Making mistakes in ethnography

Starting from the question: “How do mistakes arise in ethnography and how do they influence research trajectories?” this article makes a methodological and practical contribution to the literature on ethnography. I draw on three ethnographic studies spanning 2014 to 2020 carried out in sport organisations. Here, I consider mistakes as charged revelatory moments to unpack three interwoven aspects of mistakes: (a) wishful thinking, (b) the influence of social relationships, and (c) reflexivity. I make the case that mistakes will likely arise from extended participant observation periods. These mistakes can activate attention for similar mistakes in the future and thus limit attention to other unforeseen challenges. Further, I argue that no amount of planning, reading, preparation, and reflexivity can make researchers immune to mistakes when venturing into complex real-world settings and researching with people. Instead, they can lead to a deeper appreciation of the research context.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ethnography
Published
2025-02-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/14661381251319166
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
12.60
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Making mistakes in ethnography

Niels Boysen Feddersen
3 citations
Ethnography
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
12.60
article

Making mistakes in ethnography

Niels Boysen Feddersen
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Starting from the question: “How do mistakes arise in ethnography and how do they influence research trajectories?” this article makes a methodological and practical contribution to the literature on ethnography. I draw on three ethnographic studies spanning 2014 to 2020 carried out in sport organisations. Here, I consider mistakes as charged revelatory moments to unpack three interwoven aspects of mistakes: (a) wishful thinking, (b) the influence of social relationships, and (c) reflexivity. I make the case that mistakes will likely arise from extended participant observation periods. These mistakes can activate attention for similar mistakes in the future and thus limit attention to other unforeseen challenges. Further, I argue that no amount of planning, reading, preparation, and reflexivity can make researchers immune to mistakes when venturing into complex real-world settings and researching with people. Instead, they can lead to a deeper appreciation of the research context.

Ethnography
Norwegian School of Sport Sciences (NO)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
12.60
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.