Unobtrusive Methods in Social Research by Okunola, Rasidi Akanji and Ikuomola, A. Daniel Introduction Unobtrusive methods in social research are an interesting aspect of the broader qualitative procedures in social science research which seek answers to questions by examining in non – intrusive manner various social settings and the individuals who inhabit these settings. Qualitative researchers are most interested in the day to day activities of a people, how humans arrange themselves and their settings and how inhabitants of or in a particular location make sense of their surroundings through various aspects of traditions and culture, such as symbols, rituals, social structures, social roles, among others. In order not to interfere with the nature, cultural and traditional fabric of a people, research procedures that require a non-intrusioninto the lives of a subject are often encouraged in social research. Researcher reactivity-(theresponse of subjects to the presence of an intruding investigator) has been observed to create a gap as well as losses of vital information with the conditioning of subjects’ behaviour, often without the researcher’s knowledge. Unobtrusive method in social research becomes necessary in making positive use of the ‘reactivity’ or better still in ‘neutralizing’ it. Though in many research and texts, unobtrusive methods compared to intrusive methods are often not well discussed and used regularly, when research methods books do mention unobtrusive procedures, they typically define terms. Recommended classical research texts such as Frankfort-Nachmias &Nachmias, 1996), give only a very brief explanation on the work of Webb et al.(1981), or obscure unobtrusive measures with general content analysis strategies of analysis (Babbie, 1998).Extracts from Berg (2001:189) revealed the extent to which unobtrusive method in social science research has been neglected in classical texts: Unobtrusive studies are sometimes briefly-highlighted in textbook descriptions of unobtrusive measures-just before dismissing these techniques in favour of measures regarded as more legitimate. Even comprehensive compendiums of qualitative strategies and techniques omit the topic of unobtrusive measures and nonreactive research techniques (see, for example, Denzin & Lincoln, 1994; 1 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY 1998). Unobtrusive measures actually make up a particularly interesting-and innovative strategy for collecting and assessing data. In some instances,-unobtrusive indicators provide access to aspects of social settings and theirinhabitants that are simply unreachable through any other means. To some extent, all the unobtrusive strategies amount to examining and-assessing human traces. Literally, human traces are physical items left behind by humans often as the result of some unconscious or unintentional activity that tell us something about these individuals. What they do, how they behave and structure their daily lives, and even how humans are affected by certain ideological stances can all be observed in traces people either intentionally or inadvertently leave behind. Because these traces have been left behind without the producers' knowledge of their potential usefulness to social scientists, these pieces of research information are non-reactively produced. Knowing fully well that research methods on human beings affect how a people will be-viewed, there is the need therefore to study human beings in their natural environment without interfering or conditioning their behaviour either as a result of the research or by the researcher as the case may be (Berg, 2001; Bogdan & Taylor, 1975). Similarly, the argument against the study of human beings as a statistical aggregate comes from the fact that human beings are cultural and traditionally enrobed and if studied in a symbolically reduced fashion, there is a danger that conclusions although arithmetically precise-may fail to explain the complex human social reality. According to Berg 2001, qualitative techniques allow researchers to-share in the understandings and perceptions of others and to explore how-people structure and give meaning to their daily lives. Thus, researchers using-qualitative techniques often examine how people learn about and make sense of themselves and others. As Douglas (1976, p. 12) suggests, the methods used by social scientists fall along a continuum from totally uncontrolled (and perhaps uncontrollable) techniques arising in natural settings to totally controlled techniques of observation. It remains, then, for researchers to choose their procedures keeping in mind the problems that may arise in specific research settings among certain-research groups and in unique research circumstances. Some authors associate qualitative research with the single technique of participant observation. Other writers extend their understanding of qualitative research to include interviewing as well. 2 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY However, popular qualitative research additionally includes such methods as observation of experimental natural settings, photographic techniques (including videotaping), historical analysis (historiography), document and textual analysis, sociometry, sociodrama and similar ethno-methodological experimentation, ethnographic research, and a number of-unobtrusive techniques. Advocates of particular methodological styles of research are