of onte@t partiipant'o6servation,

ethno%raphi researhers hoose to e@plore.

CR)=IBI/IG ASS)SSM)*

In assessin% the redi6ility of a researh pro:et, 1e must onsider 1hat 1as done durin% data olletion, in the

formation of an interpretation, and in the presentation of the final interpretation to readers. ehni5ues for

enhanin% redi6ility durin% data olletion inlude prolon%ed en%a%ement, persistent o6servation, and

trian%ulation aross soures and methods. Sine the onstrution of an interpretation in ethno%raphi field1ork

6e%ins durin% data olletion 7+laser and Strauss !"&>8, the tehni5ues for enhanin% redi6ility in

interpretation formation also 6e%in in the field. hese tehni5ues inlude re%ular on'site team interation,

ne%ative ase analysis, trian%ulation aross researhers, and de6riefin%s 6y peers. ehni5ues for enhanin%

redi6ility that pertain most appropriately to the sta%e of preparin% a presentation of the interpretation for

readers inlude mem6er heks and audits. With the e@eption of audits 1hih 1ill 6e disussed in a later

setion, eah of these 1ill 6e disussed and evaluated in this setion.

$rolon%ed )n%a%ement and $ersistent -6servation

Condutin% ethno%raphi researh re5uires spendin% suffiient time in a onte@t to develop an understandin%

of the phenomenon, %roup, or ulture in 6road perspetive 6efore fousin% on a partiular aspet or theme

im6edded in that onte@t. /inoln and +u6a point to ;reeman2s 7!"#D8 o6:etion to Mead2s 7!"9#8 early fous

on aspets of adolesene 7arisin% from the a priori theories that her advisor ;ranz Boas advoated8 1ithout

first attemptin% to understand the onte@t of Samoan ulture in 1hih this 6ehavior 1as em6edded. he

pro6lem 1as not the e@istene of a priori theory, either e@pliit or impliit, 6ut rather the lak of attention to the

key feature of naturalisti in5uiry''namely, that it takes plae in situ and is therefore su6:et to a muh 6roader

set of influenes than apply in the la6oratory. hat is, despite her len%thy stay in Samoa 7rou%hly one year in

the initial field1ork8, Mead did not really onform to the spirit of prolon%ed en%a%ement as a means to

emer%ent interpretation.

But ho1 prolon%ed is prolon%ed Clearly the amount of time re5uired varies. Cultural anthropolo%ists

ondutin% field1ork for an initial pro:et in an e@oti ulture 1ith 1hih they are unfamiliar often spend at least

a year enmeshed in the ulture. Werrier and Shoepfle 7!"#>8 su%%est that even after this time period,

lan%ua%e skills are likely to 6e 1oefully inade5uate to o6tain a deep understandin% of the onepts of the

ulture. Ur6an soiolo%ists ondutin% field1ork in their home ulture may 6e%in to fous on one aspet of

soial ation more 5uikly sine the onte@t is already a part of their e@periential portfolio. ypially, rather than

livin% at a researh site 7Mannin% !"#>8, they maintain fre5uent ontat 1ith soial ators in the soial 1orld


5/23

they are studyin%, and ondut their field1ork throu%h these interations 7see for e@ample, Sno1 and Anderson

!"#>8. Similarly, researhers ondutin% field1ork in a onte@t 1ith 1hih they have previously 6eome

intimately familiar may more readily 6e a6le to ondut dia%nosti researh in a ne1, 6ut similar settin%.

o1ever, in familiar onte@ts there is the dan%er of 6ein% too familiar 1ith phenomena so that an appreiation

of that 1hih is taken' for'%ranted 7Wirth !"&(8 is more diffiult to a5uire. ere the researher must 1ork to

intentionally ultivate a more distaned and ritial naivete, 1hih also re5uires prolon%ed en%a%ement and an

a6ility to pereive thin%s 1ith ?ne1 eyes? and ne1 ears

-f ourse, more is needed than :ust spendin% a lon% time in a settin% or soial 1orld. $rolon%ed en%a%ement

is reommended partly in order to a5uire suffiient o6servations to 6e a6le to assess the distortion 1hih may

e@ist in the data. hrou%h persistent o6servation, the researher a5uires suffiient depth of understandin% to

assess the 5uality of the data. his is a topi to 1hih 1e 1ill return in the setion on inte%rity.

he len%th of time appropriate to spend in a partiular onte@t is thus a funtion of the purpose of the researh

and the prior e@periene of the researhers. $rototypial sin%le site ethno%raphis in onsumer researh have

6een ompleted in the United States 6y eisley, M+rath and Sherry 7!"##8 at a farmers2 market and 6y

M+rath 7!"##8 at a %ift store. 7See also Sherry and M+rath''this volume.8 he %oal in eah of these pro:ets

1as onstrutin% a desription and interpretation of soial ation at a sin%le site that 1as initially unfamiliar to

the researhers. In eah ase, partiipant'o6servation researh 1as atively onduted over a time span ofleast t1o omplete yles of the phenomenon of interest 7a%riultural seasons for the farmers2 market pro:et

and the yearly ourrenes of the %ift oasions of Christmas and anukkah for the %ift store pro:et8.

he shorter len%th of time spent at a s1ap meet for the Consumer Behavior -dyssey pilot pro:et 7Belk, Sherry

and Wallendorf !"##8 ompleted one miroyle 7the four days of one 1eek2s tradin% yle8 em6edded in

several lon%er Cyles %overnin% seasonal han%es and faility loation. Beause the data 1ere %athered

primarily durin% one miroy le, 1e ould only employ perspetives of ation 7informant e@planations of their

ations to the researher8 in referrin% to patterns pertinent to lon%er ylesH ho1ever, 1e ould employ 6oth

perspetives of ation as 1ell as perspetives in ation 7o6servations of atual 6ehaviors8 in interpretin%

patterns 1ithin this miroyle 7see Sno1 and Anderson, !"#>H +ould, Walker, Crane, and /idz !">(8. In

summary, one onsideration in determinin% ho1 prolon%ed the en%a%ement must 6e is the len%th of the yle

over 1hih the phenomenon of interest manifests itself.

Beause the 6roader Consumer Behavior -dyssey sou%ht to e@plore phenomena and themes in Amerian

onsumption that 1ere not site' or re%ion'speifi, movement aross sites 1as employed. *either the s1ap

meet pro:et nor the Consumer Behavior -dyssey pro:et follo1ed the approah taken 6y a 4one

anthropolo%ist studyin% an e@oti ulture, 6eause neither pro:et utilized a sin%le researher or foused on

lar%ely unfamiliar phenomena. Instead, the time spent in field1ork at a partiular site emer%ed from a

onsideration of the overall %oals of the pro:et and the information o6tained. In all ases, reportin% the amount

of time spent at a site, the num6er of researhers, and the roles taken 6y the researhers 7Adler and Adler

!"#>8 is important in esta6lishin% trust1orthiness in the presentation of the interpretation.

In advoatin% persistent o6servation, 1e are not referrin% to dis%uised o6servation, 1hih $unh 7!"#&, p. >98

notes may amount to ?rippin% and runnin%.? By 6ein% open 1ith informants a6out purposes and researher

identities, 1e have often 6een allo1ed aess to a 1ider ran%e of 6ehaviors than 1ould other1ise have 6een

the ase. -vert ondut of researh allo1s the researher to ask 5uestions and pro6e issues 1hih 1ould

seem inappropriate for a supposed non'researher partiipant 7see $rus !"#8. =is%uised o6servation inhi6its

the partiipant'o6server2s a6ility to remain in the onte@t for a prolon%ed period of time 1ithout allin% his or her

role into 5uestion. his persistent o6servation may 6e needed to overome potential impression mana%ement

on the part of informants. -pen reruitment and involvement of informants as informants allo1s researhers

from the ulture to more 5uikly asertain the nature of the onte@t and to %o on to fous on speifi themes of

interest.


6/23

rian%ulation aross Soures and Methods

A seond means 6y 1hih trust1orthiness is enhaned durin% data olletion is throu%h trian%ulation aross

soures and methods. rian%ulation aross soures re5uires the researher to develop evidene for an

interpretation from interation 1ith several informants, partiularly several types of informants as the purposive

samplin% plan unfolds. rian%ulation aross methods re5uires the researher to test an interpretation in data

%athered usin% several different methods. he a6ility to employ multiple methods may depend upon otheraspets of field1ork, inludin% the presene of a team of researhers 7see =enzin !">8.

;or e@ample, in the study of a farmers2 market 6y eisley, M+rath, and Sherry 7!"##8, the researhers found

ertain sellers 1ho 1ere not on friendly terms 1ith other sellers. 2Me use of a researh team for data olletion

ena6led different researhers to speak 1ith sellers on different sides of this ompetition 1ithout harmin%

rapport 6y appearin% to these sellers to have multiple alle%ianes 7see also =ou%las !">& for a disussion of

the use of teams to study multiperspetival realities in onflitful soieties8.

We have found that mem6ers of a researh team have differential aess to various types of informants and

eah researher may o6tain different types of information from the informant. =ou%las 7!">&8 refers to this as

the role speialization and omplementarity of team mem6ers. ;or e@ample, the type of information and

relation 1e develop 1ith an informant is 6ased at least partially on the %ender om6ination of the researherand the informant. 0See the olletion of hapters edited 6y Whitehead and Cona1ay 7!"#&8, and the

mono%raph 1ritten 6y Warren 7!"##8.4 In addition, 1e have found that aess to hildren may 6e differentially

availa6le to male and female researhers, partiularly in ommunities 1ith a stron% 7need for8 onern 1ith

protetion of hildren from stran%ers 7see ;ine !"# and ;ine and +lasner !">"8. Sine no one researher has

ideal aess to all types of informants, team researh enhanes the a6ility to trian%ulate aross soures.

his is not to imply that trian%ulation aross soures is limited to informant soures. Material from art and

literature an serve as a valua6le additional soure in onstrutin% an interpretation 7e.%., Belk, Wallendorf,

Sherry, ol6rook, and Ro6erts, !"##H Belk !"#&H Wallendorf !"##8. Suh soures an provide a narrative and

historial perspetive that informants may 6e una6le to provide.

