• Gareth DaveyEmail author
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Well-Being and Quality of Life Research book series (BRIEFSWELLBEING)


This chapter describes the methodology of the monograph which includes multi-sited ethnography, thematic analysis, coding, and reflexivity, from a symbolic interactionist perspective. Each piece of the methodology is explained and justified. The chapter begins with an overview of the multiple fieldsites chosen to challenge the localisation of Badagas in the Nilgiri Hills in previous studies, understand people as dynamic, mobile, and multiply situated, and to capture new forms of identities and quality of life in flux and which transcend bounded spaces. The chapter continues with an outline of the theoretical orientation of the research, symbolic interactionism, employed to examine identities and shared experiences and meanings of Badagas in India with emphasis on agency, social process, and subjectivity, a deliberate move away from macro-level deterministic, functionalist, and structuralist thinking that is typical of previous work. Next is an outline of an investigation into subjective quality of life among Badagas from their own point of view, an approach hitherto neglected in the literature. The final section summarises the methods of data collection and analysis. This contemporary social constructionist approach irons out many of the epistemological problems in earlier writings.


Badagas Bangalore Internet forum Multi-sited ethnography Rural-to-urban migration 


  1. Andrews, F., & Withey, S. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: Americans’ perceptions of life quality. New York, NY: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  2. Aspinall, P. J. (1997). The conceptual basis of ethnic group terminology and classifications. Social Science and Medicine, 45(5), 689–98.Google Scholar
  3. Bauer, R. (Ed.). (1966). Social indicators. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  4. Biswas-Diener, R., Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2012). Happiness in India. In H. Selin & G. Davey (Eds.), Happiness across cultures: Views of happiness and quality of life in non-western cultures (pp. 125–140). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bradby, H. (2003). Describing ethnicity in health research. Ethnicity & Health, 8(1), 5–13.Google Scholar
  7. Brubaker, R., & Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond “identity”. Theory and Society, 29(1), 1–47.Google Scholar
  8. Campbell, A., Converse, P., & Rogers, W. (1976). The quality of American life: Perceptions, evaluations, and satisfactions. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  9. Chapin, F. S. (1933). The measurement of social status by the use of the Social Status Scale 1933. Minneapolis, MN: The University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  10. Chen, Z., & Davey, G. (2008). Normative life satisfaction in Chinese societies. Social Indicators Research, 89(3), 557–564.Google Scholar
  11. Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
  12. Cottam, H., & Mangus, A. R. (1942). Standard of living: An empirical test of a definition. Rural Sociology, 7(4), 395–403.Google Scholar
  13. Cummins, R. A. (1995). On the trail of the gold standard for subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 35(2), 179–200.Google Scholar
  14. Cummins, R. A. (1996). The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos. Social Indicators Research, 38(3), 303–328.Google Scholar
  15. Cummins, R. A. (2000). Objective and subjective quality of life: An interactive model. Social Indicators Research, 52(1), 55–72.Google Scholar
  16. Davey, G., Chen, Z., & Lau, A. (2009). Peace in a thatched hut—That is happiness: Subjective wellbeing among peasants in rural China. Journal of Happiness Studies, 10(2), 239–252.Google Scholar
  17. Davey, G. (2012a). Anthropology. In S. Danver (Ed.), Native Peoples of the World: An Encyclopedia of Groups, Cultures and Contemporary Issues (pp. 705-707). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.  Google Scholar
  18. Davey, G. (2012b). Bangalore: 1900 to present. In A. Stanton., E. Ramsamy., P. Seybolt., & C. Elliott (Eds.), Cultural sociology of the Middle East, Asia, & Africa: An encyclopedia (pp. IV165–IV167). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  19. Davey, G., & Rato, R. (2012). Subjective wellbeing in China: A review. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13(2), 333–346.Google Scholar
  20. Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Beyond money: Toward an economy of well-being. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5(1), 1–31.Google Scholar
  21. Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (1995). Factors predicting the subjective well-being of nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 851–64.Google Scholar
  22. Falzon, M.-A. (Ed.). (2009). Multi-sited ethnography: Theory, praxis and locality in contemporary research. Surrey, England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  23. Ferriss, A. (2004). The quality of life concept in sociology. The American Sociologist, 35(3), 37–51.Google Scholar
  24. Gerson, E. M. (1976). On “Quality of Life”. American Sociological Review, 41(5), 793–806.Google Scholar
  25. Hallett, R. E., & Barber, K. (2014). Ethnographic Research in a Cyber Era. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 43(3), 306–330.Google Scholar
  26. Hannerz, U. (2003). Being there…and there…and there! Reflections on multi-site ethnography. Ethnography, 4(2), 201–216.Google Scholar
  27. Hockings, P. (Ed.). (1989). Blue mountains: The ethnography and biogeography of a South Indian region. New Delhi, India: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York, NY: Henry Holt & Co., Publishers.Google Scholar
  29. Land, K. C. (1983). Social indicators. Annual Review of Sociology, 9, 1–26.Google Scholar
  30. Land, K. C. (1996). Social indicators and the quality of life: Where do we stand in the mid-1990s? SINET: Social Indicators Network News, 45, 5–8.Google Scholar
  31. Maleševic, S. (2004). The sociology of ethnicity. London, England: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  32. Marcus, G. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 95–117.Google Scholar
  33. Marcus, G. E. (2011). Mulit-sited ethnography: Five or six things I know about it now. In S. Coleman & P. von Hellermann (Eds.), Problems and Possibilities in the translocation of research methods. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Mathews, G., & Izquierdo, C. (Eds.). (2010). Pursuits of happiness: Well-being in anthropological perspective. New York, NY: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  35. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  36. Mead, G. H. (1938). The philosopy of the act. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. Odum, H. N. (1936). Southern regions of the United States. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  38. Rato, R., & Davey, G. (2012). Quality of life in Macau, China. Social Indicators Research, 105(1), 93–108.Google Scholar
  39. Schuessler, K. F., & Fisher, G. A. (1985). Quality of life research and sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 11(129), 39–149.Google Scholar
  40. Selin, H., & Davey, G. (2012). Happiness across cultures: Views of happiness and quality of life in non-Western cultures. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  41. Sewell, W. H. (1940). A scale for the measurement of farm family socio-economic status. The Southwestern Social Science Quarterly, 21(2), 125–137.Google Scholar
  42. Sirgy, M. J., Michalos, A. C., Ferriss, A. L., Easterlin, R. A., Patrick, D., & Pavot, W. (2006). The quality-of-life (QOL) research movement: Past, present, and future. Social Indicators Research, 76(3), 343–466.Google Scholar
  43. Skinner, J. (Ed.). (2012). The Interview: An ethnographic approach. London, England: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  44. Smith, K. (2002). Some critical observations on the use of the concept of ‘ethnicity’ in Modood. Ethnic Minorities in Britain. Sociology, 36(2), 399–417.Google Scholar
  45. Smith, K., Staples, J., & Rapport, N. (Eds.). (2015). Extraordinary encounters: Authenticity and the interview. New York, NY: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  46. Stryker, S. (2000). Symbolic interactionism: A social structural version. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  47. Veenhoven, R. (2000). Introduction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1(4), 419–421.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Anthropology and ConservationThe University of KentCanterburyUK

Personalised recommendations