JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ISSUES, VOLUME 33, NUMBER 4, 1977

The Difficulties of a Minority Researcher in Minority Communities

Minako Kurokawa Maykovich

California State University, Sacramento

A minority researcher is not immune to various problems in approach- ing minority communities. This paper examines some of the problems encountered by a Japanese researcher in Japanese communities and in Mennonite communities in California and Ontario, Canada. Empha- sis is placed on the fluctuation of social distance between the minority researcher and the community in the course of research. This fluctua- tion is partially due to the status of the researcher as insider or outsider in relationship to the community.

Recently much attention has been directed toward the diffi- culties of white researchers doing research in minority communi- ties. A minority researcher, however, is not immune to various problems in approaching minority communities. This paper ex- amines some of the problems encountered by a Japanese re- searcher in both Japanese communities and Mennonite communi- ties. T h e data are derived, from a series of previous community research projects in California and Ontario, Canada (Kurokawa, 1962, 1969a, 1969b, 1969c, 1971; Maykovich, 1973a, 1973b, Note

As a minority member-a Japanese born in Japan, married to a white American, and living in the United States-the author has been interested in studying minority communities. My major concerns have been in three areas: (a) defining the dimensions of the minority community, (b) determining the interaction be- tween cultural and institutional forces in delimiting the boundaries of the community, and (c) examining the mental health of the community residents as affected by external forces.

1).

Correspondence regarding this article may be addressed to M. K. Maykovich, Department of Sociology, California State University, Sacramen- to, CA 958 19.

108

T H E MINORITY RESEARCHER 109

An ethnic community is not necessarily an ecological concept. Even Old Order Mennonites whose farmsteads are geographically concentrated travel long distances to obtain medical and other services (Murdie, 1965). Younger Japanese Americans live where their schools or jobs are but seem to maintain a symbolic sense of an ethnic community. Thus the research involved delineating geographical, functional, social, and psychological boundaries of minority communities as perceived by Japanese and Mennonites.

Having drawn the contours of communities, the author then pursued the question of voluntary versus involuntary segregation. Do members remain in minority communities because they want to maintain their cultural values (Caudill & De Vos, 1956), or because they have been institutionally locked into a structure demarked by a dominant group (Light & Wong, 1975; Yuan, 1963)?

T h e mental health of community residents is likely to be affected by the type of segregation. Voluntary segregation will be accompanied by various mechanisms to control invasion by outsiders (Eaton, 1952; Freed, 1957). In forced segregation minority members will submit, accommodate, or confront the imposing forces (Kurokawa, 1970).

Whatever the specific objectives of a given research were, respondents were asked to report their perception of their minority community and of their minority status in relation to the dominant group. These aspects of the research interest inevitably sensitized respondents’ perception of minority status, which affected their interaction with the researcher either as an insider or an outsider.

DESIGN A N D PROCEDURES Sample and Access

T h e sample for this paper is drawn from several previous studies. It is neither random nor stratified. However, in each Japanese study a sex ratio of one to one, and a middle- versus working-class ratio of three to two were maintained. Generation wise, the Japanese sample consisted of 100 Issei (immigrants), 200 Nisei (first generation), 270 politically conservative Sansei (second generation), and 238 politically active Sansei in the San Francisco bay area. Issei belonged to the old, Nisei to the middle, and Sansei to the college age group. T h e Mennonite sample consisted of 107 traditional, 100 transitional, and 253 progressive Mennonites in Ontario, Canada. Except for one half of the progressives, all were farmers living in relatively segregated areas.

110 MINAKO KUROKAWA MAYKOVICH

The sex ratio was approximately one to one, and the ages fell in the range of 35-55.

Three steps were required to locate Japanese and to delineate Japanese communities. First, on the most general level, telephone and city directories were examined because Japanese last names are easily recognizable. Secondly, leaders of various Japanese organizations such as Chambers of Commerce and newspapers have compiled listings of Japanese Americans in the community in addition to their membership or circulation lists. Thirdly, ethnographic field study was conducted to observe and approach Japanese in social interaction through cultural activities.