)@ept for seondary soures, trian%ulation aross soures re5uires areful attention to reordin% ontat 1ith

informants in fieldnotes that provide as muh detail as possi6le. his is espeially important in a team onte@t

%iven the possi6ility that somethin% that one team mem6er does not onsider important may in fat 6e

important 1hen trian%ulatin% on somethin% that another team mem6er disovers to 6e important to an

interpretation. =etailed fieldnotes allo1 the researher to hek for lak of a%reement in a systemati and non'

defensive manner at a later point in time 1hen details of informant interations may not 6e aessi6le to

memory 7Wyer and Srull !"#8.

/ike trian%ulation aross soures, trian%ulation aross methods mi%ht inorporate seondary data, 6ut it

normally re5uires multiple types of primary data olletion. Fideoreordin% and still photo%raphy are t1o very

useful methods in this re%ard 7see Belk, Sherry, and Wallendorf !"##8. hey provide the researher 1ith the

?ne1 eyes? mentioned in the earlier disussion of prolon%ed en%a%ement. he use of videoreordin% and still

photo%raphy for trian%ulation aross data olletion methods is one reason 1e disa%ree 1ith irshman2s

7!"#&8 o6:etion to the use of audio and video reordin%s in humanisti researh in marketin%. Althou%h

ertainly not providin% the un6iased perspetive on human interation 7Sonta% !">D8 that positivist siene

6elieves e@ists, still and video photo%raphy do provide a perspetive on field interations that is meanin%fully

different from that provided in fieldnotes 7Collier and Collier !"#&H Beker !"#&8. As suh, video and still

photo%raphy serve as separate methods for assessin% an interpretation and there6y enhanin% its

trust1orthiness. In our e@periene there is %enerally muh more to %ain in o6trusively, openly, and honestly

videoreordin% and talkin% to onsumers than in ompletely fore%oin% this opportunity and relyin% only on

uno6trusive o6servation. In the a6sene of videoreordin%, the same an 6e said of audioreordin%, as

=ou%las 7!"#, p. #D8 notes


7/23

he reorder is 6oth a reassurane of the seriousness of your pursuit and a 6rutal tehnolo%ial reminder of

human separateness that undermines the intimate ommunion you are tryin% to reate. he reorder is a

dou6le'ed%ed s1ord and is thus 5uite pro6lemati. But it is suh a po1erful 1eapon in the fi%ht for truth that it

must 6e used in all situations 1here it is allo1ed 6y the %oddesses.

Althou%h 1e 1ould not make suh a universal prolamation onernin% the use of audioreorders, 1e do

support their use 1here the researher deems them an appropriate tehnolo%y for developin% trust1orthyinterpretations.

;inally, trian%ulation aross methods sometimes means supplementin% other data 1ith that %ained throu%h

personal refletion 7e.%. ol6rook !"#&a8, partiularly 1hen systemati data searhes have %one as far as they

are a6le and additional needed data an only 6e provided 6y introspetion. Impliitly all researh employs

introspetion as a Soure of hypotheses, empathy, and testin% of 1hether an e@planation seems to ?play? in

the e@periene of the researher. Intentionally and systematially refle@ive :ournal entries in field researh

provide formal aess to these refletions that an 6e shared aross researhers.

Some e@amples of the usefulness of :ournals in our o1n researh ome to our minds here. We serendipitously

disovered, throu%h the use of systemati omputerized data searhes 7Belk !"##8 that our o1n data

olletion ativities mirrored those of interest in a pro:et on olletors and olletions 7Belk, Wallendorf,Sherry, ol6rook, Ro6erts !"##8. Similarly, some of our onerns a6out privay and time to 6e alone 1hile our

team traveled aross the ountry in a rereational vehile mirrored those of informants 1ho disussed their

day'to'day onerns a6out privay in their homes 7Wallendorf !"##8. In 6oth ases, refle@ive material from

:ournals 6eame primary data a6out the phenomenon of interest, addin% to the a6ility to trian%ulate aross

methods.

o1ever, at this point a onern a6out the dysfuntional onse5uenes of employin% multiple methods and

soures must 6e raised. )ah of them len%thens the amount of time a researh pro:et 1ill take 6efore data

olletion, data analysis, and report preparation are ompleted and the pro:et is ready to 6e su6mitted for

revie1. Get, as is the ase 1ith any type of researh, speed to print must 6e traded a%ainst trust1orthiness of

the effort. he tradeoff an most fully 6e seen 6y the researher, 6ut hopefully areful editors and revie1ers in

onsumer researh 1ill assess trust1orthiness as 1ell as interestin%ness and timeliness of a manusript.

Re%ular -n'Site eam Interation

Credi6ility is also failitated 6y re%ular on'site team interation. his allo1s eah team mem6er to ontri6ute to

the olletive sense of 1hat is appropriate to the emer%ent desi%n. In partiular, onsite team interation an

fous on plans for purposeful samplin%. It also an serve to re'ener%ize the team in the tirin% proess of

field1ork.

In our o1n field1ork, 1e fre5uently meet at a site to disuss suh issues. In addition, durin% the ondut of

field1ork, the Consumer Behavior -dyssey pro:et routinized suh meetin%s eah evenin% in 1hat has ome

to 6e alled a =-A, or =aily -dyssey Audit 7see Belk, Sherry, and Wallendorf !"##8. o1ever, suh

interations take on a peuliar harater 6eause of a set of informal rules that 1e have found helpful to

invoke. Until fieldnotes are ompleted 6y eah team mem6er for that day2s field1ork, 1e onfine ourdisussions to methodolo%ial details suh as samplin% plans, or to operational details suh as diretions or

meal plansH 1e deli6erately do not disuss any statements made 6y an informant 7e.%., ?Could you 6elieve he

said, ...?8 or any interpretations of informants2 omments 7e.%., ?hat2s the most ompulsive olletor 1e2ve

talked to yet.?8 until 1e have eah ompleted reordin% fieldnotes for the day2s interations. his makes for a

stran%e form of soial interation in the interim, 6ut makes trian%ulation aross sets of notes more le%itimate 6y

not alterin% eah other2s reall or understandin% of 1hat 1as said or done 6efore 1e reord it. herefore,

althou%h 1e routinely en%a%e in re%ular on'site team interation, 1e 1ould stress the importane of 6ein%

autely sensitive to the need to ondut suh meetin%s in a 1ay that, if it doesn2t avoid the potential for


8/23

%roupthink entirely, avoids shapin% a speifi interpretation too soon in response to the %roup $roesses 1hih

emer%e in team researh.

*e%ative Case Analysis

In onstrutin% a redi6le interpretation of ethno%raphi data materials, /inoln and +u6a also su%%est the use

of ne%ative ase analysis, in 1hih the researhers onstrut an interpretation and then su!!essiel modify itas they enounter instanes that provide ne%ative support for the ori%inal hypothesis. his is some1hat akin to

the analyti approah su%%ested 6y +laser and Strauss 7!"&>8 in 1hat they all the onstant omparative

method 7see also Miles and u6erman !"#(H MCall and Simmons !"&"8. Both disussions are 6ased on the

presumption that purposive samplin% has attempted to insure that ne%ative instanes have 6een sou%ht durin%

field1ork. hat is, as an interpretation emer%es from field1ork, it is the researher2s o6li%ation to seek data

1hih 1ould 6e most likely to not onfirm the emer%in% hypothesis. ;or ela6oration of different perspetives on

the advanta%es and disadvanta%es of this proedure, see u6er 7!">D, !">(8, Shmitt 7!">(8, and Stone, et

al. 7!">(8.

In doin% ne%ative ase analysis after field1ork has 6een suspended, it is neessary to rely on a detailed set of

fieldnotes that ontain all aspets of interations 1ith informants. Althou%h 1e reo%nize that they are holdin%

out an ideal, 1e find it diffiult if not impossi6le to atualize the stron% form of ne%ative ase analysis desri6ed6y /inoln and +u6a 7!"#, p. D"8

he o6:et ... is ontinuously to refine a hypothesis until it a!!ounts for all known !ases without

e!etion7italis in ori%inal8.

As 1ill 6e disussed in the setion on assessin% researh inte%rity, 1e reo%nize that data are never perfet

refletions of the phenomena 6ein% studied. hus 1e re:et the a6solute form of ne%ative ase analysis in

1hih no e@eptions are allo1ed. o1ever, /inoln and +u6a 7!"#, p. D!98 also have some reservations in

this re%ard and seem to su%%est a 1eak form of ne%ative ase analysis that 1e find more aepta6le

But perhaps the insistene on +ero e@eptions may 6e too ri%id a riterion. Indeed, on its fae it seems almost

impossi6le to satisfy in atual studies .... In situations 1here one mi%ht e@pet lies, fronts, and other deli6erate

or unonsious deeptions 7as in the ase of self'delusions8, some of the ases ou%ht to aear to 6e

e@eptions even 1hen the hypothesis is valid simply 6eause the false elements annot al1ays 6e fully

penetrated. Get, if a hypothesis ould 6e formulated that fit some reasona6le num6er of ases''even as lo1,

say, as & perent''there 1ould seem to 6e su6stantial evidene of its aepta6ility. After all, has anyone ever

produed a perfet statistial findin%, si%nifiant at the . level

In presentin% an interpretation to readers, the 1ays in 1hih ne%ative ase analysis has 6een employed should

6e e@pliitly detailed to ena6le readers to :ud%e the redi6ility of the proedures for themselves. Readers

should 6e provided 1ith the researher2s sense of the ran%e and nature of e@eptions as 1ell as the stren%th of

support for an interpretation. his presentation style also allo1s the researher to 6uild the ar%ument for the

interpretation, rather than :ust presentin% the interpretation. It allo1s the reader to :ud%e the researh and

ome to onlusions onernin% redi6ility for himself or herself. In these 1ays, ne%ative ase analysis serves

to temper the natural enthusiasm of the researher.

rian%ulation aross Researhers

rian%ulation aross researhers is another tehni5ue used for enhanin% the redi6ility of an interpretation.

