Ethnomethodology, Week 7

When I first read the word ‘ethnomethodology’, I cursed Sociology and its fondness for using words I don’t understand! But after a little more investigation, I learned that it’s just a fancy-pants word for studying everyday human interaction. Ethnomethodology is a term coined by Harold Garfinkel in 1967, this method of research seeks to highlight how social order is achieved by the ‘interaction of people, rather than social order being the framework within which action takes place’. In other words, people define social order, there is not a rigid set of rules that define our behaviour, rather, we are  continually defining and redefining these unwritten rules via our interactions with others at a micro level.

So what does this mean in terms people can actually understand? ‘Many people engage in a small degree of ethnomethodology every day, even though they aren't aware of it; for example, a parent explaining a concept to a child usually thinks about the way in which the child approaches the world and processes information to put the concept in terms the child will understand’ (wisegeek, 2012). Ethnomethodologists seek to make 'generalized claims about the nature of social interaction based upon specific research, itself driven by particular theoretical motivations' (Ethnomethodology, 2012).

Two important theorists studying different aspects of social action and organisation that influenced Garfinkel were Talcott Parsons and Alfred Schultz (Heritage, 1984). Parsons developed the 'action theory', which focused on attempting to create a unified theory of social action for the social sciences (Social Theory Re-wired, 2011). Schultz argued that Sociologists should study common sense beliefs and actions. Garfinkel then drew on this and other research to propose that social reality and social facts are constructed, produced and organised through the mundane actions and circumstances of everyday life, and he wanted to explore how people accomplish, establish, produce and reproduce a sense of social structure (Cohen & Crabtree, 2006).

It was a confusing topic, but I think the point is that there are expected patterns of behaviour in day to day life- when these patterns are broken, Garfinkel called it 'breaching', then there is confusion from other actors in society we interact with. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to be bad-ass and face the back in an elevator, and watch everyone get all creeped out!

References:

Cohen, D & Crabtree, B 2006, 'Qualitative Research Guidelines Project', accessed 8/9/12, http://www.qualres.org/HomePhen-3590.html

'Ethnomethodology', accessed 9/9/12, http://www.sagepub.com/david/Chapter_Ethnomethodology.pdf

Heritage, J 1984, 'The Morality of Cognition', pp75-102, in Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology, Cambridge, Polity Press.

Social Theory Re-wired, 2011, 'Ethnomethodology', accessed 8/9/12, http://theory.routledgesoc.com/category/profile-tags/ethnomethodology

Wisegeek, 2012, 'What is Ethnomethodology?', accessed 9/9/12, http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-ethnomethodology.htm