Abstract
EDITOR'S NOTE: As the previous article suggested, critics as well as practitioners of ethnographic research have observed that researchers tend to overrely on informants, and as a comsequence they may overemphasize those data which support a favored imagery rather than reporting counterinstances which challenge that imagery or indicate possible variations. Michael Agar suggests that one remedy to this problem is a mix of quantitative and qualitative procedures. Drawing from cognitive anthropology, he suggests two formalization strategies which the ethnographer could employ in improving both data acquisition and analysis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