-6viously, it is only availa6le to team researh. rian%ulation aross researhers adds to the redi6ility of a

pro:et in t1o 1ays 7!8 6y permittin% a hek on the reportin% ompleteness and auray of eah researher

throu%h omparisons of multiple sets of fieldnotes overin% the same interation, and 798 6y ena6lin% the

onsideration of an interpretation from the vanta%e of several different researhers. his latter feature of


9/23

trian%ulation does not al1ays mean that only one interpretation 1ill emer%e. Instead, 1e have often found that

multiple interpretations emer%e, 1hih may differ 6ased on other differenes in 6ak%round 6et1een

researhers 7e.%., field of trainin%, a%e, %ender, lass ori%in, reli%ion8. +iven the post'positivist re:etion of the

assumption of a sin%le ausal reality, this is entirely appropriate if the data have 6een suffiiently mined for

depth of insi%ht. o1ever, 1e 1ould assert that the multiple interpretations developed 6y a team should 6e

a6le to o'e@ist if the interpretation is to 6e re%arded as trust1orthyH they should not ne%ate eah other. If there

are multiple interpretations that emer%e from a team, eah interpretation an 6e presented to the reader for

onsideration.

;or e@ample, Belk, Wallendorf, and Sherry 7!"#"8 distin%uish amon% ultural, soial, and psyholo%ial

interpretations of the funtions of sared onsumption. While the o'authors em6rae the various

interpretations to different de%rees, the interpretations do not ontradit eah other. he key point is that the

interpretations developed 6y a team should appear plausi6le and firmly %rounded to eah mem6er of the team

and should not 6e mutually e@lusive. his is 1hat is meant 6y this feature of trian%ulation aross researhers.

=e6riefin%s 6y $eers

/inoln and +u6a 7!"#8 also su%%est de6riefin%s 6y peers as a tehni5ue for enhanin% redi6ility of

interpretation. By this they mean that researhers should periodially meet 1ith peers 1ho are not researherson the pro:et 6ut 1ho 1ill serve to riti5ue and 5uestion the emer%in% interpretation 6efore the researhers

6eome fully ommitted to it.

In t1o 1ays 1e employed this tehni5ue on the Consumer Behavior -dyssey pro:et. Most formally, a

de6riefin% session 1as held appro@imately mid1ay throu%h the data olletion phase. Inluded in this meetin%

1ere several researhers 1ho had 6een involved ontinuously in the data olletion on the pro:et, one

researher 1ho had 6een initially involved in the data olletion 6ut had not 6een travelin% for the most reent

fe1 1eeks, several researhers 1ho had 6een %atherin% data at one site throu%hout the previous months, and

t1o individuals 1ho 1ere interested in the pro:et, 6ut had not 6een involved in data olletion. he mi@ture of

persons represented served to permit the %roup to dra1 from the data %athered so far, 6ut 1ithout all present

havin% full kno1led%e of the data. his hallen%ed the researhers 1ho had 6een involved in all of the sites

visited thus far to 6e%in to e@plain 1hat they 1ere findin% to the others present. In doin% so, ommonalities

aross sites and interations emer%ed that led to the development of a list of themes. Smaller de6riefin%

meetin%s of this sort 1ere held at several sites alon% the 1ay 1here ollea%ues in other universities and in

sponsorin% or%anizations hosted or met 1ith us. In all ases, the %oal 1as to sensitize researhers to onepts

1hih mi%ht 6e applia6le in interpretin% the data in a 1ay 1hih failitated later data olletion. $remature

formulation of one omplete e@planation or interpretation 1as deli6erately avoided 6y onludin% at the point of

identifyin% themes to 6e e@plored in later field1ork.

A seond, less formal 1ay in 1hih de6riefin%s 6y peers 6eame a part of the -dyssey pro:et 1as in 1hat

1ere ostensi6ly 6riefin%s held for those 1ho 1ere :ust :oinin% the pro:et2s data olletion efforts as 1e moved

aross the ountry. While the prior esta6lishment of %roup ulture made these some1hat diffiult and

sometimes ineffetive rites of transition, they also served to introdue the researhers to ne1 ollea%ues 1ho

1anted to kno1 1hat 1e 1ere findin%. Suh e@planations served to sharpen our interpretations as 1ell as to

see 1hether they ?played? to a ne1 audiene. In response to suh interations, researhers 1ho had already

6e%un to develop personal 1ays of understandin% the data 1ere hallen%ed to formalize this understandin% for

others throu%h memos and disussions durin% =-As.

In %eneral, 1e found de6riefin%s 6y peers to 6e en:oya6le, 6ut not al1ays as produtive as other tehni5ues

su%%ested. o1ever, this evaluation may stem from the some1hat unusual rotatin% harater of the team

formed for this pro:et. =e6riefin%s 6y peers may 6e more useful in a pro:et 1here the team formed is more

onstant and endurin% in harater, a feature 1e 1ould prefer in the future.


10/23

Mem6er Cheks

A final tehni5ue for esta6lishin% redi6ility is a mem6er hek, in 1hih the interpretation and report 7or a

portion of it, perhaps re1ritten for the lay reader8 is %iven to mem6ers of the sample 7informants8 for omment.

heir omments serve as a hek on the via6ility of the interpretation. o1ever, ontrary to the proedure

reported 6y irshman 7!"#&8, omments provided throu%h mem6er heks need not serve as the 6asis for

revisin% the interpretation. Informant disa%reement 1ith elements of a report that laim to 6e emi desription1ould re5uire revision. o1ever, sine ators do not al1ays have aess to the ran%e of information a6out a

phenomenon that researhers do, informants may disa%ree 1ith some eti interpretation 6ased on the

uni5ueness of their position relative to that of the researhers. ;or e@ample, in a pro:et on a s1ap meet, 1e

found different reations to the report in separate mem6er heks 1ith a 6uyer and 1ith some sellers 7Belk,

Sherry, and Wallendorf !"##8. In suh ases, it is appropriate to note the informants2 disa%reement in the

report and attempt to e@plain it 6ased on differenes in soures of information availa6le to the informant and to

the researhers. his position akno1led%es the idea that some informants 7and all informants some of the

time8 are systematially and neessarily 1ron% in 1hat they suppose or report is %oin% on. We 1ill return to this

issue in our disussion of inte%rity.

hus, the several possi6le ne%ative outomes to a mem6er hek should 6e treated differently dependin% on

1hether the point of disa%reement onerns desriptive emi material or interpretive eti material. ;ore@ample, in our researh on s1ap meets, 1e did not e@pet to have the informants 1ho partiipated in the

mem6er heks respond 6y sayin%, ?Why, of ourse, I have often noted the importane of the saredEprofane

onept in e@plainin% 1hat happens here.? )ven 1hen some of the informants are apa6le of assessin%

a6strat interpretations, it is not e@peted that all informants 1ill 6e e5ually insi%htful. When 6oth eti

interpretation and emi desription is the %oal, it is possi6le 7and desira6le8 that the informant not disa%ree 1ith

the interpretation, 6ut instead essentially say, ?I never 5uite thou%ht of it that 1ay.? +enerally the more a6strat

the interpretation, the %reater the potential for deferrin% to the researher2s interpretation of the entire orpus of

data and the lesser the usefulness or appropriateness of a mem6er hek. Similarly, if informants disa%ree 1ith

a6strat eti interpretations 7e.%., as some mi%ht 1ith the onlusion that olletions le%itimize

a5uisitiveness''B elk, Wallendorf, Sherry, ol6rook, and Ro6erts !"##8, this may not 6e onsidered %rounds

for re:etin% the interpretation.

Some eti interpretations may 6e re:eted 6y informants for reasons of self'presentation and soial desira6ility.

We found this to 6e the ase 1hen s1ap meet informants used in a mem6er hek su%%ested that 1e

overestimated the inidene of ille%al ativity at the meet, for e@ample 7Belk, Sherry, and Wallendorf !"##8.

he most trou6lesome outome for esta6lishin% redi6ility is a mem6er hek in 1hih an informant disa%rees

1ith items in the report that omprise emi desription. Unless suh disa%reements an learly 6e attri6uted to

the partiular informant2s aess to the phenomenon 6ein% different from that of most informants or to the

desire to present oneself in a soially desira6le 1ay, suh outomes imply that the report should 6e revised

and that perhaps the field1ork is inomplete.

ere, 1e should point out several other, more lo%istial, pro6lems 1ith mem6er heks 6ased on the varyin%

suess 1e have en:oyed in attemptin% to use them in several pro:ets. *ot all informants are 1illin% to read

throu%h an aademi report merely to do the researhers a favor. Another related pro6lem is that a mem6er

hek may often represent an upsale 6ias. It favors those 1ho are more insi%htful and artiulate, 6ut Werner

and Shoepfle 7!"#>8 su%%est that this may not 6e a pro6lem. We are not trou6led 6y usin% artiulate and

insi%htful persons for mem6er heks sine findin% an informant 1ho is 1illin% and interested in $rovidin% suh

feed6ak is not al1ays easy. In %eneral, 1e have found mem6er heks to serve a useful funtion in our

researh, espeially 1hen 1e had 5uestions a6out the ade5uay of our understandin% 6ased on limited time of

e@posure to the site 7Belk, Sherry, and Wallendorf, !"##8. hus, a mem6er hek an serve to ounter6alane

onerns a6out 1hether en%a%ement 1as suffiiently prolon%ed.