In Canada property assessment listings include a person’s religious affiliation. Since most Mennonites are home owners, this provided a fairly comprehensive list of Mennonites. However, a random sample from this list and direct contact with the sampled Mennonites was not desirable. First of all, the research involved comparing orthodox and liberal Mennonites, a distinction not discernible in the above list. Secondly, the researcher was an outsider to the Mennonite community. To make it more difficult this minority group held isolationism as a major value and rejected any outside contact.

The first step was to approach a go-between who would intermediate between Mennonites and non-Mennonites, intro- ducing the researcher to ministers of the Old Order Mennonites. In the course of discussion with these ministers it became obvious that there was no way to bypass them in gaining an access to their church members. Ministers could forbid their members to participate in this research and few would disobey. In this religiously closed community, leaders constituted the power elite rather than simply the information resource as in Japanese communities. Having made official entry into the Mennonite community, ethnographic field studies were conducted by parti- cipating in their religious, familial, and agrarian activities.

The social network and power relations among liberal Men- nonites were quite different from those of orthodox Mennonites. Ministers served as informants providing lists of church member- ship but refused to influence their members in any way, They advised the researcher to approach other Mennonites directly.

Data Collection T o cover a large sample in a standardized, systematic way,

both mailed questionnaires and interviews were used. The reliabil- ity of the findings was enhanced by examining a large number

THE MINORITY RESEARCHER 111

of cases rather than by doing a case study. T h e validity of the research instrument was increased by asking a series of similar questions forming a scale. This was not possible in participant observation of isolated cases.

I n order to save time, factual information was gathered by precoded questionnaires which were mailed to the respondents. After a week, interviewers visited respondents, collected the mailed questionnaires, and asked attitudinal questions which might re- quire explanations by the interviewer. After the formal interview- ing, interviewers stayed on to have a casual conversation with respondents and to delve deeper into the thinking of the respon- dents.

T h e method of participant observation was adopted to sup- plement the questionnaire and interview. For certain subgroups of subjects, the latter was not possible. Some of the orthodox Mennonites refused to answer the questionnaire because they were not familiar with and were suspicious of pencil-and-paper research. Also political activists among Sansei rejected the validity and usefulness of standardized questionnaires, which they viewed as white racist research instruments. These same people were much less reluctant to have the researcher as a participant observer.

A participant observation can catch subtle, nonexplicit and subconscious cues from respondents which a standardized ques- tionnaire is likely to miss. Another merit of participant observation is its capacity to grasp the structure of social interaction, while interviewing and questionnaire methods deal with individuals separately .

Indices Indices of social distance were developed as a measure of

relative acceptance of a set of group membership labels. Specifical- ly, they were to measure the attitudes of ethnic community residents toward the particular researcher, toward researchers in general, and toward the “outside world.”

Content analysis of the field notes yielded eight dimensions of social distance. Attitudes toward the researcher in question were examined according to (a) the respondent’s identification with the researcher as a minority member, (b) personal sympathy with the researcher, and (c) the sense of obligation or personal pressure exerted by the researcher. Attitudes toward researchers in general were measured by the respondent’s interest in research (a) as an educational activity, (b) as an instrument for practical benefits, and (c) as a tool for the scientific progress of mankind.

112 MINAKO KUROKAWA MAYKOVICH

Attitudes toward the outside world were assessed by (a) the respondent’s receptivity to the outsider’s visits, and (b) respondent’s general orientation of assimilationism versus isolationism.

These attitudes were rated on a 5-point scale with the highest score indicating the least social distance. Reliability was checked among three independent raters, producing correlation coeffi- cients greater than .80. Internal consistency of the indices was attested to by the individual index versus the total index score intercorrelations; they ranged from .35 to .43 within each group of respondents.

