A reflexive report on the social interactions among female netball players
Ethnography is a qualitative research method frequently used by researchers to gain a profound understanding of the “social interactions, behaviours and perceptions that occur within groups” (Reeves, Kuper, & Hodges, 2008, p. 512) using the observation technique rather than testing a specific hypothesis surrounding the phenomenon. This observation technique was used in order to gain a true representation of the social interaction between the AU women’s netball team at Loughborough University and external university netball teams (Birmingham and Worcester). Moreover, due to the fact that sports matches and the role of sportsmanship cannot be regulated under controlled conditions, the use of this research technique was ideal for the investigation into the social interaction between netball players, exemplified primarily through the fact that netball players are not taught how to act or communicate with each other, instead, their actions are seamlessly natural.
One element of ethnography is the ability for the researcher to “immerse themselves” in the natural environment of the observation (Pickard, 2013, p. 138), thus, it was key to our investigation to go to the netball courts and observe the participants there in order to get an accurate and natural representation of their social interactions. In order to achieve this, it was important to investigate when and where the netball games were taking place, then gain permission from the team captain to observe and film the netball games. By using this recoding method, we were able to reflect and review actions which may have appeared less obvious to the naked eye. Highlighted by the group observation technique which allowed focus on different areas of the observation and alternative interpretations, providing a holistic understanding of the social interactions. Similarly, videoing the netball match enabled us to become aware of certain interactions which may not have been prominent on our first viewing. Although the use of a recording device to collate information is criticised heavily among scholars for driving the observation in one direction (Wakeman, 2014), we found it useful to record and re-watch the collected data in order to gain a better and more specific understanding of the social interaction. However, video recording the overt environment could have infringed the netball participants’ privacy as they were not aware that we were observing them for research purposes. In order to avoid the ethical issue of deception we refrained from asking the netball players if we could video the match for experimental purposes prior to the match itself, as we thought this might alter their social interaction due to demand characteristics, drawing on the Hawthorne Effect (Polit, 1999), therefore, limiting the reliability of our findings. This is exemplified through the majority of their non-verbal communication being involuntary, for example the netball players may have been aware of their frequent use of hand signals etc. which may have caused them to interact in a way that they would not normally and therefore interrupt the rhythm of the way they played as a team and may have influenced the game. In order to avoid deception, we debriefed the netball team after the game had finished and gained informed consent from the captain. Moreover, due to the fact that the setting was overt, meaning that anyone can observe the netball game as it is not a private event, we did not breach ethical consent because the netball game was already being observed by a large crowd, the only implication was the research purpose which may have caused issues with privacy.
In order to gain an ethnographic understanding of the social interactions between sports players, more specifically the Loughborough University women’s netball team, it was important to appreciate the interaction at different stages of the match: before the game and during the game. Using this, as researchers, we were able to code and analyse how social interactions advance as the course of the match develops due to the direct nature of the observation. Collectively, we observed that during the warmup, individual mental preparation was needed in order to ensure that each player was on the same mental intuitiveness and were prepared for the forthcoming game. We came to this conclusion as a result of each player being individually focussed on their warmup, observed through there being no verbal interaction and exercise which was scattered and out of sync. Moreover, the focus of the warmup technique changed as the group separated and focussed more heavily on skills which were more prevalent to their role; for example, Goal Shooter and Goal Attack would practise their shooting techniques; whilst those in the defence positions would practise their intercepting and marking skills. Whilst observing the interaction between the Loughborough university players we thought it was interesting that there was no interaction between any players in both teams. One explanation of this is due to the competitive nature of both teams (Loughborough and Worcester) due to the fact that they played each other on the previous week which saw Loughborough win.
On the other hand, during the game, both teams exhibited very similar interactions which were displayed primarily through non-verbal actions. These non-verbal interactions were predominately seen through the use of hand signals, for example, players would raise their arm or hold out their hand in order to signal to the ball carrier that they were available to receive the ball. Another form of non-verbal action is seen through the clapping hand action used to congratulate a player on a good pass or a goal. This celebratory and supportive action was exhibited primarily by the Loughborough team, and rarely seen amongst the Worcester team. However, in this game there were very little verbal interactions, arguing that the main focus on the game was on the physical attributes not the verbal congratulations. Contrastively, in relation to the second game that was observed, between Birmingham and Loughborough, the coach and the observers sat on the side-line exhibited verbal interactions with the players congratulating them on a goal or shot, and even shouting at them as to what move they should take or who they should pass to. However, the Loughborough University coach wasn’t as verbal as the opposition (Birmingham) coach which may have encouraged the Birmingham’s side lead due to the positive environment installed in the Birmingham side, which may have resulted in their win. The standard of sport at Loughborough is so high it was thought that this might affect the way players might interact due to pressures of both coaches and playing Loughborough University due to its high reputation within the sporting community. However, we found that the interactions were seamlessly natural specifically relating to non-verbal actions of players.
Moreover, it is argued that ethnographical research lacks generalisability due to the singular occurrence of this observation technique seen to be “lacking representativeness of samples” (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982). However, in order to reject this criticism and make the findings more generalisable we conducted two observations between the Birmingham vs. Loughborough game and the Worcester vs. Loughborough game, in order to compare and contrast our findings to draw general conclusions. Thus, making our findings more reliable and applicable in a generalisable sense to the sport culture collectively. With reference to the expectations of the phenomenon, it was anticipated that non-verbal communication was of key importance in the game due to the tactical nature of the sport. However, it was not expected that the level of verbal communication throughout the course of the game would be as relevant and prominent, as we assumed that this level of volume would be off-putting to the players. Nevertheless, the importance of communication was exemplified prominently in the game against Birmingham which saw clear communicative difficulties between Loughborough’s Goal Keeper and Goal Shooter due to the fact that they were seen marking incorrectly by marking the same player, resulting in the Birmingham team being able to easily get the ball into the shooting circle meaning that the Birmingham team had a greater availability to shoot the ball which may have potentially cost the game for Loughborough.
Bibliography
LeCompte, M., & Goetz, J. (1982). Problems of Reliability and Validity in Ethnographic Research (Vol. 1). Houston / Georgia: Review of Educational Research.
Pickard, A. J. (2013). Research Methods in Information (2 ed.). Facet Publishing.
Polit, D. H. (1999). Nursing Research: Principles and Methods, (6th Edition ed.). Philadelphia.
Reeves, S., Kuper, A., & Hodges, B. (2008, Aug 30). Qualitative research methodologies: ethnography. Qualitative Research, 337, 512.
Wakeman, S. (2014). Filedwork, biography and emotion: Doing criminological autoethnography. British Journal of Criminology, 54, 705-721.