11/23

In an informal sense, mem6er heks are arried out ver6ally throu%hout the ondut of field1ork as the

researher onstantly heks his or her understandin% of the phenomenon 1ith informants. 7).%., ?Some

olletors have told us that.... =oes that seem aurate to you? ?So 1hat you2re sayin% is that ... 2 ?Is it true

that ... ?8 he a6ility to ondut this onstant hek on interpretation as it emer%es is yet another advanta%e to

undis%uised o6servation and fully informed onsent from informants. Beause en%a%in% in suh hekin%

1ould seem out of harater for a dis%uised partiipant 1ho is really a researher, it is less likely to 6e

employed in overt researh 7e.%., irshman !"#&8. ;or further disussion of the moral dilemmas of overt

o6servation, see )rikson 7!"&>8 and Bulmer 7!"#98.

In summary, mem6er heks onduted informally throu%hout field1ork and more formally after draftin% a

report serve to enhane the redi6ility of the onstruted interpretation. o%ether 1ith prolon%ed en%a%ement,

various types of trian%ulation, team interation, and possi6ly ne%ative ase analysis and de6riefin%s 6y peers,

suh proedures an help reate redi6ility for a naturalisti researh pro:et. o1ever, other riteria for

trust1orthiness must also 6e onsidered.

RA*S;)RABI/IG ASS)SSM)*

/inoln and +u6a 7!"#, p. 9"8 present the issue underlyin% applia6ility as ?o1 an one determine the

e@tent to 1hih the findin%s of a partiular in5uiry have applia6ility in other onte@ts or 1ith other su6:ets7respondents8? his issue is parallel to the issue of e@ternal validity in e@perimental and survey researh

7Camp6ell and Stanley !"&&8. /inoln and +u6a 7!"#8 alon% 1ith Shmitt 7!">(8 su%%est an easy, 6ut

perhaps too faile ans1er to this 5uestion in post'positivist researhH namely, that if other researhers are

onerned 1ith the applia6ility of the findin%s in another onte@t, they should do researh usin% similar

methods in another time or plae and then ompare. his may 6e the 6est ans1er 1hen the study is an in'

depth desriptive ethno%raphy of a sin%le site, or%anization, or %roupH ho1ever, in other 6roader or more

e@planatory researh, inludin% those addressed 6y the Consumer Behavior -dyssey, applia6ility is a

onern.

;or many of the phenomena investi%ated 6y the -dyssey, the data 1ere olleted aross'a variety of sites

usin% 1hat Whyte 7!"#(8 alls ?hunt and pek ethno%raphy.? In suh field1ork, rather than seekin% to

understand a sin%le site, or%anization, or %roup, 1e sou%ht to understand onsumption phenomena a!ross a

variety of sites, or%anizations, and %roups. Sometimes the phenomenon 1as a type of 6ehavior, suh as

sellin% used merhandise. In other ases, suh as the onversion of artifats from profane ommodities to

sared ions, the phenomenon ould our throu%h a variety of 6ehaviors. ne proedures for esta6lishin%

transfera6ility in these t1o ases are some1hat different as e@plained in the ne@t t1o setions.

rian%ulation aross Sites throu%h $urposive Samplin%

In onstrutin% an understandin% of a type of 6ehavior that takes plae fairly predita6ly in partiular onte@ts,

1e sou%ht to esta6lish transfera6ility 6y %oin% to multiple venues of these types to study the phenomenon. ;or

e@ample, sellin% used merhandise takes plae predita6ly at s1ap meets, %ara%e sales, pa1n shops, anti5ue

autions, and other suh seond order market institutions. herefore, our researh on the sellin% of used

merhandise involved doin% field1ork at s1ap meets in different loales 6eause they are similar seond order

market institutions. We 6e%an 6y onsiderin% the initial s1ap meet e@amined 7Red Mesa S1ap Meet8 on

different days of the 1eek and at different times of day 7see Belk, Sherry, and Wallendorf !"## and Belk,

Jassar:ian, Sherry, and Wallendorf !"#>8. We revisited this same s1ap meet durin% three different months to

provide some temporal omparisons over a lon%er period of time. We ne@t moved to other loales. -ne 1e

had some evidene that similar 6ehaviors and motivations 1ere in evidene in s1ap meets in several ities

and states, 1e sou%ht to investi%ate other types of s1ap meets suh as ispani meets and ones speializin%

in speifi merhandise suh as anti5ues. We also 6e%an to investi%ate other seond order markets, inludin%

autions, anti5ue stores, and %ara%e sales. Suh purposive samplin% e@amines the 5uestion 1ill the same


12/23

6ehaviors 6e found here too his proedure fouses the researh on e@planatory onepts rather than merely

on produin% thik desription of partiular sites.

Seekin% /imitin% )@eptions

o esta6lish the transfera6ility of a phenomenon represented 6y a set of 6ehaviors that an our in a num6er

of sites or %roups, 1e pro%ressively e@panded the types of sites and onte@ts in 1hih the phenomena ofinterest 1ere investi%ated. We sou%ht to %ather suffiient understandin% of onsumption phenomena that 1e

ould understand the transfera6ility and limits of our findin%s. /imitin% e@eptions not only define the

6oundaries or limits of transfera6ility, they also offer the opportunity for understandin% 1hy the theory doesn2t

1ork in some instanes. Suh insi%hts then re5uire other testin% at additional purposively sampled sites,

hosen to see if the preditions from a tentative understandin% of the 6oundaries of the e@planation are 6orne

out.

;or instane, 1e had 6e%un to think that one items entered an individual2s olletion, they 1ould not leave.

But 1e found instanes 1here items from a olletion were disposed of. Initially, it seemed that the e@planation

1as that this 1as aepta6le to olletors 1hen the item 1as replaed 6y a 6etter one, thus up%radin% the

olletion. We then o6tained support for this e@petation, 6ut also found that suh up%radin% 1as most likely

1hen the olletion 1as limited 6y spae and funds, as is often the ase 1ith automo6iles. his led to thedevelopment of the onept of ?serial olletions? in 1hih the set of thin%s in the olletion ould e@ist aross

the olletor2s lifetime involvin% o1nership of only one item at a time, 6ut still vie1ed 6y the o1ner as 6ein% a

olletion. Besides automo6iles, this 1as found to hold for olletions of plaes some people had visited 7see

Belk, Wallendorf, Sherry, ol6rook, and Ro6erts !"##8.

)mer%ent =esi%n

Assessin% the transfera6ility of an understandin% of phenomena found in a variety of 6ehaviors is a 6it more

diffiult. $erhaps the disussion is 6est 6e%un throu%h e@ample. We found profane to sared onversions in a

variety of onte@ts that eventually led to a typolo%y of profane to sared onversions. Amon% the types of

onversion proesses identified 7see Belk, Wallendorf, and Sherry !"#"8 1ere %ift'%ivin%, 6e5ueathin%, and

a5uisition durin% pil%rima%e 7e.%., souvenirs8. With suh a diverse set of phenomena, the people and venues

in 1hih this theoretial phenomenon an 6e investi%ated are o6viously 5uite 6road. Suh a situation makes

purposive samplin% more of a hallen%e, 6ut it also makes findin% potential test ases muh easier. In some

instanes 1e found that the same people ould 6e intervie1ed onernin% multiple types of profane to sared

onversions. We reated one suh opportunity 6y %oin% to a partiular ommunity and intervie1in% people in

their homes a6out the possessions ontained in these homes. Certain possessions sho1ed some hint of

saredness in their manner of display and therefore 1ere seleted as o6:ets of fous in the depth intervie1s

onduted 1ith the o1ners. Beause the possessions on display may have 6een a5uired throu%h any of the

three saralizin% proesses identified 7and may also 6e planned to 6e 6e5ueathed in the future8, this allo1ed

us to investi%ate the transfera6ility of the theorized phenomenon and ta@onomy aross, as 1ell as 1ithin

households. We also sou%ht multiple perspetives on heirlooms and %ifts 6y intervie1in% pairs of donors and

reipients separately. -ur theory of sared to profane onversions turned out to 6e 5uite ro6ust, makin% it more

diffiult to %ain losure in the 5uest for 6oundaries and e@eptions.

his diverse array of data olletion and samplin% approahes resulted from an emer%ent researh desi%n

onstruted in the field in our attempts to 6uild a theory 1hih 1as ro6ust in its transfera6ility. Suh 6road

transfera6ility su%%ests %reater e@planatory po1er for the theory 6ein% tested.

It is important to realize that 1ithin the emer%ent nature of post'positivist 5ualitative researh, transfera6ility is

not simply a matter of statin% a hypothesis and formally testin% it. he very notion of emer%ent desi%n implies

ontinual refinement. )@eptions may su%%est plain% 6oundaries on ideas a6out the transfera6ility of one2s

theory, 6ut they may also su%%est modifiations of the theory 7+laser and Strauss !"&>8. In the preedin%


13/23

e@ample, the ta@onomy of saralizin% proesses emer%ed 1hile testin% an initially more restrited notion of

saralization 1ithin the realm of %ift%ivin%. We e@panded initial 6oundaries 1hile also detetin% different types

of and rationales for saralization 7e.%., assoiations 1ith persons in %ift%ivin% versus assoiations 1ith

e@perienes in souvenirs8.

)SAB/ISI*+ =)$)*=ABI/IG

he issue of dependa6ility in post'positivist researh is similar to the issue of test'retest relia6ility in positivist

researh and is translated 6y /inoln and +u6a 7!"#, p. 9"8 as ?o1 an one determine 1hether the

findin%s of an in5uiry 1ould 6e repeated if the in5uiry 1ere repliated 1ith the same 7or similar8 su6:ets

7respondents8 in the same 7or similar8 onte@t? As /inoln and +u6a 7!"#8 point out, this 5uestion makes

more sense 1ithin a philosophy of siene in 1hih one assumes that there is a sin%le o6:etive reality 7in this

ase, unhan%in% persons and onte@ts8 ?out there? to 6e disovered. If one does not adopt this positivist

philosophy, as is the ase in post'positivist in5uiry, then the 5uestion makes muh less sense. 0o1ever, for a

differin% perspetive, see Jirk and Miller, !"#&.4 3ust as one annot ross the same stream t1ie, one may not

intervie1 the same informant t1ie or %o 6ak to the same onte@t t1ie. $eople and onte@ts 6oth ontinually

han%e. o1ever, this is an inade5uate ar%ument for totally dismissin% the onern 1ith produin% dependa6le

findin%s. If the ar%ument 1ere to 6e totally em6raed, 1e 1ould 6e sayin% that all is idiosynray and findin%s

an therefore never 6e hallen%ed. his is not the position 1e 1ish to take.