frequently more concerned with asserting or defending their techniques than with indicating alternative ways of approaching the subject of research.Similarly most researchers have come to realise the need to combine methods, at least one methodological technique they feel most comfortable using, which often becomes their favourite or only approach toresearch. This might be why many previous qualitative research texts presented only a single research methodology (participant observation, interviewing, orunobtrusive measures). Further, many researchers perceive their researchmethod as an atheoretical tool (Denzin, 1978). Because ofthis, they fail to recognize that methods impose certain perspectives on reality. For example, whenresearchers go to the field and organise interviews with their subjects todiscuss their opinions or assessments ofsome social issues, often than not a theoretical assumptionhas alreadybeen made--specifically, that reality is fairly constant and stable. Similarly,when they make direct observations of events, researchers assume reality isdeeply affected by the actions ofall participants, including themselves. Eachmethod thus reveals slightly different facets ofthe same symbolic reality. Every method is a different line ofsight directed toward the same point, observingsocial and symbolic reality. Bycombining several lines of sight, researchersobtain a better, more substantive picture ofreality; a richer, more complete arrayofsymbols andtheoretical concepts; and a means ofverifying many ofthese elements. The use of several lines ofsight is frequently called triangulation. Though this is not the focus of this paper, it is worth mentioning for emphasis sake that an early reference to triangulation was first made in relation to the idea of unobtrusive method proposed by Webb et al. (1966:3), who suggested, “Once a proposition has been confirmed by two or more independent measurementprocesses, the uncertainty of its interpretation is greatly reduced. The mostpersuasive evidence comes through a triangulation of measurement processes” (p. 3) 3 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Thus,it is important to state that like triangulation the best way to gather information on human subjects is to combine one or more unobtrusive methods. The paragraph below comprehensively examines the four broad categories of unobtrusive strategies. These are: Observation, Archival Strategies, Physical Erosion and Accretion. Categories of Unobtrusive Methods in Social Science Research 1. Observation As an ethnographic research method, observation seems to have no specific beginning. While some researchers found indications of its use in ancient times, others have pointed to the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when anthropologists starting “collecting data firsthand” (Atkinson & Hammersley, 1994, p. 249). Describing it as the “bedrock source of human knowledge” about the “social and natural world,” Adler and Adler (1994) stated that Aristotle used observational techniques in his botanical studies on the island of Lesbos and that Auguste Comte, the father of sociology, listed observation as a core research method” (p. 377). Observations have lead to some of the most important scientific discoveries in human history. Charles Darwin used observations of the animal and marine life at the Galapagos Islands to help him formulatehis theory of evolution that he describes in On the Origin of Species.Observations can be conducted on nearly any subject matter, thus social scientists, natural scientists, engineers, computer scientists, educational researchers, and many others use observations as a primary research method. Generally there are two broad approaches to using observational techniques in researching behaviours: (a) participant observation and (b) nonparticipant observation.Participant observers conduct their observations “from the inside”; that is, the researcher is an integral part of the environment being observed. Nonparticipant observers conduct their observations “from the outside”; the researcher does not interact with those being observed. (1967). The crux of the matter of observational studies is often related to sampling (precisely on how to get respondents): “who, what, where, and when” questions. Polit and Hungler (1987) divided the units of observation into two categories: molar and molecular. Molar involves observing large units of activity “as a whole,” whereas the molecular approach “uses small andhighly specific behaviors as the unit of observation” (p. 268). These twocategories are not mutually exclusive. For 4 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY example, the researcher mayuse the molar approach at the beginning of the study and change to the molecular one as her/his familiarity with, and understanding of, the insiders and their environment grows. Adler and Adler (1994) used the analogy of a funnel to describe this process wherein the stages of observation get progressively narrower and direct the researcher’s “attention deeper into the elements of the setting that have emerged as theoretically and/or empirically essential” (p. 381). In observation, the researcher uses all of her/his senses to gather information about the phenomena under study (Adler & Adler, 1994). A variety of material should also be used to enhance sensual observations. Audio-recorders can be used to tape interviews. Video-recorders or cameras can be used