Phases For the analysis here two phases during the interviews were

identified in terms of time order and content. T h e early phase refers to the period ranging from the initial access to the inter- viewee through approximately the first half an hour of interview- ing. At this stage mainly general attitudinal questions were asked. T h e lute phase consists of the remaining half-hour interview session and the succeeding casual conversation, which delved into the personal feelings of the respondent.

Limitation5 T h e limitations of this research are of two kinds. Difficulty

arose at first from my status as an ethnic minority researcher, resulting in fluctuating social distance between myself and the study subjects. T h e second limitation is attributable to the general methodological problem of comparability, that is, comparability of data gathered from different groups using different methods.

RES [ 11. TS

Gaining Access to Japanese As a Japanese who is bilingual, my initial approach to the

Japanese community was relatively easy. Rapport was established from the first encounter whatever channel of access had been adopted.

As Table 1 indicates, the scores on ethnic identification are high across the generations. Ethnic familiarity due to common features such as physical appearance, language, and name seemed to incur in the respondents the sense of ethnic identification with the researcher.

This ethnic identification in turn tended to produce the feeling of ethnic obligation, that they had to cooperate with a Japanese

T H E MINORITY RESEARCHER 113

TABLE 1 SOCIAL DISTANCE SCORES BETWEEN RESEARCIIEH A N D RESPONDENTS

DL'KING T l l E EAKI.~. PllASF.

Japanese Sansei-' Mennonites

Dimension Issei Nisei C. P. Trad. Trans. Prop.

Ethnic ID Personal

Sympathy Obligation Research as:

Education Practical

Concern Science

Receptivity Assimilation

( N )

4.65 4.48

4.78 4.55 4.66 4.33

4.58 4.63

2.36 2.82 1.23 1.41 2.23 2.42 4.82 4.71 (100) ('LOO)

-~

4.32 4.25 1.23 1 .37

3.83 3.11 1.34 1.29 3.37 3.24 1.46 1.53

4.39 3.87 1.22 1.21

2.1 1 2.87 1 . 1 1 1.32 2.33 1.54 1.34 1.52 2.69 2.24 1.22 1.32 4.54 2.12 1.14 1.21 (270) (238) (107) (100)

2.15

2.32 2.41

3.57

3.86 4.1 I 4.11 4.23 (253)

Notes.

"C = conservative; P = politically active.

Score range = 1-5; the higher the score the less the distance. See text for description of indices.

researcher. This was true particularly among Issei and Nisei. The same people who had refused to participate when approached by a non-Japanese interviewer became cooperative after learning that the researcher was really a Japanese.

Social distance was reduced not only because of the ethnicity of the researcher but also because of other attributes. Personal sympathy was shown, particularly by the Issei and Nisei, toward a young, female university professor who was working hard. This researcher with professional qualifications seemed to represent a model of a success story, Japanese style, and the realization of achievement goals shared by Japanese in general (Caudill & De Vos, 1956; Petersen, 1966).

Thus the researcher enjoyed the full advantages of a minority researcher who was accepted as an insider in the minority commu- nity. In fact, the Japanese subjects seemed to show greater interest in the researcher than in the contents of the research itself.

T h e respondents' concerns with research in general were geared toward educational values rather than practical benefits o r scientific knowledge which might rGsult from the research. They equated research with education, that is, studying and learning about something. However, they showed an apprehension about public intervention or possible connection of the researcher with government agencies which might increase taxation, welfare, or political control.

114 MINAKO KUROKAWA MAYKOVICH

The general orientation of the Japanese toward the outside world has been that of assimilation or accommodation (Lyman, 1970). While they cherish unique traditional values, they also share values compatible with those of the white middle class, including achievement orientation (Caudill & De Vos, 1956). Table 1 shows that the Japanese, except the activist Sansei, report a desire to be assimilated into white American society. The low scores of the activist Sansei indicate a rising awareness among this group of the necessity of ethnic self-determination. A politically active younger generation has realized the negative effects of conformity to white values and has begun to advocate ethnic identity for the yellow race (Maykovich, 1973a).