Instead, 1e 6elieve it is important to asertain the e@tent to 1hih the e@planation advaned previously is

endurin%, and the e@tent to 1hih it derives from the peuliar onver%ene of a partiular time and plae.

=ependa6ility then, as a riterion, is linked to time and to han%e proesses, rather than to sta6ility and

similarity as relia6ility issues are in positivist in5uiry. hus, for assessin% dependa6ility, 1e su%%est o6servation

over time and e@planation of han%e. Before turnin% to these su%%estions, 1e 1ill 6riefly mention another

tehni5ue 1hih 1e have found less useful, namely a dependa6ility audit.

=ependa6ility Audit

/inoln and +u6a2s primary su%%estion onernin% the dependa6ility or onsisteny issue is to ondut a

dependa6ility audit 6y %ivin% ra1 materials as 1ell as resultin% inferenes to an e@ternal auditor. o1ever, 1e

find this su%%estion to he inade5uate. Althou%h an audit an 6e useful in esta6lishin% onfirma6ility 7disussed

in the ne@t setion8, 1e f ind audits less useful in esta6lishin% dependa6ility 6eause they do not diretly

address the issue of han%e over time.

-6servation over ime and )@planation of Chan%e

Rather 1e 1ould su%%est that a ertain sort of repliation an help the researhers assess the 6oundaries of

the dependa6ility of findin%s. Rather than returnin% to informants a 1eek or t1o after previous ontat and

e@petin% everythin% to he the same aside from random variation, 1e su%%est returnin% to informants or sites

months or even years later 1hen thin%s should have han%ed in various 1ays 7see for e@ample the series of

reports from the Middleto1n studiesH e.%., /ynd and /ynd !"9"H /ynd and /ynd !"D>H Caplo1 !"#(8. Suh

revisits an help orret the e@tant ross'setional 6ias in soial siene researh. By learnin% 1hat has

han%ed and 1hether these han%es have affeted the phenomenon previously deteted, a deeperunderstandin% of the phenomenon of interest and its 6oundaries is attained. he revisit provides a more

dynami opportunity to see 1hether the han%es 1hih have ourred are still onsonant 1ith the ori%inal

theory. If they are not, the theory must either 6e modified to aommodate the une@peted findin%s or else

disarded. It an 6e seen that the emer%ent nature of suh researh does not end 1hen one initially leaves the

field or pu6lishes the findin%s of one 1ave of data olletion.

At this 1ritin%, researhers on the Consumer Behavior -dyssey pro:et have returned to people and sites in at

least five loales. We have returned several times to talk 1ith a man 1ho aumulated several %ara%es full of


14/23

possessions to %ive to others 7see Wallendorf and Belk !"#>8. We have returned several times 7and in several

different loales aross the ountry8 to talk to some s1ap meet sellers 1ho have served as informants and as

partiipants in a mem6er hek 7see Belk, Sherry, and Wallendorf !"##8. We have reontated one informant

to autodrive him 7as su%%ested 6y eisley and /evy !"##8 usin% photo%raphs of his possessions taken

previously. We have returned to re'intervie1 several 1omen in a su6ur6an ommunity 1hose homes and

possessions are a ontinuin% fous of our researh. And 1e have returned to re'intervie1 several men in a

small to1n 1hose ars and truks 1ere the fous of our previous intervie1s. In eah ase at least several

months 7and up to a year8 separated the visits. In other ases, 1e have kept in ontat 1ith informants, and

1ith han%es in their lives and onsumption patterns, throu%h ontinuin% ontat and letters, often at their

initiation. In the revisits, informants and irumstanes 1ere antiipated to have han%ed in various 1ays. We

plan to ontinue returnin% to these informants as their lives, families, areers, and a%es han%e even more.

Suh researh proedures ertainly lok the researher into a lon%'term ommitment to a pro:et, 6ut the fous

e@plored in reintervie1s may shift sli%htly over time in response to han%es in the person and situation as 1ell

as in response 'to han%es 1hih 6eome apparent in the researher.

In the ases of the men and their automo6iles for e@ample, our initial intervie1s led us to infer that for these

7then youn% sin%le8 men, the automo6ile 1as sometimes vie1ed as a rival 6y their %irlfriends. If and 1hen

these men and their %irlfriends marry, 1e 1ould e@pet the ar to 6e seen as less of a rival 7sine marria%e

implies a ommitment8, 6ut 1e 1ould also e@pet the males to divert some of the time previously spent on theirars to home and family ativities instead. We have thus far had only a limited opportunity to test these

e@petations, 6eause only one marria%e has thus far taken plae amon% these men. *onetheless, 1e look

for1ard to further testin% 1ith future follo1'up visits.

In summary, rather than esta6lishin% dependa6ility throu%h an audit as reommended 6y /inoln and +u6a, 1e

reommend the use of revisits over time in a lon%itudinal approah. his approah is not meant to prelude

periodially 1ritin% interpretations of the data, 6ut is meant to temper the ross'setional 6ias inherent in soial

siene researh.

)SAB/ISI*+ C-*;IRMABI/IG

he issues of onfirma6ility is raised 6y /inoln and +u6a 7!"#, p. 9"8 in their 5uestion ?o1 an one

esta6lish the de%ree to 1hih the findin%s of an in5uiry are determined 6y the su6:ets 7respondents8 and

onditions of the in5uiry and not 6y the 6iases, motivations, interests, or perspetives of the in5uirer? he

term neutrality is an inappropriate term for this onern 6eause post'positivist researh reo%nizes that there

an 6e no a6solute o6:etivityH at 6est the researher an 6eome onsious of and hopefully redue his or her

ethnoentrism, semanti aents, and 6iases. In li%ht of this onstrutive reo%nition of the impossi6ility of

o6:etivity, there are three reommended tehni5ues to address this onern trian%ulation aross researhers

and methods, refle@ive :ournals, and auditin%. We are more in a%reement 1ith /inoln and +u6a 7!"#8 on the

tehni5ues for assessin% onfirma6ility than 1e 1ere for dependa6ility, althou%h 1e feel that these authors

plae too muh emphasis on auditin% as the 6est approah to esta6lishin% onfirma6ility.

rian%ulation

rian%ulation is meant here primarily in the sense of olletin% data 6y multiple mem6ers of a researh team.

)speially 1hen investi%atin% a site 1here partially independent 1ork is possi6le 7as 1ith a s1ap meet as

ontrasted 1ith a small private home8, team mem6ers an 1ork separately and later ompare data. )ven 1hen

t1o or more researhers are present in a sin%le intervie1 ho1ever, trian%ulation is very useful. As disussed

1ith referene to assessin% redi6ility, in all ases, it is essential that eah researher 1rite up fieldnotes and

:ournals separately 6efore disussin% anythin% a6out the intervie1 1ith the other researhers. Without this

safe%uard there is very likely a mi@in% of ideas and the possi6ility of %roupthink inreases. Beause it is

unlikely that multiple researhers 1ill have idential 6iases, the omparison of indeendent fieldnotes then

provides an opportunity 6oth to strive for independent onfirmation of o6servations, findin%s, and


15/23

interpretations, and also to learn more a6out the nature of one2s 6iases as differenes are deteted. As

mentioned earlier, it may 1ell 6e that male and female mem6ers of a researh team 1ill learn different thin%s

from the same informant, even 1hen that informant is :ointly intervie1ed 6y the researh team. ;or this reason,

havin% a researh team omposed of researhers of 6oth %enders is very valua6le. We have also tried to

represent different disiplinary trainin% and 6ak%rounds amon% researhers partiipatin% in the Consumer

Behavior -dyssey pro:et. What is 6ein% ompared in suh trian%ulation is the intersu6:etive ertifia6ility of

findin%s.

rian%ulation over data olletion methods is also sometimes useful in esta6lishin% onfirma6ility. ;or e@ample,

photo%raphs provide additional information that an 6e ompared to fieldnotes for at least some desriptive

details a6out persons, plaes, and thin%s o6served. Fideo and audio reordin%s also provide a hek on 1hat

ations took plae and 1hat 1as said. We have also found transriptions of these reords to 6e of use in

ad:udiatin% differenes in researher fieldnotes. Another %ood e@ample of trian%ulation over data olletion

methods is the 1ork of -2+uinn and ;a6er 7!"#>8 in 1hih their 5ualitative findin%s from o6servations and

depth and %roup intervie1s 1ith ompulsive shoppers 1ere supplemented 1ith 5uantitative measurement of

ompulsiveness amon% onsumers from the same %roups and amon% other onsumers as 1ell. he

omparisons of 5ualitative and 5uantitative results in this ase provides an e@ellent model that others mi%ht

follo1.

Refle@ive 3ournals

3ournals also aid in esta6lishin% onfirma6ility of findin%s. 3ournals are refle@ive douments kept 6y

researhers in order to reflet on, tentatively interret, and plan data olletion. he intent in this personal diary

is 6oth to reflet on 1hat one is learnin% and on 1hat is %oin% on 1ith the individual keepin% the diary. Werner

and Shoepfle 7!"#>8 refer to tryin% to learn a6out oneself and ho1 one may 6e affetin% the information 6ein%

%athered as tryin% to learn a6out one2s ?personal e5uation.? Ideally, the :ournal allo1s a day'6y'day or een

hour&6y'hour %au%e on the fieldnotes of the resear!her. 'n this respet, the :ournal is useful in detetin% the

influenes of the researher2s personal frame of mind, 6iases, and tentative interpretations on the data 6ein%

%athered. Beause of this shift in frame of referene and purpose, 1e find it useful for ourselves to separate

the :ournal from fieldnotes, reo%nizin% that the physial separation is dihotomous, 1hile the proesses have

moreer#eale oundaries. 0;or an ar%ument favorin% the om6ination of the t1o in one lo%, see ol6rook!"#&64. he onstrutive reo%nition of personal 6iases in the :ournal is an important learnin% e@periene for

the researher. Some even su%%est that field1orkers under%o psyhoanalysis to 6eome more insi%htful

re%ardin% their personal e5uation, althou%h fe1 field1orkers follo1 this advie.

