Ethnomethodology

In sociology, ethnomethodology focuses on how people transgress social norms in order to find them. This viewpoint calls into question what most people consider to be common sense. Ethnomethodology promotes the concept that in a dialogue between two or more individuals, the participants must agree or the communication would fail. This accord becomes a mirror of what holds society together (Garfinkel, 2005).

The breach experiment is based on the idea that victims of norm violations are not cognizant. Second, the experiment assumes that these norms exist and can be easily and reliably seen and documented at any given time. Furthermore, it is assumed that the setting up of “rules” of interpersonal communication is done every time. The breaching of the experiment involves a scenario where the experimenter breaks the typical social standards which are not usually addressed or enforced but can be accepted far and wide (Garfinkel, 2005).

This breaching experiment shall involve a conversation between my friends and me about a plane crash accident which happened in the black sea as reported by BBC sometimes back in the completion of the assignment given by the lecturer. The experiment shall help analyze the kinds of reactions and the effects of the breaking of social norms during the interpersonal interaction. The research will show the effects of our individual emotions to others.

Method

The experiment involves discussions in groups of ten members who were organized by the class representative on behalf of our lecturer to study and find out the effects of large water bodies on the objects and in that case, the reasons behind the several plane crash in water. The groups are to compile a comprehensive report before sunset. At this time many people are preoccupied with this project and rushing against time. I chose the two groups on the basis of gender in leadership, that is, one lead by a lady and the other by a gentleman. I noted down the reactions of the group members after leaving the team and before joining the next one. I attended two such panels within twenty-five minutes before I could join my respective group. My group was meant to be the control experiment and a representation of adherence to the social norms. In the first panel, I confronted the group leader to clarify every statement she mentioned. In the second experiment, I could frequently move out to answer a phone call, but on coming back, I could request a repeat of what had been said in my absence. Before the group leader could finish explaining, I again moved out for another pretended phone calls. In the third experiment which was within my respective group, I adhered to the rules of the group and gave a lot of contribution towards the topic. The discussions were done within the Block B lecture halls with each group in separate rooms. The experiment is meant to create awareness on how social norms enforce conformity. Secondly, the experiment shall enlighten me on the conceptions of this course and the idea behind breaching experiment. Finally, the significance of the discomforts encountered when doing these experiments.

Results

In the first experiment, the members seemed to cooperate to answer my question but later became irritated to the point that some could compel me to keep quiet. The irritation could be read from the facial expression; while others could literary keep quiet and others ignore my question. The members decided to junk me out of the group. In the second experiment, the team members accepted to revisit the ideas that they had discussed in my absence for three times. After the third time, they expressed anger and irritation towards my behavior. The group leader requested me to finish with the phone calls then return later. He did it politely because he justified that could be, the phone call was genuine. In the third group, the discussion was very smooth, and the members cordially participated in the study. This experiment was meant for comparison to redefine the social norms and their violation. The majority of the subjects who were irritated faster were the ladies. The table of percentage of the reactions was completed to show the types of reaction and the rate of response shown by the members of the group. The table was used for the evaluation of the success of the experiment in bringing the understanding of the concepts of social norms and the effects of breaching these norms as learned in social psychology.

Result

Condition

First Experiment

(without reason)

Second Experiment

(phone calls)

Third Experiment

(control experiment)

Subjects who paid attention from the start to the end (N=10)

0 = 0%

2 = 20%

10 = 10%

Subjects who paid attention at first, but later got irritated (N=10)

4 = 40%

7 = 70%

0 = 0%

Subjects who never paid any attention and was irritated throughout the conversation (N=10)

6 = 60%

1 = 1%

0 = 0%

Discussion, Evaluation and Conclusion

The experiment is done in an education set up where people have gathered for a particular purpose (Rafalovich, 2006). They form social groups which are bound by specific rules and regulations which enable them to accomplish their goals. Failure to comply discriminate the individuals from the participation in the group discussion as a result. Now that the social norms always seem obvious, other individuals in the set up may characterize the person as mental illnesses (Rafalovich, 2006). The penalty for breaching of social interaction rules is the association with insanity or confusion. The members of the first two groups, therefore, developed mistrust and were not willing to get any contribution from me. The experiment enabled me to realize that the societal rules are innate, essential right and inviolable (Rafalovich, 2006).

The experiments have supported the hypotheses because they have unveiled the requirements of achieving a successful social interaction. As an experimenter, it pains a lot to interrupt discussions. The personal feelings may affect the experimenter courage to attain more from the experiment as it all depend on his/her capability to contain the reaction (Rafalovich, 2006). Contrary to the set up of this experiment, a similar operation can be done in other avenues than the academic discussion because it wastes time. The recommended areas can be the football, politics and general discussions as this do not affect the educational key goals. The experiments should not be done on the same day to avoid biases (Garfinkel, 2005). Sometimes, it becomes difficult to optimize on the experiment because of the embarrassment, anxiety, and strain, therefore it becomes hard for the experimenter to look at the group leader on the face to show genuineness in his/her requests (Rafalovich, 2006).

The emotions above are the ones responsible for preventing the people from breaking the usual standards of the interaction (Rafalovich, 2006). The social norms are therefore not taught or stipulated in any of the constitution rules but are internal self-judgments which curb the breaching of those standards (Rafalovich, 2006). Finally, it is through the breaching of social norms that we realize their existence and their importance to our daily endeavors so that we may apply (Rafalovich, 2006).

Appendix:

Experiment one:

The participants were ten, and out of the number, no one showed the willingness to clarify the points throughout the discussion, four explained to some extent but later shunned the business. The rest never showed interest in my questions.

Experiment two:

The participants were ten. Out of the number, two out of ten showed willingness throughout the experiment, seven of them later lost interest, and only one showed no interest throughout the experiment.

Experiment three:

Experiment three was a control experiment. Total compliance was witnessed throughout the experiment.

References

Garfinkel, H. (Ed.). (2005). Ethnomethodological studies of work. Routledge. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=-KGHAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Garfinkel,+H.+Studies+in+Ethnomethodology&ots=RHDAr5l49J&sig=x9OMfyXDKpgvQajuppshx6NzrLg

Rafalovich, A. (2006). Making sociology relevant: the assignment and application of breaching experiments. Teaching Sociology, 34(2), 156-163. Retrieved from http://tso.sagepub.com/content/34/2/156.full.pdf