On the Outside Looking In: Ethnography and Authoritarianism

2Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Despite the common assumption that ethnography is most successful where researchers achieve recognition as insiders within the communities they study, conducting research in nondemocracies inverts incentives to conduct ethnographic research as an insider and poses unexpected ethical risks to both researchers and respondents. Rather than increasing trust and facilitating access, cultivating insider roles in nondemocracies may have the unintended effects of encouraging conformity with regime discourses, limiting further fieldwork access, and exacerbating respondents' tendency toward epistemic deference. Drawing on the authors' research experiences and the growing literature on fieldwork in nondemocracies, this article argues that outsider roles may be preferable to insider roles for identifying the unspoken rules, assumptions, and taken-for-granted aspects of everyday politics in nondemocracies. Moreover, outsider roles clarify the relationship between researcher and respondent in ways that provide clear ethical advantages in terms of consent, value, and risk.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Stroup, D. R., & Goode, J. P. (2023). On the Outside Looking In: Ethnography and Authoritarianism. Perspectives on Politics, 21(4), 1162–1177. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592722004182

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free