Fieldnotes refer to qualitative notes recorded by scientists or researchers in the course of field research, during or after their observation of a specific organism or phenomenon they are studying. The notes are intended to be read as evidence that gives meaning and aids in the understanding of the phenomenon. Fieldnotes allow researchers to access the subject and record what they observe in an unobtrusive manner.
One major disadvantage of taking fieldnotes is that they are recorded by an observer and are thus subject to (a) memory and (b) possibly, the conscious or unconscious bias of the observer. [1] It is best to record fieldnotes while making observations in the field or immediately after leaving the site to avoid forgetting important details. Some suggest immediately transcribing one's notes from a smaller pocket-sized notebook to something more legible in the evening or as soon as possible. Errors that occur from transcription often outweigh the errors which stem from illegible writing in the actual "field" notebook. [2]
Fieldnotes are particularly valued in descriptive sciences such as ethnography, biology, ecology, geology, and archaeology, each of which has long traditions in this area.
The structure of fieldnotes can vary depending on the field. Generally, there are two components of fieldnotes: descriptive information and reflective information. [3]
Descriptive information is factual data that is being recorded. Factual data includes time and date, the state of the physical setting, social environment, descriptions of the subjects being studied and their roles in the setting, and the impact that the observer may have had on the environment. [3]
Reflective information is the observer's reflections about the observation being conducted. These reflections are ideas, questions, concerns, and other related thoughts. [3]
Fieldnotes can also include sketches, diagrams, and other drawings. Visually capturing a phenomenon requires the observer to pay attention to every detail so as not to overlook anything. [4] An author does not necessarily need to possess great artistic abilities to craft an exceptional note. In many cases, a rudimentary drawing or sketch can greatly assist in later data collection and synthesis. [2] Increasingly, photographs may be included as part of a fieldnote when collected in a digital format.
Other observers may further subdivide the structure of fieldnotes. Nigel Rapport said that fieldnotes in anthropology transition rapidly among three types. [5]
Fieldnotes are extremely valuable for scientists at each step of their training. [2] In an article on fieldnotes, James Van Remsen Jr. discussed the tragic loss of information from birdwatchers in his study area that could have been taking detailed fieldnotes but neglected to do so. This comment points to a larger issue regarding how often one should be taking fieldnotes. In this case, Remsen was upset because of the multitudes of "eyes and ears" that could have supplied potentially important information for his bird surveys but instead remained with the observers. Scientists like Remsen believe observations can be easily lost if notes are not taken.
Nature phone apps and digital citizen science databases (like eBird) are changing the form and frequency of field data collection and may contribute to de-emphasizing the importance of hand-written notes. Apps may open up new possibilities for citizen science, but taking time to handwrite fieldnotes can help with the synthesis of details that one may not remember as well from data entry in an app. Writing in such a detailed manner may contribute to the personal growth of a scientist. [2]
Nigel Rapport, an anthropological field writer, said that fieldnotes are filled with the conventional realities of "two forms of life": local and academic. The lives are different and often contradictory but are often brought together through the efforts of a "field writer". [5] The academic side refers to one's professional involvements, and fieldnotes take a certain official tone. The local side reflects more of the personal aspects of a writer and so the fieldnotes may also relate more to personal entries.
Taking fieldnotes in biology and other natural sciences will differ slightly from those taken in social sciences, as they may be limited to interactions regarding a focal species and/or subject. An example of an ornithological fieldnote was reported by Remsen (1977) regarding a sighting of a Cassin's sparrow, a relatively rare bird for the region where it was found. [2]
An important teacher of efficient and accurate note-taking is Joseph Grinnell. The Grinnell technique has been regarded by many ornithologists as one of the best standardized methods for taking accurate fieldnotes. [2]
The technique has four main parts:
Methods for analyzing and integrating fieldnotes into qualitative or quantitative research are continuing to develop. Grounded theory is a method for integrating data in qualitative research done primarily by social scientists. This may have implications for fieldnotes in the natural sciences as well. [6]
This section's tone or style may not reflect the
encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. (January 2020) |
The decisions about choosing what is recorded may have a significant impact on the ultimate findings. As such, creating and adhering to a systematic method for recording fieldnotes is an important consideration for a qualitative research. American social scientist Robert K. Yin recommended the following considerations as best practices when recording qualitative field notes. [7]
Fieldnotes refer to qualitative notes recorded by scientists or researchers in the course of field research, during or after their observation of a specific organism or phenomenon they are studying. The notes are intended to be read as evidence that gives meaning and aids in the understanding of the phenomenon. Fieldnotes allow researchers to access the subject and record what they observe in an unobtrusive manner.