In spite of their general assimilationist attitudes, all Japanese showed low scores on receptivity toward outsiders who were casual visitors. They seemed to receive formal guests or visitors with formal introductions but tended to be suspicious of anyone who would drop in, whether he were acensus taker, peddler, or friendly newcomer to the town.

Gaining Access to Mennonites The initial approach to Mennonite communities by a Japanese

outsider was a formal one censored by ministers. The researcher, although a minority member, did not have the advantage of ethnic familiarity. T o most Mennonites, Japanese were very foreign. Some studies of social distance (Just, 1952) have reported that Mennonites felt as distant from Japanese as from blacks or Jews.

As Table 1 indicates, minority identification among the Mennonites is extremely low, although somewhat higher among the progressives. Some of the traditional Mennonites asked if Buddhism was Oriental Christianity. Our only common basis for communication was the comparison of agrarian lives in Japan and in Canada.

As a total stranger in terms of ethnicity, religion, sex (due to male dominance in Mennonite society), and education (due to the Mennonites’ opposition to higher education), the researcher did not ignite any sense of personal sympathy among these research subjects.

A slight feeling of obligation was elicited through religion and church, in the sense of Christian brotherhood. Also when the project was approved by ministers who encouraged church members to cooperate, there was pressure created. The Mennonite church is non-hierarchical, but the religious community is so tight

THE MINORITY RESEARCHER 115

that any decision made at a church is likely to influence the behavior of the members.

Social distance scores between Mennonites and researchers in general are very low, except in the case of progressive Menno- nites (Table 1). Traditional and transitional Mennonites opposed higher education for fear of bad influences, such as the ideas of evolutionism, materialism, and pleasurism. They reported their view of the university as an evil place rampant with delinquency and sinful activities, hence showed no interest in the educational aspect of research activities. They maintained a religiously and economically self-sufficient community with mutual aid, paid taxes but did not receive public assistance. Thus they did not believe in any practical gains from research, but feared a possible increase in government control. Furthermore, they rejected the goal of research endeavor as discovery of facts since they believed that the Bible revealed all the facts. Progressive Mennonites, on the other hand, showed great interest in research as an educational activity, as beneficial to their daily life, and also as an effort to gain knowledge about human beings.

T o the outside world traditional and transitional Mennonites take an isolationist attitude, citing 2 Cor. 6: 14.

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers; for what fellow- ship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

These two groups were the least receptive to any approach by outsiders. T o outsiders they appeared very stern, expressionless, and detached. Progressive Mennonites, on the other hand, were very active in missionary activities and seemed eager to change the stereotypical image of Mennonites as peculiar people. Except in the sphere of religious beliefs they were anxious to be assimilated into the rest of the world.

Later Interaction with Japanese Just as the early acceptance of the research was on a personal

basis, later rejection (Table 2) was also directed to the racial identity of the researcher as a person.

There were generational differences in perceiving the re- searcher’s identity. Many Sansei activists rejected the researcher as a “whitewashed” racist who was married to a white American and who was doing research based on white values. Some Nisei conservatives treated the researcher as an agitator who was affiliated with irresponsible college youth and whose research would cause trouble for their traditional community. Finally, Issei

116 MINAKO KUKOKAWA MAYKOVICH

TABLE 2 SOCIAL DISTANCE S(;OKES BEIWELN KEhEAKCIIER AND REWONDENTS DLRING T I I E LATE PHASE

Dimension

Ethnic ID Personal

Sympathy Obligation Research as:

Education Practical

Concern Science

Receptivity Assimilation

( 1%')

Japanese Sansei" Mennonites

Issei Nisei C. P. Trad. Trans. h o g .