Confirma6ility Audit

he final reommended method for addressin% the issue of onfirma6ility is an audit. /ike a finanial auditor,

the 5ualitative researh auditor e@amines the orrespondene 6et1een the data and the report. In the ase of

5ualitative researh, the data onsist of fieldnotes, :ournals, photo%raphs, audio tapes, videotapes, artifats,

and reords of the analytial proess. o%ether, suh materials omprise the audit trail that sho1s ho1 the data

1ere olleted, reorded, and analyzed 7see /inoln and +u6a !"#8. he auditor is asked to omment not so

muh on the ?truth? of the report and inferenes dra1n 6y the researhers as on the plausi6ility of their

interpretations and the ade5uay of the data. In other 1ords, auditors are asked to e@amine 1hether the

researhers have either played fast and free 1ith the data or have perhaps deluded themselves 6y makin%

inferenes that annot 6e fully supported 6y or ade5uately %rounded in the data. Auditors 1ho are familiar 1ith

the use of the methods employed 6ut 1ho are not a part of the pro:et team are seleted.

We have used auditin% in -dyssey and post'-dyssey 1orkH 1e have 6een involved in 6ein% audited 6y several

others 7Belk, Sherry, and Wallendorf !"## 1as audited 6y three ollea%ues8 as 1ell as in auditin% the 1ork of

others 7Wallendorf has audited some 1ork done 6y -2+uinn and Belk8. o our kno1led%e, these have 6een the

only appliations of auditin% in onsumer researh. Auditin% involves supplyin% an auditor 1ith all ra1 data


16/23

materials, as 1ell as the interpretation derived from themH it %oes 6eyond #erel asking ollea%ues to read an

interpretation and omment on it. Based on our eerien!e, we see the audit as a useful proedure, althou%h it

does not provide an a6solute %uarantee that the inferenes dra1n are onfirma6le or onfirmed.

Beause data interpretation is an on'%oin% proess that 6e%ins in the field, trian%ulation amon% researhers

an also 6e seen as a form of ?internal audit? use in team researh, :ust as is true of ne%otiatin% interpretations

6et1een researhers on the team one they are out of the field. In some 1ays, due to the lose pro@imity ofresearhers on a team to the phenomena of interest in a partiular researh pro:et, this internal audit is more

useful than the eternal audit where een with e@ellent data reords, the auditor remains somethin% of an

outsider.

Auditin%, like the other proedures disussed here, has its limits and pro6lems. We 1ould 6e remiss if 1e did

not mention the politial and personal diffiulties of arryin% out the role of auditor as 1ell as that of researher

6ein% audited. he auditin% proess is one in 1hih the researhers must 6are their souls in a muh more

personal and diret 1ay than ours in revie1 proesses. As a result, the auditin% proess an 6eome frau%ht

1ith hostilities and misunderstandin%s 1hih do not serve to improve the researh and may ne%atively shape

the harater of the relationship 6et1een the parties, either diretly or indiretly.

An additional limitation on e@ternal auditin% is that it 6eomes um6ersome or impossi6le as the pro:et6eomes very lar%e. In the ase of the sared and profane 1ork for the -dyssey 7Belk, Wallendorf, and Sherry

!"#"8, an auditor 1ould have to read appro@imately ! pa%es of ra1 fieldnotes and :ournals, read a%ain this

many pa%es of annotated fieldnotes used in analysis, vie1 appro@imately !D videotapes, and peruse (

photo%raphs and slides. hese 1ould then have to 6e assessed in li%ht of a !(K pa%e report of sared and

profane interpretations. o say that this 1ould plae a su6stantial 6urden on the 1ould'6e auditors is a %ross

understatement. Auditin% in this ase is simply not feasi6le. o1ever, the issue of onfirma6ility remains,

nonetheless.

herefore, instead, in suh ases, the authors must provide suffiient ver6atim material from fieldnotes that a

reader is a6le to assess onfirma6ility 1ithout resortin% to testimony from an auditor. We have found auditin% to

6e muh more useful for smaller sale pro:ets, espeially those in 1hih one 1ould reasona6ly 5uestion

1hether suffiiently prolon%ed en%a%ement and persistent o6servation 1as attained. )ven then it is important

to keep in mind that this time'onsumin% proedure adds another su6:etive assessment of the pro:et and

thus does not %uarantee its orretness. Beause of the impossi6ility of auditin% lar%e'sale pro:ets from the

Consumer Behavior -dyssey, 1e have hosen to address the onfirma6ility issue 6y plain% the data, after

appropriately dis%uisin% names to protet informant anonymity, in an arhive at the Marketin% Siene Institute

in Cam6rid%e, Massahusetts. his allo1s others to use the data to develop alternate interpretations of

phenomena and to hallen%e our interpretations.

I*)+RIG ASS)SSM)*

he pro6lem of lak of inte%rity in naturalisti 7and other8 researh arises from the possi6ility of onflit

6et1een the researher and informants, rather than from the temptations that may present themselves to the

researher. ;or e@ample, %iven the omple@ity of produin% 5ualitative fieldnotes, videotapes, and

photo%raphs, it is likely that it is more diffiult for ethno%raphi researhers to fa6riate data.

o1ever, pro6lems 1ith inte%rity may arise 1hen informants fear the researher 7espeially 1here the su6:et

of investi%ation is soially undesira6le or ille%al8, dislike the researher, or simply try to present themselves in

more attrative 1ays 7see *ahman !"#( for more disussion of the 1ays these may affet the data8. 3ak

=ou%las 7!">&8 has su%%ested four resultin% pro6lems misinformation, evasions, lies, and fronts, eah of

1hih represents a suessively more ela6orate deeption. o1ever, he points out that


17/23

Sure, people tell the truth most of the time in their everyday lives, at least as they see it. o1 often do people

6other to lie a6out the 1eather -r 1here the salt is But the outsider tryin% to find out 1hat the truth is a6out

the thin%s that ount most to people, suh as money and se@, must look upon all their aounts a6out those

thin%s as suspiious until proven other1ise 7=ou%las !">&, '&8.

Besides the %eneral strate%y of skeptiism 7e.%., =ean and Whyte !"#8, there are several other means of

assessin% and inreasin% the inte%rity of naturalisti researh. hese methods inlude

!. $rolon%ed en%a%ement and the onstrution of rapport and trust

9. rian%ulation 7aross soures, methods, and researhers8

D. +ood intervie1in% tehni5ue

(. Safe%uardin% informant identity

. Researher self'analysis and introspetion

$rolon%ed )n%a%ement and Constrution of Rapport and rust

What the strate%y of onstrutin% rapport and trust attempts to do is to han%e from a onflit paradi%m

6et1een researher and informant to a ooperation paradi%m. Suspiious informants often learn to trust a

researher 1ho sho1s sustained interest and ultivates familiarity and intimay 1ith them and 1ith others

7Wallendorf !"#>8. Beause esta6lishin% trust 1ith some informants in a settin% may ause distrust in others,

the use of a researh team in 1hih different mem6ers an ultivate different informants is espeially useful.

$rolon%ed en%a%ement %ives the researhers time to learn the nuanes and lan%ua%e of a settin% or

phenomenon throu%h partiipant o6servation. he su6tlety of this appreiation is sho1n in the %radual

development of an a6ility to kno1 1hen somethin% ?feels ri%ht? or ?feels 1ron%? 7see also the disussion 6elo1

on self'analysis and introspetion8. he researher also learns more a6out the harater of informants, their

potentially mar%inal status or a@'to'%rind motivations 1ithin the %roup, and 1hat others think of them. hus,

1hile prolon%ed en%a%ement allo1s the researher to develop rapport and trust 1ith informants, it alsoprovides a 6etter 6asis for assessin% lues to the potential deeptiveness of the information these informants

may provide.

rian%ulation Aross Soures, Methods, and Researhers

Another means of assessin% potential distortions in naturalisti researh is 6y omparin% the information

%athered usin% different informants, data olletion methods, and mem6ers of the researh team. Su6se5uent

informants are routinely asked many of the same 5uestions asked of earlier informants in an effort to hek the

auray of this information and the e@tent to 1hih it is shared. -ften key informants are assumed to provide

6etter information, 6ut 6eause they may 6e mar%inal mem6ers of a %roup, it is 1ell advised to hek their

information 1ith others. When ontraditions are found, ulterior motives, harater traits, and other inentives

to deeive must 6e onsidered in 1ei%hin% the information. Beker 7!">8 su%%ests that the onte@t in 1hih

omments are eliited should also 6e taken into onsideration. Statements made spontaneously 6y informants

should 6e valued more than responses to diret researher 5uestionsH statements made in the presene of the

researher only are to 6e valued over statements made in a %roup settin%. Suh %uidelines, of ourse, an only

6e follo1ed if detailed fieldnotes or tapin%s of eah interation and its irumstanes have 6een kept. And as

Werner and Shoepfle 7!"#>8 note, statements made later in field1ork 1ith a %iven informant 7after rapport and

trust have presuma6ly 6een 6uilt8 should 6e trusted over statements made early in the intervie1in% proess.

rian%ulation over methods is espeially helpful in omparin% intervie1'6ased perspetives on ation to

o6servation'6ased perspetives in ation 7Sno1 and Anderson !"#>8. ;or e@ample, an informant 1ho presents


18/23

a personal front of lak of involvement 1ith household pets may 6e ontradited 6y o6servations of the

informant pettin% and tenderly talkin% to the pet 7Wallendorf !"#>8. he use of photo or video reords of suh

6ehavior in autodrivin% the informant may 6e a 1ay to prelude or orret suh misstatements 7eisley and

/evy !"##8.

rian%ulation over researhers helps to assess and improve data inte%rity 6y takin% advanta%e of the a6ility of

researhers of different %enders, a%es, appearanes, and personalities to o6tain different information from aninformant. In multiple researher o6servations, personal o6server 6iases an also 6e deteted. We have

oasionally also employed a mild form of ?%ood opE6ad op? :oint intervie1in% tehni5ue in 1hih t1o 7or

sometimes even three8 researhers simultaneously intervie1 the same informant. If one of these intervie1ers

takes a more diret and 6old approah to askin% 5uestions and the other takes a more indiret and milder

approah, the informant is a6le to open up to one of the researhers 7most often the latter8 1ho is pereived

more favora6ly.