One major disadvantage of taking fieldnotes is that they are recorded by an observer and are thus subject to (a) memory and (b) possibly, the conscious or unconscious bias of the observer. [1] It is best to record fieldnotes while making observations in the field or immediately after leaving the site to avoid forgetting important details. Some suggest immediately transcribing one's notes from a smaller pocket-sized notebook to something more legible in the evening or as soon as possible. Errors that occur from transcription often outweigh the errors which stem from illegible writing in the actual "field" notebook. [2]
Fieldnotes are particularly valued in descriptive sciences such as ethnography, biology, ecology, geology, and archaeology, each of which has long traditions in this area.
The structure of fieldnotes can vary depending on the field. Generally, there are two components of fieldnotes: descriptive information and reflective information. [3]
Descriptive information is factual data that is being recorded. Factual data includes time and date, the state of the physical setting, social environment, descriptions of the subjects being studied and their roles in the setting, and the impact that the observer may have had on the environment. [3]
Reflective information is the observer's reflections about the observation being conducted. These reflections are ideas, questions, concerns, and other related thoughts. [3]
Fieldnotes can also include sketches, diagrams, and other drawings. Visually capturing a phenomenon requires the observer to pay attention to every detail so as not to overlook anything. [4] An author does not necessarily need to possess great artistic abilities to craft an exceptional note. In many cases, a rudimentary drawing or sketch can greatly assist in later data collection and synthesis. [2] Increasingly, photographs may be included as part of a fieldnote when collected in a digital format.
Other observers may further subdivide the structure of fieldnotes. Nigel Rapport said that fieldnotes in anthropology transition rapidly among three types. [5]
Fieldnotes are extremely valuable for scientists at each step of their training. [2] In an article on fieldnotes, James Van Remsen Jr. discussed the tragic loss of information from birdwatchers in his study area that could have been taking detailed fieldnotes but neglected to do so. This comment points to a larger issue regarding how often one should be taking fieldnotes. In this case, Remsen was upset because of the multitudes of "eyes and ears" that could have supplied potentially important information for his bird surveys but instead remained with the observers. Scientists like Remsen believe observations can be easily lost if notes are not taken.
Nature phone apps and digital citizen science databases (like eBird) are changing the form and frequency of field data collection and may contribute to de-emphasizing the importance of hand-written notes. Apps may open up new possibilities for citizen science, but taking time to handwrite fieldnotes can help with the synthesis of details that one may not remember as well from data entry in an app. Writing in such a detailed manner may contribute to the personal growth of a scientist. [2]
Nigel Rapport, an anthropological field writer, said that fieldnotes are filled with the conventional realities of "two forms of life": local and academic. The lives are different and often contradictory but are often brought together through the efforts of a "field writer". [5] The academic side refers to one's professional involvements, and fieldnotes take a certain official tone. The local side reflects more of the personal aspects of a writer and so the fieldnotes may also relate more to personal entries.
Taking fieldnotes in biology and other natural sciences will differ slightly from those taken in social sciences, as they may be limited to interactions regarding a focal species and/or subject. An example of an ornithological fieldnote was reported by Remsen (1977) regarding a sighting of a Cassin's sparrow, a relatively rare bird for the region where it was found. [2]
An important teacher of efficient and accurate note-taking is Joseph Grinnell. The Grinnell technique has been regarded by many ornithologists as one of the best standardized methods for taking accurate fieldnotes. [2]
The technique has four main parts:
Methods for analyzing and integrating fieldnotes into qualitative or quantitative research are continuing to develop. Grounded theory is a method for integrating data in qualitative research done primarily by social scientists. This may have implications for fieldnotes in the natural sciences as well. [6]
This section's tone or style may not reflect the
encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. (January 2020) |
The decisions about choosing what is recorded may have a significant impact on the ultimate findings. As such, creating and adhering to a systematic method for recording fieldnotes is an important consideration for a qualitative research. American social scientist Robert K. Yin recommended the following considerations as best practices when recording qualitative field notes. [7]