
Sociology 8th Edition by Margaret Andersen ,Howard Taylor ,Kim Logio
Edition 8ISBN: 978-1285431321
Sociology 8th Edition by Margaret Andersen ,Howard Taylor ,Kim Logio
Edition 8ISBN: 978-1285431321 Exercise 1
A Cop in the Hood: Participant Observation
Research Methodology: An excellent recent example of participant observation research of the overt type is sociologist Peter Moskos's twenty months as a bona fide police officer in Baltimore, Maryland. For his doctoral dissertation research, Moskos, who is White, underwent the standard six months of training in the police academy and was then assigned to Baltimore's Eastern District, a heavily African American and depressed ghetto with a heavy drug trade. A true participant observer, he became a police officer. He got to know and trust the other officers with whom he worked, and he became familiar with the social life of the homeless individuals, drug dealers, and neighborhood residents in East Baltimore. He lived minute by minute and day by day with the ever-present extreme dangers of police work, carried a Glock semiautomatic pistol with a seventeen-shot clip (which he never had to fire but had to "show" on occasion), and discovered that "danger creates a bond" among police officers. He wrote his field notes each day after work-numbering 350 typed, single-spaced pages overall. His study ranks with other classic participant observation studies in sociology, such as Whyte's Street Corner Society (1943), Anderson's A Place on the Corner (1976) and Streetwise (1990), and Duneier's Sidewalk (1999).
Research Results: Moskos's study is important because, among other things, it dispels a number of myths that the public has about police officers and police work. For example, many think that summoning the police by calling 911 will get a quick solution to the problem- whether it be a drug deal taking place, an incident of domestic violence, or gunfire on the street. Although police are indeed generally quick to respond, in reality, the drug deal or the domestic violence reconvenes immediately after the police leave the scene. Moskos even concludes that, unfortunately, 911 is "a joke."
Many assume that if a suspected drug dealer is standing close to a vial of cocaine in the street, the observing police officer will report that he or she "saw" the dealer throw the vial into the street. Moskos found, however, that this was rarely the case: The vast majority of officers over the vast majority of such incidents reported "seeing" the dealer toss the vial only if they indeed saw the dealer do so and were able to verify this act by another officer witnessing it. A veteran officer warned Moskos that "if you don't see him drop it, then just kick it or crush it."
In his further demystification of the police and police culture, Moskos describes his fellow police officers not as power-hungry, thrill-seeking bullies, but as hard-working people who marshal their own weaknesses and strengths to cope with unique job conditions.
Also of importance is Moskos's discovery of certain elements of social structure characterizing street drug trade. For example, virtually each and every illicit drug transaction on the street corner involves five social roles in addition to the person who actually purchases a drug or drugs: lookouts (who watch for police cars, the lowest status role in the street transaction); steerers (who "hawk" or advertise their drug to passersby); money men (who collect the money paid for the drug); slingers (who actually give the drugs to the purchaser); and gunmen (who stand ready in the shadows in case they feel needed). Engaging in such roles serves the function of limiting the legal liability of each individual in the event of arrests.
Implications: Such insights into the social structure and culture of street activity (in this case, street drug trade) ranks Moskos's work with other participant observation studies that reveal structure and culture-for example, those of Whyte, Anderson, and Duneier.
In studies that employ participant observation, there is always a danger of becoming too involved with one's research subjects, thus causing the researcher to lose a certain amount of objectivity. This is called "going native." Do you think that this might have happened, or did not happen, to Moskos? Elaborate.
Research Methodology: An excellent recent example of participant observation research of the overt type is sociologist Peter Moskos's twenty months as a bona fide police officer in Baltimore, Maryland. For his doctoral dissertation research, Moskos, who is White, underwent the standard six months of training in the police academy and was then assigned to Baltimore's Eastern District, a heavily African American and depressed ghetto with a heavy drug trade. A true participant observer, he became a police officer. He got to know and trust the other officers with whom he worked, and he became familiar with the social life of the homeless individuals, drug dealers, and neighborhood residents in East Baltimore. He lived minute by minute and day by day with the ever-present extreme dangers of police work, carried a Glock semiautomatic pistol with a seventeen-shot clip (which he never had to fire but had to "show" on occasion), and discovered that "danger creates a bond" among police officers. He wrote his field notes each day after work-numbering 350 typed, single-spaced pages overall. His study ranks with other classic participant observation studies in sociology, such as Whyte's Street Corner Society (1943), Anderson's A Place on the Corner (1976) and Streetwise (1990), and Duneier's Sidewalk (1999).
Research Results: Moskos's study is important because, among other things, it dispels a number of myths that the public has about police officers and police work. For example, many think that summoning the police by calling 911 will get a quick solution to the problem- whether it be a drug deal taking place, an incident of domestic violence, or gunfire on the street. Although police are indeed generally quick to respond, in reality, the drug deal or the domestic violence reconvenes immediately after the police leave the scene. Moskos even concludes that, unfortunately, 911 is "a joke."
Many assume that if a suspected drug dealer is standing close to a vial of cocaine in the street, the observing police officer will report that he or she "saw" the dealer throw the vial into the street. Moskos found, however, that this was rarely the case: The vast majority of officers over the vast majority of such incidents reported "seeing" the dealer toss the vial only if they indeed saw the dealer do so and were able to verify this act by another officer witnessing it. A veteran officer warned Moskos that "if you don't see him drop it, then just kick it or crush it."
In his further demystification of the police and police culture, Moskos describes his fellow police officers not as power-hungry, thrill-seeking bullies, but as hard-working people who marshal their own weaknesses and strengths to cope with unique job conditions.
Also of importance is Moskos's discovery of certain elements of social structure characterizing street drug trade. For example, virtually each and every illicit drug transaction on the street corner involves five social roles in addition to the person who actually purchases a drug or drugs: lookouts (who watch for police cars, the lowest status role in the street transaction); steerers (who "hawk" or advertise their drug to passersby); money men (who collect the money paid for the drug); slingers (who actually give the drugs to the purchaser); and gunmen (who stand ready in the shadows in case they feel needed). Engaging in such roles serves the function of limiting the legal liability of each individual in the event of arrests.
Implications: Such insights into the social structure and culture of street activity (in this case, street drug trade) ranks Moskos's work with other participant observation studies that reveal structure and culture-for example, those of Whyte, Anderson, and Duneier.
In studies that employ participant observation, there is always a danger of becoming too involved with one's research subjects, thus causing the researcher to lose a certain amount of objectivity. This is called "going native." Do you think that this might have happened, or did not happen, to Moskos? Elaborate.
Explanation
One of the prominent sociologists Mr. MS...
Sociology 8th Edition by Margaret Andersen ,Howard Taylor ,Kim Logio
Why don’t you like this exercise?
Other Minimum 8 character and maximum 255 character
Character 255