to record the activities of the insiders because, according to Collier and Collier (1986), cameras are an “instrumental extension of our senses” (p. 7) that may help researchers to “see more and with greater accuracy” (p. 5). In her multimethod study of hobby cooks that included “secondary research, interviews . . . and the unobtrusive analysis of sites,” Hartel took 125 photographs to “capture the titles of books or file tabs with subject headings” (2003, p. 235). Other material such as minutes of meetings, memoranda, letters, magazines, or newspaper articles can also expand one’s understanding of the study group. Spradley (1980) also mentioned making maps to record observations. Given and Leckie (2003) “mapped and photographed the visual space on all floors” of both libraries they studied “to document the location of furniture and equipment” in order to create the “seating sweeps checklist” (2003, p. 375). However there are ethics guiding the usage of observation as a research method. One of the major factors associated with observational studies is ethics. While observation is generally seen as the least intrusive data collection method, it can also be an abuse of an individual’s privacy (Adler & Adler, 1994; Jorgensen, 1989; Chatman, 1992). Chatman (1992), in her book on retired women living in Garden Towers, discussed two different types of ethical dilemmas an observer can encounter. One is “guilty knowledge, in which the investigator is privy to confidential information, and [the other is] dirty hands;or a situation in which theresearcher is able to correct or reveal some wrongdoing, but chooses not to do so” (p. 18).In observational research, the complexity of fieldwork in which theresearcher is engaged “make[s] it difficult, if not impossible, to adopt single set of standards,” (Spradley, 1980: 20). It is in this regard observational method be it participant or non-participant is often advised to be used alongside other obtrusive qualitative methods such as interviews and focus group discussions, among others. 5 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY 2. Archival Strategies Archival strategies deal with the proper scrutiny and intelligent examination of documented records, information, and history among others for academic cum research purposes. Documentations in various archives are typical examples. In Nigeria the national archives located in Ibadan houses a lot of information dated back to the pre-colonial, colonial, pre- independence and independence era. It is often updated from time to time. Similarly other institutional repositories such as libraries and other research institutions such as the Nigerian Institute of Social and Economic Research (NISER) and the various national museums are places where research can be conducted using the unobtrusive methods. According to Denzin (1978, p. 219), archival records can be divided into public archival records and private archival records. In the case of the former, records are viewed as prepared for the expressed purpose of examination by others. Traditionally, the term archive brings to mind some form of library. No doubt libraries are indeed archives, so too are graveyard tombstones, hospital admittance records, church baptismal records, computer-accessed bulletin boards, motor vehicle registries, newspaper morgues, arrest records, and even credit companies' billing records. As Webb et al. (1981) suggest, virtually any running record provides a kind of archive. Although access to public archives may be restricted to certain groups (forexample, certain law enforcement records, credit histories, school records,and so on) they are typically prepared for some audience. As a result, publicarchival records tend to be written in more or less standardized form andarranged in the archive systematically using alphabets (a-z), dates, (e.g chronologically, from 1900-2050) or numerically indexed (e.g 1-10).In contrast privatearchival records typically are intended for personal (private) audiences.Except for published versions of a diary or personal memoirs (which in effectbecome parts of the public archival system), private archival records reachextremely small-if any-audiences, but very useful in life histories research. Private records are particularly useful for creating case studies or lifehistories. Typically, owing to the personal nature of private archives and documents, thesubjects' own definitions life experiences are well captured. According to Bogdan and Taylor(1975), Denzin (1978), Webb et al. (1981), and Taylor and Bogdan (1998), theautobiography is the most widely accepted form of 6 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY private and personal documents or archives. Autobiography could come in three types: comprehensive autobiographies, topical autobiographies, and edited autobiographies.The use of autobiography continues to meet resistance in some academic circles, and has even been called "self-indulgent" (Mykhalovskiy, 1996). In defence of the strategy of autobiography, Mykhalovskiy (1996, p.134) has written, "The abstract, disembodied voice of traditional academicdiscourse [is] a fiction, accomplished through writing and other practiceswhich remove evidence of a text's author, as part of concealing the conditionof its production." Nevertheless the usefulness and intimacy afforded by autobiographies, diaries, letters, and personal journals, remain and constitute an underutilized element