+ood Intervie1in% ehni5ue

-6viously employin% skillful and reative inter'vie1in% an also help to prelude misinformation and aid in its

detetion. Inter'vie1s should 6e%in 1ith 6road non'threatenin% 5uestions that over a 6road a%enda in

relatively little detail. Su6se5uently in the same or later intervie1s 1ith an informant more detailed andsensitive 5uestions an 6e employed, often %oin% 6ak to ideas only overed superfiially durin% initial

5uestionin%. $ro6in%, reframin%, and tryin% alternative approahes are additional parts of %ood inter'vie1in%

tehni5ue 7see =ou%las !"#8. But perhaps most important is sensitivity and adapta6ility. A team settin% allo1s

the possi6ility of employin% the intervie1er 1ho is 1orkin% 6est 1ith a %iven informant to take over more of the

intervie1 one this pattern is deteted.

Another useful intervie1in% tehni5ue is self'revelation. Contrary to the distaned approah advoated 6y

positivist researhers, naturalisti in5uirers often make it a point to offer details from their personal lives to the

informant.' -ne intent in doin% so is to defuse onerns a6out em6arrassin% revelations 6y offerin% some

personal information to the informant. o1ever, suh revelations need not, and often should not, 6e diretly

parallel to those 6ein% investi%ated. Instead, the fat that the researher is 1illin% to talk a 6it a6out himself or

herself makes the intervie1 more natural and less threatenin% to informants. It also permits the researher and

informant to temporarily onnet as fello1 humans, layin% aside the researh roles in 1hih they are en%a%ed

7Wallendorf !"#>8. Sometimes dis%uised desriptions of the 6ehavior of other informants an have the same

effet.

Beker 7!">8 su%%ests an inter'vie1in% tehni5ue of planned naivete in 1hih the researher plays i%norant

in order to %et the informant to e@plain thin%s onretely and e@pliitly. While 1e 6elieve that this tehni5ue is

sometimes useful in penetratin% some evasions, it need not 6e arried to the e@tremes of =avis2 7!">D8

?Martian? intervie1er. If the researher, like a reently'landed Martian, 6rin%s no kno1led%e that an 6e

impliitly assumed to 6e shared 1ith the informant, the inter'vie1 1ould have to o6tain e@planations of 1hy

people are 6reathin% and 1hy adults are lar%er than hildren. Clearly, the researher 6rin%s an open mind

onernin% appropriate interpretation into the fieldH ho1ever, this does not mean that the researher has a

6lank mind and is une5uipped 1ith onepts and theories 1hih may 6e usefully employed in interpretin% the

ation o6served 7Blumer !"&"H Shmitt !">(8.

he 5uestion thus is 1hat should 6e assumed and 1hat should 6e e@pliated. -ne tehni5ue 1e have found

useful in team researh is to have one researher 1ho is less familiar 1ith an informant, ulture, or %roup

settin% ondut the intervie1. Suh a researher an le%itimately ask the informant 5uestions that mi%ht

other1ise fall in the re%ion of taken ' for'%ranted assumptions 7Wirth !"&(8 that should 6e e@amined 6y the

researhers. Beause informants may hide information 6y makin% it seem that some thin%s are simply ?kno1n

6y all? or ?not to 6e talked a6out,? these tehni5ues may help penetrate suh evasions.


19/23

;inally, the 6est intervie1 is one 1hih is supplemented 6y and em6edded in o6servations of 6ehavior in a

naturalisti settin%. In other 1ords, over'reliane on intervie1 material 1ithout supplementary onte@tualizin%

o6servations and partiipation in the ulture of the informant opens the door to the impatient researher 6ein%

duped.

Safe%uardin% Informant Identity

In ondutin% inter'vie1s are should also 6e taken to e@plain ho1 the information provided 1ill 6e used, 1hat

1ill 6e done to assure informant anonymity, and the fat that the informant an at any time resind per'

missions previously %iven. 2Me use of pseudonyms and dis%uises should 6e e@plained and pratied in

fieldnotes, :ournals, and reports. Where the researher seeks information onsidered sensitive 6y the

informant, attempts to mehanially reord the onversation are not %enerally 1ell advised. o1ever, 1hat

researhers and informants may onsider sensitive often differs. ;or e@ample, reently one of the authors

intervie1ed an informant 1ho did not mind openly disussin% ille%al dru% use on videoamera, 6ut re5uested

that the amera and an audio reorder 6e turned off 1hile she disussed her opinions a6out her t1o 6rothers2

oupational hoies. What is most sensitive to an informant an not al1ays 6e antiipated ahead of time.

o1ever, prolon%ed en%a%ement usin% multiple methods 7sometimes employin% videoreordin% and

sometimes not8 provides an opportunity to penetrate suh pro6lems.

)@pliitly and repeatedly assurin% the anonymity of an informant2s identity removes one potential reason 1hy

informants may misrepresent or distort information reported to a researher. As this 6ehavior neessitates

e@pliit researh ondut, it preludes the possi6ility of ondutin% overt researh. -ddly, this undermines the

ar%ument that overt researh 1ill someho1 produe data 1hih %ives a ?truer? piture of the soial 1orld

investi%ated. Rather, it appears from our o1n researh e@periene that overt researh 6uilds in pro6lems

1hih prevent this possi6ility.

Researher Self'Analysis and Introspetion

Introspetion is the 6asis for empathy and is the first test 6y 1hih the inte%rity of researh findin%s are

assessed. Introspetion is important to akno1led%e sine naturalisti researh findin%s may also lak inte%rity

6eause of 6iases diretly 6rou%ht a6out 6y the researher. +reater researh inte%rity an 6e 6rou%ht a6out 6y

researhers more ompletely and openly understandin% themselves. o this end, Werner and Shoepfle 7!"#>8

advise that researhers under%o psyhoanalysis, althou%h they reo%nize that the num6er of 5ualitative

researhers 1ho have done so is 5uite small.

-ne e@ample of 5ualitative researh that 6enefitted %reatly from suh analysis is ol6rook 7!"##8. In this piee

the author 6e%ins 1ith an interpretation 6y other mem6ers of the Consumer Behavior -dyssey that his deor

reflets an unintentional ?%reat 1hite hunter? motif. =ra1in% on five years of psyhoanalysis, he is a6le to trae

the likely ori%in of this deor to the resolution of hildhood fears that 1ould 6e unlikely to have 6een deteted

1ith the most intensive naturalisti in5uiry.

=ou%las 7!"#8 advoates ?researher kno1 thyself2 in order that 1e mi%ht assess not only our 6iases, 6ut also

our stren%ths. e too ites ;reeman2s 7!"#D8 ritiisms of Mar%aret Mead2s Samoan researh as a autionary

e@ample

Mead2s idylli piture of se@ual li6eration on this supposed fara1ay utopia 1as pro6a6ly a pro:etion of her o1n

lonely Cravin%s 7=ou%las !"#, (8.

*ot only does self'kno1led%e potentially aid in assessin% effets on informants and data interpretation, it also

aids in appreiatin% 6iases in pro6lem and informant seletion. his is an important reason for keepin%

researher :ournals and for keepin% this material in addition to fieldnotes 7see Bo%dan and aylor !">8. =oin%

so allo1s others to potentially assess suh 6iases in researh as 1ell.


20/23

C-*C/USI-*S

In this hapter 1e have ritially disussed the use of a num6er of tehni5ues for assessin% the trust1orthiness

of partiipant'o6servation, ethno%raphi researh in onsumer 6ehavior. Issues onernin% redi6ility,

transfera6ility, dependa6ility, onfirma6ility, and inte%rity as omponents of trust1orthiness have 6een

disussed. ehni5ues for esta6lishin% and assessin% these omponents have 6een e@plained and evaluated

6ased on our use of them. he tehni5ues disussed and evaluated inlude prolon%ed en%a%ement om6ined1ith persistent o6servationH trian%ulation aross soures, methods, researhers, and sitesH re%ular on'site

team interationH ne%ative ase analysisH de6riefin%s 6y peersH mem6er heksH purposive samplin%H seekin%

limitin% e@eptionsH emer%ent desi%nH o6servation over time and the e@planation of han%esH refle@ive :ournalsH

dependa6ility and onfirma6ility auditsH intervie1in% tehni5uesH safe%uardin% informant identityH and

researher self'analysis and introspetion. $artiularly %iven the lak of a researh tradition in onsumer

6ehavior utilizin% this approah, 1e endorse areful attention to issues onernin% trust1orthiness as this field

develops suh a tradition.

R);)R)*C)S

Adler, $atriia A. and $eter Adler 7!"#>8, Me#ershi Roles in :ield Resear!h, Lualitative Researh Methods,

vol. &, Beverly ills Sa%e.

Anderson, $aul ;. 7!"#&8, ?-n Method in Consumer Researh A Critial Relativist $erspetive,? ;ournal of

onsu#er Resear!h !D 7Septem6er8, !'!>D. Beker, o1ard S. 7!">8, $o!iologi!al Work0 Method and

$ustan!e, Chia%o Aldine.

Beker, o1ard S. 7!"#&8, '".

