This week I was actually scheduled to
give my group presentation however unfortunately it has been
postponed to next week. We were planning to perform breaching
experiments in the presentation and I was hoping to discuss the
results in my blog, but that will have to be next Thursday!
This week we studied Harold Garfinkel
and his famous breaching experiments. Garfinkel was the first person
to use the term ethnomethodology, and his research in this area is
his most famous work – in particular Studies in Ethnomethodology
(1967). Ethnomethodology is the study of people's methods and how
they behave in everyday situations.
According to Lynch (2011) Studies in
Ethnomethodology “challenged
'top down' theories which proposed that society was structured around
relatively limited sets of rules and overarching values. Garfinkel
presented an alternative 'bottom up' picture of society built from
innumerable occasions of improvised conduct adapted to particular
situations.” Garfinkel asked “How do social actors come to know
and know in common, what they are doing and the circumstances in
which they are doing it?” He decided that in order to
research how social order is made it would be best to start with a
framework of stable features and see what can be done to make
trouble. This was achieved through his famous breaching experiments.
In these experiments Garfinkel and his
students would break the normal rules of a situation and wanted to
create a senseless situation. However the interesting result of these
experiments was that often the subjects would attempt to add meaning
to the experimenter's actions so that it could be understood as a
legally possible event. For example, when someone would cheat in a
game of noughts and crosses, the subject would “realise” that
this game had a different set of rules.
I had a lot of fun looking on the
internet for breaching experiment ideas and Youtube clips of people
performing them. My favourite idea was taking groceries out of
someone's trolley rather than from the shelf in a supermarket –
when asked for an explanation one would simply reply “Oh it's just
easier to reach this one.” Interestingly when I told my friend
about this idea and possibly performing it myself they were horrified
and said “but you just DON'T do that!!!!!!!!” To which I replied
“but that is the whole point!” They also asked me not to do this
myself incase someone reacted in an extreme way and tried to harm me.
Heritage,
John. 1984. 'The Morality of Cognition' in Garfinkel
and
Ethnomethodology.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Lynch,
M (2011) 'Harold Garfinkel obituary – Sociologist who delved into
the minutiae of daily life' The Guardian,
13 July,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/jul/13/harold-garfinkel-obituary
I found that after doing the reading and touching on breaching experiments in the tutorial, I am now also a big fan of them (at least in principal). I also did some research into Garfinkel’s breaching experiments so I figured I would build upon your post since you have already succinctly summarised the reading and explained breaching experiments.
ReplyDeleteSomething I came across was the results of one of Garfinkel’s experiment. He asked 135 students to go into big department stores and barter for items by offering less than the marked price. Half the students (67) were asked to complete 6 different transactions and the other half (68) were asked to complete only one transaction. When students were initially given the instructions of the experiment 3% of first group terminated the experiment compared with 20% who terminated the experiment from the second group (terminating meaning they point-blank refused to participate).
I thought this was the most interesting part of Garfinkel’s results. People who were asked to bargain once were more likely refuse or terminate the assignment while people who were asked to bargain multiple times were more likely to see the experiment through to the end. In almost all participants the anxiety decreased as more bargaining transactions were completed. I find it funny and a little bit foreign that people were not willing to complete the assignment, something as simple as bargaining for a retail item, however I also find the subject of the assignment foreign so I can’t really say how I’d react if I were put in that situation. I’d like to think I’m a rebel and willing to break the rules but realistically I’d probably wuss out.
What I find worthy of critiquing is how unwilling people are to break the norms and our rituals within society. People suffering anxiety at the thought of breaking social norms just proves how engrained they are in our lives and how much we rely upon.
Hilbert, R, 2001, ‘the Status of Rules in Moral Life’ The Classical Roots of Ethnomethodology: Durkheim, Weber, and Garfinkel, UNC Press Books, p 43.
Week 7 - Ethnomethodology
ReplyDeleteAfter doing this week’s reading, and getting further clarification about this week’s topic Ethnomethodology, in the tutorials, what really stood out to me the most was Garfinkel’s breaching experiments. This idea of breaching social norms within society and seeing the result of this was fascinating. Like Maiquilla Brown, I think Danielle Merlino did a good job of creating a good break down and explanation of Ethnomethodology and Garfinkels theories in regard to his breaching experiments, and portrayed this effectively in her blog.
At this point, I decided to look further into the idea of breaching, and came across a reading Design in the Absence of Practice : Breaching Experiments by Andy Crabtree which looked at further breaching experiments that Steve Mann performed. In this particular reading he looks at it from a surveillance perspective, yet the definition that is given is effective, he describes breaching as a person who “actively creates a situations of uncertainty, bewilderment, anxiety and confusion in order to bring into question everyday structure” (Crabtree 2004). I found this definition interesting as to breach social norms in society can leave people feeling confused, anxious and uncomfortable.
I also turned to You Tube Clip for examples, and I found one clip of a group of students who for a sociology project went into their local community and breached several social norms and rules. These included things such as sitting at a table in a food court next to a stranger who was eating, if this was to happen to me, I would feel uncomfortable and anxious as the person sitting down is breaking the social rules and I would be left not knowing how to react in this instance. Another breaching experiment the group did was reading a book over the shoulder of a child, this again is a situation where the person could be left feeling uncomfortable as their personal space is being invaded and social norms are being broken. There are also several more interesting examples in the You Tube Clip.
Here is the clip for your viewing pleasure
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-HZfwqS9TY&feature=related
• Crabtree, A 2004, “Design in the Absence of Practice: Breaching Experiments, DIS '04 Proceedings of the 5th conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques, pp 59-68, accessed 6/9/12, http://www2.uiah.fi/~ikoskine/ip07/r0207_crabtree-breaching%20experiments.pdf
• Breaking Norms Sociology Project 2010, accessed 6/9/12, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-HZfwqS9TY&feature=related