Ethnography

Ethnography, literarily, refers to the descrip­tion (-graphy) of people (ethno-). It typically involves describing social practices and inter­preting associated systems of meaning in partic­ular cultural settings (Lindlof & Taylor, 2010).

Whereas in anthropology, ethnography tends to imply “living intimately and for a prolonged period of time within a single native community whose language [the researcher] has mastered” (Wax, 1972, p. 7), in sociol­ogy as well as in communication, ethno­graphic practice is more commonly described as “participant observation” that requires deep, long-term immersion in a social setting. Conflict researchers may not involve them­selves with foreign cultures but focus instead on domestic locales, urban subcultures, and other lifeworlds where conflict takes place and reflects specific humanistic, social, politi­cal, and economic circumstances. Regardless of the research foci, prolonged engagement by the researcher within a social setting is expected to produce a detailed account of the theoretical significance of the ethnographic fieldwork.

Ethnography does not imply a single strat­egy of data collection or analysis, although participant observation is used by nearly all ethnographers. Nor are quantitative data collection and analysis abandoned by all eth­nographers as long as such data contribute to the contextual understanding of the given culture and its meaning system (Lindlof & Taylor, 2010).

As one example of interpersonal conflict, Boxer (2002) studied nagging as a sociolin- guistic speech behavior. Boxer found that nagging becomes a source of familial conflict influenced by variables such as gender, power/ status, and social distance. On-site observa­tions not only provided a heightened con­sciousness of such face-threatening acts but, more important, the conditions that led to such speech behavior. Furthermore, in an eth­nographic study of conflicts between young men and the manifestations of male values during their evenings out in Northern England, Benson and Archer (2002) followed the group in two phases, facilitated by interviews after­ward: the first, more general, included 10 eve­ning observations; the second, more focused, included 5 evening observations. Participant observation yielded details about the provok­ing situations, the sequence leading to aggres­sive verbal exchange and to fights, the role of alcohol, the perception of challenge or insults, and the values attached to them.

In their study of organizational conflict between advertorialists and journalists at a daily paper of more than 400 employees, Eckman and Lindlof (2003) depicted the tension in the organization serving distinctly oppositional interests—advertising and news. Advertorials are advertisement “posing as news,” which were at the center of the debate between marketing and news departments. To understand how the two sides compete for control over their symbolic goods, Eckman and Lindlof utilized ethnography, specifically participant observation and interviews to access and contextualize advertorial produc­tion.

Community conflict also has been explored ethnographically in online contexts. Goodwin (2008) used online participant observation, archived online discussion threads, semistruc­tured interviewing, and documentary analysis to explore conflict between two rival virtual communities—Moseley Egroup and Moseley Free Egroup—developed by two oppositional groups in the same geographical community Moseley, Birmingham (the United Kingdom). When the Moseley Egroup’s founder/ moderator announced his run for local office yet refused to hand over control of the online group to a neutral moderator, a “flame war” broke. Internal conflict led to the creation of Moseley Free Egroup.

Goodwin’s study displayed the two online groups’ deep disagreements over the mean­ing of online space and interactions. Whereas Moseley Egroup conceptualized and used online space instrumentally to support the “real” offline locality and relationships, Moseley Free Egroup reconceptualized the online space as a “real” public space in its own right. Moseley Free space was less embed­ded in locality, with members encouraged to develop new relationships to “regenerate” the local community. Conflict not only was rooted in divergent values and power struggles but also in how technology was appropriated in community life.

Interethnic/intercultural conflict operates as the centerpiece of Kochman’s (1981) classic, Black and White Styles in Conflict. Kochman explores interethnic conflict using an ethno­graphic approach by collecting and analyzing patterns of language and culture that affect interracial communication.

In their ethnographic study of cultural norms in conflict communication among Mexicans and U.S. Americans working in maquila­doras (American-owned assembly plants in Mexico), Lindsley and Braithwaite (1996) gathered ethnographic interviews and utilized participant observations in seven plants. Their study surfaces deep cultural divides at the plants where widely held Mexican cultural norms are violated by U.S. Americans that led to decreased organizational effectiveness. One Mexican manager for instance expressed his puzzlement over how his U.S. American colleagues expressed disagreement at manage­ment meetings:

When we are in a meeting together, the U.S.

Americans will tell another manager, “I didn’t like what you did....” Mexicans interpret this as a personal insult. They have a difficult time understanding that U.S. Americans can insult each other in this way and then go off and play golf together.................. Mexicans would

be polite, perhaps tell the person in private, or make a suggestion, rather than confront- ιng. (p. 208)

In a recent ethnographic study of conflict at an ethnoracially divided California high school, Bocholtz (2011) revealed how race talk reproduces racial binaries while also per­petuating gender ideologies. White youth see themselves disadvantaged by their black peers with references to “reverse discrimination,” narratives of racialized fear, and fight stories. Claire, a European American girl, said in the interview: “I’m really bitter about [that class]” (p. 388), referring to the multiculturalism class at the school. The word “multiculturalism” was mentioned in a whisper. White boys’ narratives also highlighted racial differences. Discourses of the “Big Black Man Syndrome” and “the little Asian fools” (i.e., fools as in guys and dudes) tend to reproduce and rein­force racial identities and ideologies.

An area of communication research that examines peace and conflict processes can be labeled as international and geopolitical con­flict. As one early communication example, Fetherston and Nordstrom (1995) interro­gated the appropriateness of traditional con­flict management techniques used to ameliorate violent conflict in war zones. Drawing from ethnographic experience with United Nations peacekeeping on the ground level, the study shows that application of traditional conflict management techniques is conditioned by both policymakers’ and interveners’ own life experi­ences and cultures, which in turn limits the range of alternatives “perceived” to be avail­able for managing conflict. More recently, Ellis’s research program on geopolitical or ethnopolitical conflict has delved into observa­tions of interactions and profound complexities between Israeli Jews and Palestinians. Conflicts revolve around religion, economics, support­ers, goals, strategies, and cultures as depicted in Transforming Conflict: Communication and Ethnopolitical Conflict (D. Ellis, 2006) and Deliberative Communication and Ethnopolitical Conflict (D. Ellis, 2012).