Copy the page URI to the clipboard
Hammersley, Martyn
(2019).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794118781383
Abstract
Ethnomethodologists have made some fundamental criticisms of conventional forms of ethnography. For example, it has been argued that they fail to examine the processes through which the phenomena studied have been constituted, and that they lack rigour because they rely upon unexplicated common-sense knowledge. In my view, these criticisms have not been given sufficient attention. This article outlines them in detail and then goes on to provide an evaluation. It is concluded that they do not provide a sufficient basis for the radical-re-specification of the focus of inquiry that ethnomethodologists propose. However, they do raise issues to which ethnographers should give more attention.
Viewing alternatives
Metrics
Public Attention
Altmetrics from AltmetricNumber of Citations
Citations from DimensionsItem Actions
Export
About
- Item ORO ID
- 55726
- Item Type
- Journal Item
- ISSN
- 1741-3109
- Keywords
- construction of social phenomena; ethnomethodology; ethnography; reflexivity; rigour in qualitative research
- Academic Unit or School
- Faculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language Studies (WELS)
- Copyright Holders
- © 2018 The Author
- SWORD Depositor
- Jisc Publications-Router
- Depositing User
- Jisc Publications-Router