2.42 2.11 2.89 2.21 2.25 1.41 2.95

2.4.5 2.52 2.32 1.32 3.12 1.27 3.22 3.57 3.22 2.55 1.29 . 2.24 1.12 2.25

4.22 4.51 4.22 1.22 3.23 1.12 3.66

2.22 3.23 2.23 1.15 2.33 1.29 3.77 1 . 1 1 1.23 1.32 1.39 3.33 1.30 4.02 2.01 2.11 2.23 1.10 1.59 1.28 4.05 4.73 4.69 4.23 2.00 1.23 1.19 4.01 (100) (200) (270) (238) (107) (100) (253)

Note. See Note to Table 1. "C = conservative; P = politically active.

tended to attack the researcher as a Japanese political leftist who had been supporting anti-U.S. policies of Japan.

Why these objections? Upon accepting the researcher into the community, respondents began to realize that they had to reveal their position clearly in relation to the larger society. Beginning hesitancy, progressive reluctance, and final avoidance of the researcher generally appeared when respondents were asked to report their perception of their status as a racial minority. It might reflect the dilemma of a Japanese community which maintains segregation as a result of cultural as well as institutional forces. They were aware of their deprivation due to minority status, yet they were not ready openly to fight against the dominant group (Light & Wong, 1975; Maykovich, 1973a). Some of the research questions required them to take a definite stance on the issue, which must have frustrated them.

Not everyone refused to continue their participation, possibly because of a sense of obligation. However, the previous personal acceptance of the research grew into a formal and impersonal politeness.

Scores on social distance between the Japanese community and the researcher in general did not change remarkably in the process of research except among the activist Sansei. The latter became articulate in criticizing any research. They expressed objection to university affiliated research as irrelevant to the needs of the minority community. They were skeptical of research

THE MINORITY RESEARCHER 1 1 7

conducted by public agencies for fear that the research findings might be used against the interests of the community.

As for the general orientation of the Japanese community toward the larger society, there was not much difference between the earlier and the later stages of the research. Except for activist Sansei, the Japanese generally took an assimilationist orientation toward the outside world, but were not very receptive to strangers at the door.

Later Interaction with Mennonites As the research progressed, the social distance between the

researcher and the Mennonite community kept decreasing (Table 2). Suspicion and fear toward an ethnic and religious stranger was replaced by curiosity and carefree intimacy toward an outsider. T h e status as a Japanese Buddhist was beyond the normative framework of Mennonites, which seemed to relieve them from the fear of in-group control. Many respondents came to confide in the researcher about various internal group conflicts. Tradi- tional and transitional Mennonites appeared critical of progressive Mennonites, calling the latter secular and materialistic. In return, progressive Mennonites labelled the traditional Mennonites “peculiar people” and wished to be differentiated from them.

Except among the transitional Mennonites, the degree of personal sympathy frequently grew into personal friendship at various levels. First there was a genuine exchange of ideas when the researcher became good friends with the respondents. Second, there was an over-intimacy in the form of infaruation. As formality was dissolved, several traditional Mennonite youth became emo- tionally attached to the researcher and her assistants. They seemed to enjoy the openness of expression shown by outside researchers. Finally, there was casual intimacy during which certain traditional Mennonite males made passes at the researcher.

There is a danger in measuring social distance by these incidents. Casual and overly intimate feelings shown by traditional Mennonites to the researcher might have been an “acting O U ~ ”

of frustration toward an outsider, for which the Mennonite community provides no channel (Gutkind, 1952; Schroeder & Beele, 1955).

Throughout the research, transitional Mennonites kept them- selves aloof from the researcher. As reported elsewhere (Kuro- kawa, 1969b, 1969c), it may be due to the fact that transitional Mennonites who had deviated from the norms but had not established completely new, nonorthodox norms (as progressives

118 MINAKO KUKOKAWA MAYKOVICH

have done) were afraid of encroachment on the part of inter- viewers.

Not only toward the specific researcher, but toward research in general, the attitudes of traditional Mennonites changed drasti- cally. Having been exposed to the research methodology, their curiosity seemed to be heightened. Some traditional Mennonites constructed questionnaires to give the researcher. Others ex- pressed a desire to visit the university to interview students, although this never materialized. The type of questions they composed manifested their perception of the university as an immoral and delinquent institution. They inquired about the extent of alcoholism, drug addiction, and sexual permissiveness on campus. Other traditional Mennonites questioned the amount of tuition and the number of class hours required for attendance, which indicated their growing interest in higher education. They also saw practical gains in keeping good relations with the outside world through cooperation with researchers.

Apart from researchers, however, traditional and transitional Mennonites retained a great social distance from the outside world.

C o N C L Lwo N Three major conclusions about the relative acceptance of

a researcher by ethnic community residents may be derived from these studies of Japanese and Mennonite communities by a Japanese researcher.

First of all, a minority researcher is not any more free from problems than a white researcher attempting to carry on a project in a minority community. Problems encountered are different in kind but by no means different in severity.

Secondly, a minority researcher in a minority community may encounter difficulties during the later phase of the project as a reaction to her or his initial ready acceptance by the commu- nity on the basis of common ancestry. Social distance may increase as the respondents grow critical of the goals, the content, and the methods of the research.

Thirdly, the social distance between a researcher and research subjects manifests multidimensionality, which fluctuates through- out the research period. Acceptance of a researcher by ethnic community residents can be an expression of the latter’s personal interest, sense of obligation, ethnic identification, or other motives, and as such constitutes a complex foundation for the relationship.

T H E MINORITY RESEARCHER 119

REFERENCE NOTE 1. Maykovich, M. K. Defining Asian American community. Paper presented

REFERENCES Caudill, W., & De Vos, G. Achievement, culture, and personality: The case

of Japanese Americans. American Anthropologist, 1956, 58, 1102- 1126. Eaton, J. Controlled acculturation: A survival technique of Hutterites.

American Sociological Review, 1952, 17, 331-340. Freed, S. A. Suggested type societies in acculturation studies. American

Anthropologist, 1957, 59, 55-67. Gutkind, P. C. W. Secularization us. the Christian community: The problems

of an Old Order House Amish famib. Unpublished master’s thesis, Univer- sity of Chicago, 1952.

Just, L. R. An analysis of the social distances of students from the three major American Mennonite groups. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, 1952.

Kurokawa, M. Occupational mobility among Japanese businessmen in Sun Fran- risco. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1962.

Kurokawa, M. Acculturation and childhood accidents among Japanese and Chinese Americans. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 1969, 79, 89-159.

Kurokawa, M. Beyond community integration and stability: A comparative study of Oriental and Mennonite children. Journal of Social Issues, 1969, 25(1), 195-214. (b)

Kurokawa, M. Psycho-social roles of Mennonite children in a Canadian society. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 1969, 6, 15-35. (c)

Kurokawa, M. (Ed.). Minority responses. New York: Random House, 1970. Kurokawa, M. Mutual perceptions of racial images: White, black, and Japanese

Americans. Journal of Social Issues, 1971, 27 (4), 213-235. Light, I., & Wong, C. C. Protest or work: Dilemmas of the tourist industry

in American Chinatowns. American Journal of Sociology, 1975, 80, 1342- 1368.

Lyman, S. Contrasts in the community organization of Chinese and Japanese in North America. In S. Lyman (Ed.), The Asians in the west. Reno: Western Studies Center, University of Nevada, 1970.

Maykovich, M. K. Japanese American identity dilemma. Tokyo: Waseda Univer- sity Press, 1973. (a)

Maykovich, M. K. Political activation of Japanese American youth. Journal of Social Issues, 1973, 29(2), 167-186. (b)

Murdie, R. A. Cultural differences in consumer travel. Economic Geography, 1965,41, 21 1-233.

at the Pacific Sociological Conference, Victoria, April 1975.

( 4

Petersen, W. Success story, Japanese-American style. New York Times, January 1966.

Schroeder, W. W., & Beegle, J. A. Suicide: An instance of high rural rates. In A. M. Rose (Ed.), Mental health and mental disorder. New York: W. W. Norton, 1955.

Yuan, D. Y. Voluntary segregation: Astudy of New York Chinatown. Phylon, 1963, 255-265.