Emic versus etic perspectives in cultural research

EMIC vs. ETIC PERSPECTIVES in ETHNOGRAPHY

Emic vs. Etic

Emic and Etic terminologies were coined by Kenneth Pike in 1954. Pike was a linguistic anthropologist, and he derived the terms from "phonemic" and "phonetic." The terminologies suggest there are two views that can be used when conducting cultural research of a society, these views are the inside view or the outside view.

Emic perspective is also referred to as the insider perspective. This is because the person giving their findings has to be a member of the community or field of study. The findings are from the experiences that one undergoes or faces, and they are more valid. With an inside view/perspective, one is able to better understand and relate to their field of study and their findings will more trustworthy and valid. Etic perspectives require a lot of time to be spent in the field so that the researcher can get all the information they require, patience is also very important in order for one to get relevant information.

Etic perspectives are referred to as the outsider perspective. The person giving out their findings is not a member or directly related to the field of study. The findings are from observation only. Outside perspectives are mostly based on concepts that the researcher sees, but they do not get to experience anything. Thus, there might be slight discrepancies if the information is valid. Etic perspectives do not require as much time as with etic perspectives. This is because one does not need to immerse themselves into the world of their informants. The researcher may never have to visit the natural environment of the field of study and he/she would mostly rely on the information they read, or their own knowledge.

Emic perspectives as more valid than Etic ones

Insider information is always more trustworthy and valid than having outsider or observers information, and that is why emic perspectives are more valid than etic perspectives. When conducting research in a particular field one would be better placed if they can immerse themselves to the insider environment of their research field. This way they will be better placed to understand and have more concrete facts that will lead to their research been more validated and accepted by others.

Emic perspective allows the researcher to gain the confidence of their field of study be it people, animals, or the environment. Since the researcher is living amongst the people, they will warm up to them much faster, and they will start bee comfortable, relax, engage, and open up to the researcher. This way one gets the information easily, and they will not be withholding any information. As an insider one is also comfortably able to observe and interact with the informants in their natural environment, and this gives another deep insight to the research.

There may be some challenges that one would face as an insider e.g. The informants may presume some questions that are asked to be simple and the researcher ought to know the answers so they may not be willing to answer this questions, one may be intimated, or fear asking certain questions that might go unanswered, and this would affect the research output. To overcome these challenges one needs to come out as been overly curious and try to maintain a neutral point at all times, this way the informants would engage the researcher more willingly and more willing to answer all the questions asked though they would expect the researcher, automatically to have the answers.

Etic perspectives easily overcome the above challenges as they do not have to associate themselves with the informants and adapt to their environment so they perceived not to be in the know. For the above challenges, it is better if one is an outsider, but they still will not get the full information, and they might have to make more assumptions on their research. It is always recommended that researchers immerse themselves in their informants' environment, they live with them, and learn their language, and one will be able to analyze their findings with the informants' culture in mind.