Conducting Field Research in Asia: Fundamental Differences As Compared to Western Societies

Abstract

A journey in search of intercultural research in Hong Kong (China) has highlighted some fundamental differences between research conducted in Asia and previous projects in Europe with regard to the conceptual approach to field research. This paper is intended to present an experience rather than a research report. In particular, it will describe in detail culturally related barriers to entering the research field as well as getting access to Western and Chinese research participants. Finally, recommendations are made regarding how to maintain dignity with regards to science, research subjects and the researcher him-/herself. The paper is a case description of intercultural contact within the context of research. The intention is to illustrate the gap between knowledge of research methods and logistical aspects of doing intercultural research.

Keywords

differences in field research: Confucian vs Western societies intercultural field research recommendations for intercultural researchers

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adler, P.A. , & Adler, P. (1987). Membership roles in field research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Alasuutari, P. (1995). Researching culture: Qualitative method and cultural studies. London: Sage.

Bond, M.H. (1991). Beyond the Chinese face: Insights from psychology. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press

Cheng, C.-Y. (1987). Chinese philosophy and contemporary human communication theory. In D.L. Kincaid (Ed.), Communication theory: Eastern and western perspectives. New York: Academic Press

Gudykunst, B.W. , & Kim, Y. (1992). Communicating with strangers: An approach to intercultural communication(2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Gummesson, E. (1991). Qualitative methods in management research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hong, G.-Y. (1998). Logistics and researchers as legitimate tools for ‘doing’ intercultural research: Arejoinder to Guenther. Culture & Psychology, 4(1), 81–90.

Kirchmeyer, C. (1993). Multicultural task groups: An account of the low contribution level of minorities. Small Group Research, 24(1), 127–148.

Munroe, R.L. , & Munroe, R.H. (1986). Field work in cross-cultural psychology. In W.J. Lonner & J.W. Berry , (Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural research, 8. London: Sage.

10.

Punch, M. (1994). Politics and ethics in qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage.

11.

Shaffir, W.B. (1991). Managing a convincing self-presentation. In W.B. Shaffir & R.B. Stebbins (Eds.), Experiencing fieldwork: An inside view of qualitative research.London: Sage

12.

Shenkar, O. , & Ronen, S. (1987). The cultural context of negotiations: The implications of Chinese interpersonal norms. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 23, 263–275.

13.

Tang, S.F. , & Kirkbride, P.S. (1986). Developing conflict management skills in Hong Kong: An analysis of some cross-cultural implications. Management Education and Development, 17, 287–301.

14.

Van de Vijver, F. , & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. London: Sage.

15.

Weggel, O. (1994). China(4th ed.). Munich: C.H. Verlag.