Abstract
Field research with proselytizing groups presents difficult problems for field researchers. Such groups usually expect commitment from those who are knowledgeable about their point of view. Should the field researcher fail to make this commitment there is the possibility that further access to the group will be ended. Even if access to the group is not denied, continuous proselytizing directed at the researcher can create emotional responses that adversely affect field relationships. In this article, methods for dealing with these problems are discussed in the context of a study of two Jesus People groups. The article concludes that open, honest,disagreement with the groups' beliefs as well as avisible role as a researcher result in increased rapport and acceptance by the groups and reduced psychological stress on the researcher. The processes of role taking and role playing in the relation between the researcher and group members suggest that distancing strategies are useful when proselytizing groups are studied by nonbelievers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bellah, Robert 1970 Christianity and symbolic realism. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 9:89–96.
Becker, Howard S. 1970 Field work evidence. Pp. 39–62 in Howard S. Becker, Sociological Work: Method and Substance. Chicago: Aldine.
Bromley, David G. and Anson D. Shupe, Jr. 1980 Evolving foci in participant observation: Research as an emergent process. Pp. 191–203 in W.B. Shaffir, R.A. Stebbins, and A. Turowetz (eds.), Fieldwork Experience: Qualitative Approaches to Social Research. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Dean, John P., Robert L. Eichhorn, and Lois R. Dean 1969 Establishing field relations. Pp. 68–70 in George J. McCall and J.L. Simmons (eds.), Issues in Participant Observation: A Text and Reader. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Enroth, Ronald M., Edward E. Ericson, Jr., and C. Breckingridge Peters 1972 The Jesus People: Old Time Religion in the Age of Aquarius. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans.
Freilich, Morris 1970 Toward a formalization of field work. Pp. 485–585 in Morris Freilich (ed.), Marginal Natives: Anthropologists at Work. New York: Harper and Row.
Gold, Raymond 1958 Roles in sociological field observations. Social Forces 36:217–223.
Horowitz, Ruth 1986 Remaining an outsider: Membership as a threat to research rapport. Urban Life 14:409–430.
Johnson, John M. 1975 Doing Field Research. New York: The Free Press.
Lofland, John 1966 Doomsday Cult: A Study of Conversion, Proselytization, and Maintenance of Faith. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
McCall, George J. and J.L. Simmons 1969 Issues in Participant Observation: A Text and Reader. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
McGuire, Meredith B. 1982 Pentecostal Catholics: Power, Charisma, and Order in a Religious Movement. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Peshkin, Alan 1984 Odd man out: The participant observer in an absolutist setting. Sociology of Education 57:254–264.
Pollner, Melvin and Robert M. Emerson 1983 The dynamics of inclusion and distance in fieldwork relations. Pp. 235–252 in Robert M. Emerson (ed.), Contemporary Field Research. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.
1979 Organized Miracles: A Study of a Contemporary, Youth, Communal, Fundamentalist Organization. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
1981 Researching a fundamentalist commune. Pp. 12–17 in Ian Robertson (ed.), The Social World. New York: Worth.
Robbins, Thomas, Dick Anthony and Thomas E. Curtis 1973 The limits of symbolic realism: Problems of empathic field observation in a sectarian context. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 12:259–271.
Rochford, E. Burke 1985 Hare Krishna in America. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Schwartz, Gary 1970 Sect Ideologies and Social Status. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Shaffir, William B., Robert A. Stebbins and Allan Turowetz, eds. 1980 Fieldwork Experience: Qualitative Approaches to Social Research. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Snow, David A. 1980 The disengagement process: A neglected problem in participant observation research. Qualitative Sociology 3:100–122.
Snow, David A., Robert D. Benford and Leon Anderson 1986 Fieldwork roles and informational yield. Urban Life 14:377–408.
Thorne, Barrie 1979 Political activist as participant observer: Conflicts of commitment in a study of the draft Resistance movement of the 1960's. Symbolic Interaction 2:78–33.
Trice, H.M. 1970 The ‘outsider's’ role in field study. Pp. 77–82 in William J. Filstead (ed.), Qualitative Methodology; Firsthand Involvement with the Social World. Chicago: Markham.
Wax, Rosalie Hankey 1952 Reciprocity as a field technique. Human Organization 11:34–41.
Wilson, B.R. 1969 A typology of sects. Pp. 361–383 in Roland Robertson (ed.), Sociology of Religion. Baltimore: Penguin.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This is a revised version of a paper presented at the 1986 Meetings of the American Sociological Association. I wish to thank Shulamit Reinharz and three anonymous reviewers for their excellent and helpful comments on this paper.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gordon, D.F. Getting close by staying distant: Fieldwork with proselytizing groups. Qual Sociol 10, 267–287 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988990
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988990