in research especially in the social sciences unlike in the arts. Information via these methods offers more than simply a single individual's subjective view on matters. Berg (2001:218) noted that autobiographies offer a solid measure of data for theresearch process. There are instances where personal or private libraries have been taken over or willingly donated by family members of notables to the state, and in no time such archives become accessible to the public for research, thus the concept of public archival data in social science research. Public archival data are part and parcel of archival strategies. Webb et al. (1966, 1981), classified them into three broad groups of commercial mediaaccounts, actuarial records, and official documentary records: a. Commercial media accounts may include the use of such items as newspapers, books, magazines, television program transcripts, videotapes, drawn comics, maps, and so forth. b. Actuarial recordsinclude items such as birth and death records; records of marriages and divorces; application information held by certain institutions. For example, churches, insuranceand creditcompanies in custody of title, land, and deed information; and certain demographic or residential types of records. Such data tend to be produced for special orlimited audiences but are typically available to the public under certain circumstances. c.Official documentary records may include but not limited to internally generated governmentagency reports, official court transcripts, police reports, census information, financial records, crime statistics, political speech transcripts, school records, bills of lading, sales records, and similar documents. Official documents may also include less obvious, and sometimesless openly available, forms of communications such as 7 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY interoffice memos,printed e-mail messages, minutes from meetings, organizational newsletters,and so forth. These materials often convey important and useful information that a researcher can effectively use as data. Similar to actuarial records, official documentary recordslimited to small audiences, but nevertheless they often find their way into the public domain. 3. Physical Erosion Measures Physical evidence is frequently the key to resolving social scientific questions in research. Erosion measuresinclude several types of evidence indicating that varying degrees of selective wear or usage have occurred on some object or material. According to Lee (2000), “everything in and of the world is irredeemably cultural, and therefore open to study, no matter how seemingly peripheral, insignificant or taken for granted” (p. 8). In most cases, erosion measures are used with other techniques in order to corroborate one another in studying human cultural remains. An example of an erosion measure is the examination of the frequency of usage of an item in a museum or library in order to examine the wear and tear that may have occurred over time. The most widely quoted illustration of how erosion measures operate involves a study at the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry cited by Webb et al. (1981, p. 7): A committee was formed to set up a psychological exhibit at Chicago's Museum of Science and Industry. The committee learned that the vinyl tiles around the exhibit containing live, hatching chicks had to be replaced every six weeks or so; tiles in other areas of the museum went for years without replacement. A comparative study of the rate of tile replacement around the various museum exhibits could give a rough ordering of the popularity of the exhibits. Webb et at. (1981) additionally note that beyond the erosion measure, unobtrusive observations (covert observers) indicated that people stood in front of the chick display longer than they stood near any other exhibit. Though there could have been other explanations, nonetheless, the illustration does indicate the particularly interesting kinds of information provided by augmenting data sources with erosion measures. This case further illustrates how multiple measures may be used to corroborate one another. Lee (2000) classifies these ‘physical traces’ as either running records or episodic records. 8 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY 4. Accretion Measures Accretion is one of the two identified physical trace measurement by Webb et al. (1966). Accretion is a measure, which involves the use of deposited materials as research evidence. Social scientists have recognized that materials deposited by individuals are useful for exploring a wide variety of behaviours. A clear example of the usefulness of accretion data is Blake’s (1981) examination of the ethnic content of graffiti appearing in male lavatories at the University of Hawaii. This allowed Blake to identify, among other things, stereotypes of ethnic groups from other ethnic group messages that are typically taboo in Hawaii. Accretion measures available to the police may consist of DNA information, ballistic evidence, fingerprints and body recovery locations. And even students cheat sheets accumulated over a long time. The deposit of almost any object or material by humans can be an accretion (Berg, 2001). In fact, as illustrated by the work of Rathie (1979) even garbage may contain important clues to social culture using accretion measures. There are several advantages to erosion and accretion measures. Certainly, it