ABSTRACT
More than any other methodological technique, community studies typically employ that of participant observation. The fact that community sociologists have usually gone, even if only for a short time, to live in a community and have shared some of the experiences of some of the inhabitants of the locality in which they are interested accounts for the vividness of many of the resulting monographs. This sharing of experience is not, however, conducive to the supposed ideal detachment of the scientist. Thus, whilst community studies have been plundered for source materials for some of the most influential theoretical contributions in other fields of sociology, they have also attracted the derision of other sociologists, summed up by Ruth Glass, that they are 'the poor sociologist's substitute for the novel'.l
It is not too difficult to see the basis of her accusation. Participant observation by one or a few research workers lends itself to a degree of subjectivity, and even downright idiosyncracy and eccentricity, which many find intolerable. This is particularly unfortunate in an area such as that of community studies, since they are by definition micro-sociological studies, which to some degree must be cumulative and replicable if they are to contribute to an understanding of society as a whole. In particular, the sheer innumeracy of many community studies, a simple lack of figures, has hindered attempts at comparability. This is particularly inexcusable in view of the wealth of statistical data in some of the earlier studies. It also has certain problematical consequences for the researchers' data, not the least of which is how reliable and valid they are. An observational, rather than a statistical or experimental method, means that the usual procedures of control, verification and reliability are quite different from those of, for example, survey research or small group experiments. The best community studies, however, are eclectic, utilizing whole batteries of techniques over and above the central one of observation. These allow internal checks upon the validity and representativeness of data resulting from participant observation.2 Nevertheless, although community studies have some clear
advantages in bringing the researcher closer to the interconnections of the data, idiosyncratic and non-comparable monographs do tend to be produced as a result. Justifiable attempts to synthesize disparate studies and to elicit the underlying social processes which they seek to analyse are therefore fraught with difficulties.
