Practical Knowledge and Participant Observation

Energy simulation for decision support in early architectural design

“…These methods can cover a wide spectrum of research activity, ranging from detached observation to engaged interaction with individuals and involvement in their activities. The degree to which the researcher engages in interaction with the individuals and becomes involved in their activities is largely determined by three factors: what will be the most informative; the level to which the researcher feels comfortable participating; and the level to which individuals feel comfortable allowing the researcher to participate (Zahle, 2012). This involvement, however, must allow access to experiences that offer meaningful and valid data and result in a richer understanding of the practice, so that it can be converted into a valuable asset for the research (Schwartz & Schwartz, 1955).…”

“…This qualitative form of inquiry seeks to situate knowledge within a practical setting, recognising that theories involving inherently tacit constructs are generated most effectively "in context, influencing, and being influenced by a context of interactions as they are in the process of being developed ... through an alliance and dialogue between researchers and practitioners" (Fook, 2002, p.83). The relevance of participant observation to these studies is evidenced not only by literature stating the applicability of this approach to the investigation of tacit knowledge, but also by theorists of practice advocating its use to unlock the implicit practical knowledge possessed by individuals (Bourdieu, 1990(Bourdieu, , 1993Zahle, 2012). As Hume & Mulock (2004, p.xi) explain, "the rationale of the approach is that ... the researcher can come close to experiencing and understanding the 'insider's' point of view".…”

“…Threats of this nature can be mitigated by establishing relationships with multiple individuals of differing perspectives. In this manner, observations can be validated through their coherence with other observations, with those proving incompatible dismissed, and earlier interpretations revised as new knowledge is acquired (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982;Pohland, 1972;Zahle, 2012). The purpose of developing constructs in this manner is to obtain findings for a specific group of people that may then be compared and contrasted against other similar groups (Fook, 2002).…”

“…The main risk with respect to the observer is misinterpretation of an observed situation or interaction through erroneous assessment of the reactivity of one or more of its actors (Zahle, 2012). This can be a manifestation of distorted observer perception, typically relating to their status in the practice, existing disciplinary bias, or participation that is either too active or too passive; it can also be symptomatic of the observed responding fallaciously, by lying, withholding relevant information or misrepresenting their claims, usually in an attempt to paint themselves in the best light or please the researcher (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982;Schwartz & Schwartz, 1955).…”

“…Jarvis (1999) offers a more formal, yet similar, description of practical knowledge, asserting it to be a combination of three types of knowledge -process, content and tacit -legitimised within a practice environment. More recently, Zahle (2012), has defined this knowledge from the perspective of how it is accessed, arguing that it can be understood as the ability of individuals to work in an appropriate and/or effective manner when participating in activities involving a plurality of persons. The emphasis in all three definitions is on the tacit aspect of practical knowledge, the element that informs a person's actions in response to a particular context or set of circumstances, which is learnt through experience and often difficult for individuals to articulate expressly (Fook, 2002;Jarvis, 1999;Zahle, 2012).…”