should be clear that they are themselves rather inconspicuous and unaffected by researchers who locate and observe them. In consequence, the trace data are largely free of any reactive measurement effects. However, interpreting these physical traces and affixing meaning is problematic and may severely bias research findings. It is often advised that researchers must always remember to obtain corroboration. Unobtrusive measures actually make up a particularly interestingand innovative strategy for collecting and assessing data. In some instances,unobtrusive indicators provide access to aspects of social settings and theirinhabitants that are simply unreachable through any other means. To some extent, all the unobtrusive strategies amount to examining andassessing human traces. What people do, how they behave and structure theirdaily lives, and even how humans are affected by certain ideological stancescan all be observed in traces people either intentionally or inadvertently leavebehind. The more unusual types of unobtrusive studies are sometimes briefly highlighted in textbook descriptions ofunobtrusive measures-just before dismissing these techniques in favour ofmeasures regarded as more legitimate. 9 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Unobtrusive method: Human traces as vital data sources: There are two distinct categories of human traces: (1)erosion measures (indicators ofwearing down oraway) and (2) accretion measures(indicators ofaccumulation or build-up).An example is Pullen et al.’s (2000) unobtrusive study of discarded ‘cheat sheets’ in universities in which students unwittingly provide valuable research data by leaving their cheating notes behind after exams. Because these traces have been left behind without the producers' knowledge of their potential usefulness to social scientists, these pieces of research information are non-reactively produced. Physical Erosion measures are indicators of ‘wearing down or away’ of left behind evidences or items, while accretion measures are indicators of accumulation or build-up of left behind items or evidences. These thus bring us to the various advantages and disadvantages of the unobtrusive method as one of the qualitative methods in qualitative research. Advantages of unobtrusive methods There are several advantages in making use of unobtrusive methods in social research. One among others is the: a. Freedom of Interference First, by definition, Unobtrusive methods donot require intrusion into the lives ofparticipants by investigators. This isbecause most unobtrusive data have been created by people and left as eitherresidue or erosion-but without the intention ofleaving research data. Otherdata-collection strategies, including focus group interviews, are quite intentional and invasive.With mostunobtrusive data strategies, no subjects need be involved during the actualcourse of the research. There are some types of unobtrusive data collection,however, in which subjects may be more actively involved than in others. Forexample, if researchers ask a group of traders to deliberately construct their life experiences in the market place,as a subject their lives would have been intruded upon, knowingly or not by the researcher. b. Passiveness Unobtrusive data may include limited elements that provide insightinto the cognitive or psychological lives of individuals. However, there is nointeraction between subjects or between subject and investigator. Unlike focus groups, participant observation or other forms of interviewing, unobtrusive strategies are passive rather than dynamic. 10 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY c. Historicity If one is interested ininvestigating how people have lived under certain situations or in specific settings, there may be a number of viable unobtrusive strategies available.Even if you wanted to know how people acted and their attitudes duringsome event or time, unobtrusive tactics could be used. But, by their verynature, unobtrusive data usually are historical. That is, information is createdat one time but identified as data at some later time. For instance data collected in 2008 on children born during the Nigerian civil war of 1967 revealed the stigmatisation emanating from the names given to them by their parents in later years in memory of the war (Ikuomola,2011). Thus through this method of research, the impact of historical events on human beings were unravelled. d. Fairly low cost Though unobtrusive method remains stronger in the realm of the surface level analysis, it however shares an overlapping interest with focus group interviews in comprehending the biographical experiences of people in any environment, while focus group interviews possess the ability to effectively alternatebetween surface and deep levels analysis. Decisions about whether to use unobtrusivemeasures over others will be made for several reasons. The most obviousis the level oflife structure a researcher wishes to examine. Another, again, may befinance . Here, however, you are likely to find that unobtrusive measures,like focus groupinterviews, can be created at fairly low cost. A researcher might consider innovatively combining the two, as in the group diary. Such a strategy allows both a variation on triangulation and a means for assessing bothsurface and deep levels ofparticipants' lives.The decision a researcher make when selecting a method of research overthe other, of