Textbooks on research methods generally emphasize the need to collect data with high validity, reliability, and in the case of qualitative research, authenticity. Yet, field research often poses unanticipated challenges, particularly when the research is conducted in less-than-well-documented milieus. This article outlines field challenges encountered by the authors when doing a qualitative study of a slum community in the Philippines. Acceptable Western standards for gaining entry into a research community, for participating in local community life, and for the language and dress code used in the field had to be re-evaluated by the authors according to the prevailing Filipino cultural norms and the norms used in the local slum community. Lessons learned in this research can inform those doing qualitative research generally, but particularly those considering research in non-Western cultures.
ChurchAT (1987) Personality research in a non-Western culture: the Philippines. Psychological Bulletin102: 272–292.
2.
CicourelAV (1964) Method and Measurement in Sociology. New York: Free Press.
3.
ConstantinoR (1976) Identity and consciousness: the Philippine experience. Journal of Contemporary Asia6: 5–28.
4.
DavidEJROkazakiS (2006) Colonial mentality: a review and recommendation for Filipino American psychology. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology12: 1–16.
5.
DenzinNKLincolnYS (2005) Introduction. In: DenzinNKLincolnYS (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1–32.
6.
DillmanDA (2007) Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. New York: John Wiley.
7.
DunlapEJohnsonBSanabriaH. (1990) Studying crack users and their criminal careers—the scientific and artistic aspects of locating hard-to-reach subjects and interviewing them about sensitive topics. Contemporary Drug Problems17: 121–144.
8.
EmersonRM (2001) Contemporary Field Research: Perspectives and Formulations. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
9.
EnriquezVG (1986) Kapwa: a core concept in Filipino social psychology. In: EnriquezVG (ed.) Philippine World View. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 6–19.
10.
EnriquezVG (1993) Developing a Filipino psychology. In: KimUBerryJW (eds) Indigenous Psychologies: Research and Experience in Cultural Context. Cross-cultural Research and Methodology Series, Vol. 17. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 152–169.
11.
FoddyW (1994) Constructing Questions for Interviews and Questionnaires: Theory and Practice in Social Research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
HarleMTDelaRFVelosoG. (2007) The experiences of Filipino American patients with cancer. Oncology Nursing Forum34: 1170–1175.
14.
JocanoFL (1975) Slum as a Way of Life: A Study of Coping Behavior in an Urban Environment. Quezon City, Philippines: University of the Philippines Press.
15.
LeonCT (1987) Social categorisation in Philippine organisations: values toward collective identity and management through intergroup relations. Asia Pacific Journal of Management5: 28–37.
16.
LincolnYSGubaEG (2000) Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In: DenzinNKLincolnYS (eds) The Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 163–188.
17.
LynchFMakilPQ (2004) Philippine Society and the Individual: Selected Essays of Frank Lynch. Quezon City, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila University Press.
18.
MaggayMP (1999) Understanding Ambiguity in Filipino Communication Patterns. Quezon City, Philippines: Institute for Studies in Asian Church and Culture.
19.
MendozaSL (2004) Pahiwatig: the role of ambiguity in Filipino American communication patterns. In: FongMChuandR (eds) Communicating Ethnic and Cultural Identity. Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield, 151–164.
20.
ParkYSKimBSK (2008) Asian and European American cultural values and communication styles among Asian American and European American college students. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology14: 47–56.
21.
Pe-PuaR (2006) From decolonizing psychology to the development of a cross-indigenous perspective in methodology. In: KimUYangK-SHwangK-K (eds) Indigenous and Cultural Psychology. New York: Springer, 109–137.
22.
Pe-PuaRProtacio-MarcelinoEA (2000) Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino psychology): a legacy of Virgilio G. Enriquez. Asian Journal of Social Psychology3: 49–71.
23.
PomeroyWJ (1992) The Philippines: Colonialism, Collaboration, and Resistance. New York: International Publishers Co.
24.
RimonteN (1997) Colonialism’s legacy: the inferiorizing of the Filipino. In: RootMPP (ed) Filipino Americans. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 39–61.
25.
SingletonRStraitsBCStraitsMM. (1999) Approaches to Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press.
26.
WatkinsD (1982) Antecedents of self esteem, locus of control, and academic achievement: a path analytic investigation with Filipino children. Applied Psychology31: 475–490.
27.
WatkinsDGutierrezM (1989) The structure of self concept: some Filipino evidence. Australian Psychologist24: 401–410.
28.
WhyteWF (1943) Street Corner Society: The Social Structure of an Italian Slum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