Belk, Russell W. 7!"#&8, ?Art Fersus Siene as Ways of +eneratin% Jno1led%e A6out

Materialism,? Methodologi!al erse!ties in onsu#er Resear!h, Rihard /utz and =avid Brin6er%, eds.,

*e1 Gork Sprin%er Ferla%.

Belk, Russell W. 7!"##8, ?Lualitative Analysis of =ata from the Consumer Behavior -dyssey he Role of the

Computer and the Role of the Researher,? ro!eedings of the '!!.

Belk, Russell W., arold Jassariian, 3ohn Sherry, and Melanie Wallendorf 7!"#>8, ?Red Mesa S1ap Meet A

$ilot Study for the Consumer Behavior -dyssey,? unpu6lished report, Boston Marketin% Siene Institute.

Belk, Russell W., 3ohn ;. Sherry, 3r., and Melanie Wallendorf 7!"##8, ?A *aturalisti In5uiry into Buyer and

Seller Behavior at a S1ap Meet,? ;ournal of onsu#er Resear!h, 12 7Marh8, 229&256.

Belk, Russell W., Melanie Wallendorf, and 3ohn Sherry 7!"#"8, ?he Sared and the $rofane in Consumer

Behavior heodiy on the -dyssey,? ;ournal of onsu#er Resear!h, !& 73une8, forthomin%.

Belk, Russell W., Melanie Wallendorf, 3ohn ;. Sherry, 3r., Morris ol6rook, and Sott Ro6erts 7!"##8,

?Colletors and Colletin%,?Adan!es in onsu#er Resear!h, ol. !, Mihael ouston, ed., $rovo

Assoiation for Consumer Researh.

Blumer, er6ert 7!"&"8, $#oli! 'ntera!tionis#0 erse!tie and Method, )n%le1ood Cliffs, *.3. $rentie'

all.


21/23

Bo%dan, Ro6ert and Steven 3. aylor 7!">8, 'ntrodu!tion to >ualitatie Resear!h Methods, *e1 Gork Wiley'

Intersiene.

Bulmer, Martin, ed. 7!"#98, $o!ial Resear!h *thi!s, /ondon Mamillan $ress, /td..

Camp6ell, =onald . and 3ulian C. Stanley 7!"&&8, *eri#ental and >uasi& *eri#ental !8, ?hat2s Interestin% o1ards a $henomenolo%y of Soiolo%y and a Soiolo%y of

$henomenolo%y,? hilosoh of the $o!ial $!ien!es, 2, D".

=ean, 3ohn $. and William ;. Whyte, 7!"#8, ?o1 =o Gou Jno1 If the Informant is ellin% the ruth? -u#an

@rgani+ation, !>, D('D#.

=enzin, *orman J. 7!">8, The Resear!h A!t0 A Theoreti!al 'ntrodu!tion to $o!iologi!al Methods, Chia%o

Aldine.

=ou%las, 3ak =. 7!">&8, 'nestigatie $o!ial Resear!h0 'ndiidual and Tea# :ield Resear!h, Beverly ills

Sa%e.

=ou%las, 3ak =. 7!"#8, reatie 'nteriewing, Beverly ills Sa%e.

)rikson, Jai . 7!"&>8, ?A Comment on =is%uised -6servation in Soiolo%y,? $o!ial role#s, !(, D&&'D>D.

;ine, +ary 7!"#8, ?Crakin% =iamonds -6server Role in /ittle /ea%ue Base6all Settin% and the A5uisition of

Soial Competene,?:ieldwork *erien!e0 >ualitatie Aroa!hes to $o!ial Resear!h, William B. Shaffir,

Ro6ert A. Ste66ins, and Allan uro1etz, eds., *e1 Gork St. Martin2s $ress, !!>'!D9.

;ine, +ary and Barry +lassner 7!">"8, ?$artiipant -6servation 1ith Children,? /ran ?ife, # 73uly8, !D'!>(.

;reeman, =erek 7!"#D8, Margaret Mead and $a#oa0 The Making and /n#aking of an Anthroologi!al

Mth, Cam6rid%e arvard University $ress.

+laser, Barney +. and Anshn /. Strauss 7!"&>8, The ualitatie Resear!h, Chia%o Aldine $u6lishin% o.

+ould, /eroy C., Andre1 /. Walker, /ansin% ). Crane, and Charles W. /idz 7!">(8, onne!tions0 otes fro#

the -eroin World, *e1 aven Gale University $ress.

eisley, =e6orah, Mary Ann M+rath, and 3ohn Sherry, 3r. 7!"##8, ?A =ay in the /ife of a ;armers2 Market,?

*orth1estern University 1orkin% paper.

eisley, =e6orah and Sidney 3. /evy 7!"##8, ?;amiliar Interlude Autodrivin% in Consumer Analysis,?

*orth1estern University 1orkin% paper.


22/23

irshman, )liza6eth C. 7!"#&8, ?umanisti In5uiry in Marketin% Researh $hilosophy, Method, and

Criteria,? ;ournal of Marketing Resear!h, 9D 7Au%ust8, 9D>'9(".

ol6rook, Morris 7!"#&a8, ?An Audiovisual Inventory of Some ;anati Consumer Behavior he 9'Cent our of

a 3azz Colletor2s ouse,?Adan!es in onsu#er Resear!h, eds. Melanie Wallendorf and $aul Anderson, vol.

!(, $rovo Assoiation for Consumer Researh, !(('!(".

ol6rook, Morris 7!"#&68, ?;rom the /o% of a Consumer Researher Refletions on the -dyssey,?Adan!es

in onsu#er Resear!h, eds. Melanie Wallendorf and $aul Anderson, vol. !(, $rovo Assoiation for Consumer

Researh, D&D&".

ol6rook, Morris 7!"##8, ?Steps o1ard a $syhoanalyti Semiolo%y of Artisti Consumption o1ard a Meta'

Meta'Meta'Analysis of Some Issues Raised 6y the Consumer Behavior -dyssey,?Adan!es in onsu#er

Resear!h, %ol. !, Mihael 3. ouston, ed., $rovo Assoiation for Consumer Researh, D>'(9.

u6er, 3oan 7!">D8, ?Sym6oli Interation as a $ra%mati $erspetive he Bias of )mer%ent

heory,?A#eri!an $o!iologi!al Reiew, D# 7April8, 9>('9#(.

u6er, 3oan 7!">(8, ?he )mer%eny of )mer%ent heory,?A#eri!an $o!iologi!al Reiew, D" 73une8, (&D'

(&>.

udson, /aurel A. and 3ulie /. -zanne 7!"##8, ?Alternative Ways of Seekin% Jno1led%e in Consumer

Researh,? ;ournal of onsu#er Resear!h, !( 7Marh8, #'9!.

Jirk, 3erome and Mar /. Miller 7!"#&8, Reliailit and %alidit in >ualitatie Resear!h, Beverly ills Sa%e.

/auden, /arry 7!"#(8, $!ien!e and %alues, Berkeley University of California $ress.

/inoln, Gvonna S. and )%on +u6a 7!"#8, aturalisti! 'n7uir, Beverly ills Sa%e $u6liations.

/ynd, Ro6ert S. and elen M eff ell /ynd 7!" &Eori%. !"9"8, Middletown0 A $tud in Modern A#eri!an

ulture, *e1 Gork arourt, Brae, and World.

/ynd, Ro6ert S. and elen Merrell /ynd 7!"D>8, Middletown in Transition0 A $tud in ultural onfli!ts, *e1

Gork arourt, Brae, and Company.

Mannin%, $eter J. 7!"#>8, $e#ioti!s and :ieldwork, *e16ury $ark, CA Sa%e.

MCall, +eor%e 3., and 3. /. Simmons 7!"&"8, 'ssues in arti!iant @seration0 A Tet and Reader, Readin%,

Mass. Addison'Wesley.

M+rath, Mary Ann 7!"##8, ?An )thno%raphy of a +ift'Store,? unpu6lished $h.=. dissertation, *orth1estern

University, =epartment of Marketin%.

Mead, Mar%aret 7!"9#8, o#ing of Age in $a#oa, *e1 Gork Morro1.

Miles, Matthe1 B. and A. Mihael u6erman 7!"#(8, >ualitatie 8, ?An )@ploration of the World of Compulsive Consumption

Correlates, Aetiolo%y and Conse5uenes,? 1orkin% paper, University of Illinois Colle%e of Communiations.


23/23

$unh, Maurie 7!"#&8, The oliti!s and *thi!s of :ieldwork, Lualitative Researh Methods, vol. D, Beverly

ills Sa%e.

$rus, Ro6ert 7!"#8, ?Soiolo%ist as ustler he =ynamis of A5uirin% Information,? :ieldwork

*erien!e, William =. Shaffir, Ro6ert Ste66ins, and Allan uro1etz, eds., *e1 Gork St. Martins $ress, !D9'

!D.

Shmitt, Raymond /. 7!">(8, ?SI and )mer%ent heory A Ree@amination,?A#eri!an $o!iologi!al Reiew, D"

7D8, (D'(&.

Sherry, 3ohn R., Sr. and Mary Ann M+rath ?A Comparative )thno%raphy of the +ift Store,? this volume

Smith, 3ohn J. and /ous eshusius 7!"#&8, ?Closin% =o1n the Conversation he )nd of the Luantitative

'Lualitative =e6ate Amon% )duational In5uirers,? *du!ational Resear!her, ! 73anuary8, ('!9.

Sno1, =avid A. and /eon Anderson 7!"#>8, ?Identity Work Amon% the omeless he Fer6al Constrution and

Avo1al of $ersonal Identities,?A#eri!an ;ournal of $o!iolog, "9 7May8, !DD&!D>!.

Sonta%, Susan 7!">D8, @n hotograh, *e1 Gork ;arrar, Straus and +irou@.

Stone, +re%ory $., =avid R. Maines, arvey A. ;ar6erman, +ladys I. Stone, and *orman J. =enzin 7!">(8,

?-n Methodol

Documents

Assessing Trustworthiness in Naturalistic Consumer Research