course, is often based on what the researcher is willing to give up or trade off. For instance, a researcher must be willing to trade off emergent observations in a natural setting (using other obtrusive method, participant observation and focus group discussions), forconcentrated interactions in a short time frame. This is likely not the sort ofdecision that you will make strictly on the basis of financial and time costs.Roth (1966) suggests that costs largely depend upon howmuch of the research is done or will be done by "hired hands" and how much bythe researcher. Similarly, costs will be affected by whether or not subjects arepaid for their involvement in the study. Largely, such decisions are made on the basis of the value placed on 11 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY theadvantages or disadvantages of a method over another. Also, decisions will beaffected by the research topic itself and the specific interests, values, background, and training of the researcher (Sussman et al. 1991; Fern, 1982). Disadvantages and Critique of the Unobtrusive Methods The unobtrusive methods or strategies are quite good at identifying surface level structures of life, most are not adequate for uncovering deep-Ievel lifestructures. Thus what the unobtrusive method lacks in unravelling germane issues which can only be revealed through interactions with people (research subjects) canbe adjusted through the use of focus-group-like activities which enables deep interaction. Bysharing information, thoughts, and common problems and suggesting solutions one to the other, group diaries or focus group discussion effectively become unguided but robust. Their discourse, then, amounts to a similar synergistically created convergence of ideas and experiences. Such discussions and biographical information provides researchers with the structure ofthe writers' lives. Biographical experiences are culturally influenced and created. Every culture affects its members'self-perceptions and understanding about social roles, social institutions, andsocial structures. According to Denzin (1989:39), biographical experiences have effects attwo levels in a person's life: the surface level and the deep level. On the surfacelevel, effects may be barely felt, noticed, or misinterpreted. They are often taken for granted andare non-disruptive. For example picking up a vase of red flowers on the way home from work might not necessarily mean an atmosphere of love is ready to be ignited somewhere. Effects at the deep level, however, strike at the core of anindividual's life. They have a strong hold over the individual and affect howwe behave, think, and understand things. Acceptance of our temperament, sexuality, self-hate, grief and other deep- rooted epiphanies serve to illustrate deep-Ievel lifestructures. In relation to obtrusive method such as the Focus groups, provide avenues to understand a variety ofdeep structural elements. For instance, Twiggs (1994) and Grant (1993)suggest that focus groups can be used to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses ofcourt cases, and even to determine important issues in particularcases. Knowing why a judge gave a verdict and the implication such verdicts have on a people cannot be unravelled without direct interactions with the people or at least the judge. Grant further suggests that information culled from focus groups mayassist attorneys in selectingjuries during voir dire. 12 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Unobtrusive strategies and focus group interviews share an overlapping interest in the biographical experiences ofgroup members and group dynamics. For the mostpart, unobtrusive measures remain in the realm ofthe surface level. On theother hand, focus group interviews possess the ability to effectively alternatebetween surface and deep levels. There are key underlining factors a researcher needs to note whether to make use ofthe unobtrusivemeasures or the obtrusive methods.First is the level oflife structure therein to be investigated. Secondly may befinance. In this case the researcher is likely to find that unobtrusive measures,like other strategies, can be incorporated in a research at a fairly low cost. One might alsoconsider innovatively combining both the unobtrusive and obtrusive methods, making use of interviews, surveys and observations. Thus the concept of triangulation comes handy which allows the meandering and gathering of data at the surface and deep levels ofparticipants' lives.Unobtrusive method in social science research demonstrates that data canbe collected from various traces and records created or left behind by humans. Manytypes of unobtrusive data provide avenues for the study of subjects thatmight otherwise be very difficult or impossible to investigate (Schwartz and Jacobs 1979; Glassner & Hertz, 1999). Conclusion Unobtrusive methods in social research are very interesting and useful in many ways, but they are only one of several possible research strategies that should be used in concert. Similarly these methods highlight the benefits of using materials that have not been specifically designed for research purposes. Using the unobtrusive methods researchers are empowered to make sensible a range of complex and messy fragments of information. All of these potential advantages rely heavily on observing many of the limitations and benefits of non-reactive, unobtrusive measurement. This is not to reprimand or discourage other research methodologies, but merely a reiteration of an earlier suggestion relating to triangulation in social sciences that a single, controlled approach to researching social issues has its own imperfections. In addition, unobtrusive methods are likely to present researchers with opportunities for deriving innovative means of exploring relevant social issues and developing a complementary approach to social research. References 13 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1987). Membership roles in fi eld research: Vol. 6. Qualitative research methods.Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1994). Observational techniques. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.). Atkinson, P., & Hammersley, M. (1994). Ethnography and participation observation. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 248–261). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Babbie, E. (1998). The Practice of social research (8th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing. Baker, L.M. (2006) Observation: A complex research method.Library Trends, 55, No. (1): 171– 189 Berg, b. L 2001. Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. California State Long Beach. Blake, C. F. (1981) ‘Graffiti and racial insults: The archaeology of ethnic relations in Hawaii’, in R. A. Gould and M. B. Schiffer (eds.) Modern material culture: Thearcheology of US. New York: Academic Press. Bogdan, R, & Taylor, S. J. (1975). Introduction to qualitative research methods. New York: Wiley. Chatman, E. A. (1992). The information world of retired women. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Collier, J., Jr., & Collier, M. (1986). Visual anthropology: Photography as a research method. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act. Chicago: Aldine. Denzin, N. K. (1989). Interpretive interactionism. Applied social research methods series, Vol. 16. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Denzin, N. K, & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Denzin, N. K, & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1998). Strategies of qualitative inquiry (Handbook of Research Paperback Edition, Vol. 2). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Douglas, J. D. (1976). Investigative social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Fern, E. F. (1982). The use of focus groups for idea generation: The effects of group size, acquaintanceship, and moderator on a response quality and quantity. Journal ofMarketing Research 19,1-13. th Frankfort-Nachmias, C, & Nachmias, D. (1996). Research Methods in the Social Sciences (5 ed.). New York St. Martin's Press. Given, L. M., & Leckie, G. J. (2003). “Sweeping” the library: Mapping the social activity space of the public library. Library & Information Science Research, 25, 365–385. Glassner, B., & Hertz, R. (Eds.). (1999). Qualitative Sociology as Everyday Life. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Grant, B. C. (1993). Focus groups versus mock trials: Which should you use? Trial Diplomacy Journal 16,15-22. Hartel, J. (2003). The serious leisure frontier in library and information science: Hobby domains. Knowledge Organization, 30(3/4), 228–238. Ikuomola, A.D. (2011). The Nigerian civil war and the stigmatization of Children born of rape victim in Edo State. In Gender and Sexualities in History: Rape in Wartime. Raphaelle Branche and Fabrice Virgili. Palgrave Macmillan , France.. Chapter 12. Pp. 169-183. Jorgensen, D. L. (1989). Participant observation: A methodology for human studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 14 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY Lee, R. M. (2000) Unobtrusive methods in social research. Milton Keynes: Open University Press Mykhalovskiy, E. (1996). Reconsidering table talk: Critical thoughts on the relationship between Sociology, autobiography, and self-indulgence. Qualitative Sociology 29(1), 131-151. Polit, D. F., & Hungler, B. P. (1987). Nursing research: Principles and methods (3rd ed.). Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott. Pullen, R., Ortloff, V., Casey, S. & Payne, J.B. (2000). Analysis of academic misconduct using unobtrusive research: A study of discarded cheat sheets. College Student Journal, 34, 616- 625. Roth, J. (1966). Hired hand research. The American Sociologist. 1,190-196. Schwartz, D. (1989). Visual ethnography: Using photography in qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology 12(2),119-154. Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Sussman, S, Burton, D., Dent, C. W., Stacy, A. W, & Flay, B. R (1991). Use of focus groups indeveloping an adolescent tobacco use cessation program: Collection norm effects. Journal of Applied SocialPsychology 21,1772-1782. Tayler, S. J., &Bogdan, R (1998). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guide book & resource. New York Wiley. Twiggs, H. F. (1994). Do-it-yourself focus groups: Big profits, modest cost. Trial 30(9), 42-117. Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D. and Sechrest, L. (1966) UnobtrusiveMeasures: Non-Reactive Research in the Social Sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally. Webb, E. 1., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R D., Sechrest, L., & Grove, J. B. (1981). Nonreactivemeasures In the social sciences. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 15 UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY