Skip to main content

Ethnomethodology

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
  • 482 Accesses

Abstract

Ethnomethodology is a qualitative research methodology which has recently gained momentum across disciplines, more specifically social and health sciences. Ethnomethodology focuses on the study of methods that individuals use in “doing” social life to produce mutually recognizable interactions within a situated context, producing orderliness. It explores how members’ actual, ordinary activities produce and manage settings of organized everyday situations. Practice through everyday life is central to ethnomethodology, the methods of which produce and maintain accountable circumstances of their life activities, making use of common sense knowledge in mundane situations. Ethnomethodology originated from Garfinkel who criticized Parsons’ action theory whereby Garfinkel illustrated how ethnomethodology departs from conventional social theory to develop a methodology for studying social life. Ethnomethodology draws on video-recorded data as a preferred method with detailed attention to talk-in-interaction and gestures as interaction. The rich, detailed data generated may be viewed several times over, thus demonstrating that the data is valuable and trustworthy. The concepts of indexicality, reflexivity, and accountability are central to ethnomethodology because together they illustrate meaning as a methodical accomplishment. The reflexive accountability that contributes to order and the members’ local performance of shared methods to carry out a joint activity form the central values of ethnomethodology. The analytical resources of ethnomethodology have been used to produce procedural accounts of human conduct in zones like museums, classrooms, and sports. Hence health care can be explored and empirically investigated as local interactions to contribute to patient safety.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

References

  • Atkinson P. Ethnomethodology: a critical review. Annu Rev Sociol. 1988;14:441–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson JM, Drew P. Order in court. New York: Macmillan; 1979.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Hillel Y. Indexical expressions. Mind; 1954;63(251):359–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bezemer J, Murtagh G, Cope A, Kress G, Kneebone R. “Scissors, please”: the practical accomplishment of surgical work in the operating theatre. Symb Interact. 2011;34(3):398–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler C. Talk and social interaction in the playground. Aldershot: Ashgate; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clayman SE, Maynard D. Ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. In: Have PT, Psathas G editors. Situated order: Studies in the social organization of talk and embodied activities (pp. 1–30). Washington, D.C.: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis & University Press of America; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins R, Makowsky M. The discovery of society. London: Random House; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel H. Studies in ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press; 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel H. Ethnomethodology’s program: working out Durkheim’s aphorism. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel H, Lynch M, Livingston E. The work of a discovering science constructed with materials from the optically discovered pulsar. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1981;11(2):131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath C, Luff P. Technology in action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Heath C, Hindmarsh J, Luff P. Video in qualitative research analysing social interaction in everyday life. London: Sage; 2010.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Heritage J. Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Express; 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage J. Ethnomethodology. In A. Giddens and J. Turner (eds) Social Theory Today. Cambrigde: Polity Press, 1987;224–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage J, Atkinson JM. Introduction. In: Atkinson JM, Heritage J, editors. Structures of social action: studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holstein JA, Gubrium JF. Interpretive practice and social action. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln SY, editors. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. 3rd ed. London: Sage; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kew F. Playing the game: an ethnomethodological perspective. Int Rev Sociol Sport. 1986;2(14):305–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koschmann T. Early glimmers of the now familiar ethnomethodological themes in Garfinkel’s The Perception of the Other. Human Studies, 2012;35(4);479–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luff P, Hindmarsh J, Heath C, editors. Workplace studies: recovering work practice and informing systems design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch M. Art and artifact in laboratory science: a study of shop work and shop talk. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch M. Scientific practice and ordinary action: ethnomethodology and social studies of science. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch M. Silence in context: ethnomethodology and social theory. Hum Stud. 1999;22(2):211–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maynard D, Clayman SE. The diversity of ethnomethodology. Annual Review of Sociology, 1991;17(1);385–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maynard DW. Inside plea bargaining: the language of negotiating. New York: Plenum; 1984.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mehan H. Learning lessons: social organisations in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1979.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mehan H, Wood H. The morality of ethnomethodology. Theory Soc. 1975;2(4):509–30. Retrieved 30 Oct 2017. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.464.8004&rep=rep1&type=pdf

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nevile M. Beyond the black box: talk-in-interaction in the airline cockpit. Aldershot: Ashgate; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierce JF. The ethnomethodological movement: sociosemiotic interpretation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter; 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollner M. Sociological and common sense models of the labeling process. In: Turner R, editor. Ethnomethodology: selected readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin; 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pomerantz A. Offering a candid answer: an information seeking strategy. Commun Monogr. 1988;55:360–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sacks H. The search for Help: no one to turn to. In E. S. Shneidman, ed. Essays in self destruction. New York: Science House: 1967;203–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks H. An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for sociology. In: Sudnow D, editor. Studies in social interaction. New York: Free Press; 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks H. Notes on methodology. In: Atkinson JM, Heritage J, editors. Structures of social action: studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks H. Lectures on conversation, vol. I and II. Malden: Blackwell; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schutz A. The phenomenology of the social world. London: Heinemann; 1972. (Translation of Schütz, [1974/1932] (1967)).

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverman D. Harvey Sacks: social science and conversation analysis. Oxford: Policy Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Svensson MS, Luff P, Heath C. Embedding instruction in practice: contingency and collaboration during surgical training. Sociol Health Illn. 2009;31(6):889–906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ten Have P. Doing conversation analysis: a practical guide. London: Sage; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • ten Have P. The notion of member is the heart of the matter: on the role of membership knowledge in ethnomethodological inquiry. Forum qualitative SozialResearch, Forum: 2002;3(3). Available at: http://www.qualitativeresearch.net/fqs/fqs-eng.htm

  • ten Have P. Understanding qualitative research and ethnomethodology. London: Sage; 2004.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Whalen J, Vinkhuyzen E. Expert systems in interaction: diagnosing document machine problems over the telephone. In: Luff P, Hindmarsh J, Heath C, editors. Workplace studies: recovering work practice and informing systems design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman DH, Pollner M. The everyday world as a phenomenon. In: Douglas JD, editor. Understanding everyday life: towards a reconstruction of sociological knowledge. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul; 1971. p. 80–103. (1st ed. 1970).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rona Pillay .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Pillay, R. (2018). Ethnomethodology. In: Liamputtong, P. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences . Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_68-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_68-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-2779-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-2779-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Social SciencesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics