Musculinity and drinking

1.   Does the study meet the scientific requirements?It cannot be denied that scientific study has become of great importance to any profession.   Everyone is aware of the fact that knowledge is increased through study and that critique of that study can also provide a basis for improving the study practices.  This study, â€Å"The Glass Phallus Pub (lic) Masculinity and Drinking in Rural New Zealand by Hugh Campbell meet the scientific requirements as it involved an intensive analysis of a particular site.2.   Is it a research study?Moreover, it is a scientific study utilizing the ethnographic fieldwork research methods.   Ethnographic research or fieldwork is considered an essential part of the training towards becoming a social scientist such that it is said to play a role in â€Å"consciousness raising† by extending one’s view of the world and challenging one’s assumptions about the nature of things (Robson, 1993).   Through ethnographic research the fieldworker gains an appreciation of the diversity and complexity of the human social condition and, at the same time, of the ultimate unity of human-kind.3.   Is it a quantitative study?No, it is not a quantitative study since it did not use any notation system. It must be noted that quantitative researchers assign numbers to observations and produce data by counting and measuring things.   Further, this study did not use any counting and measuring of things.4. Is it a qualitative study?Yes, this is a qualitative study since the researcher did not make counts or assign numbers to his observations. But rather, the researcher gain access into the â€Å"life-world† of his subjects and male groups; that is, to discover their motivations, their sources of meaning, their emotions and other subjective aspects of their lives because it is only in doing so that a researcher will be able to see, to describe, and to understand human behavior and social phenomena with greater d epth.   In addition, the researcher employed a qualitative research method which is participatory ethnographic fieldwork (p.262)5.   Is it clearly written?Yes, it is clearly written as the researcher used the first person and based on his experiences and analysis6.   Assess the title.The title is somewhat vague though as the author used a metaphor and one may not be totally familiar with â€Å"The Glass Phallus.†   So, one has to read the article thoroughly first before understanding the meaning behind the title.7.   Assess the authors` affiliations.Not much of the authors` affiliations were included in the study except that he has lived in the research area or community for five years as this is a participatory ethnographic fieldwork (p.262)8.   Assess the abstract.The abstract is clearly stated and includes the necessary things to include in an abstract such as the subjects and locale of the study, design of the study, the results, and the conclusion.9.   Asse ss the references.The references used were comprehensive and suited to the given study.10.   Is there a centrality of purpose between the introduction, method, and results?Yes, more or less there’s a centrality of purpose between the introduction, method, and results. But lesser centrality between introduction and method as the introduction is more of a myth about the rural pub, a nostalgic fiction of yesteryears as described in the introduction.   The method and results has more centrality as the author was able to connect the method used which is ethnographic fieldwork to the results of the study which is more qualitative.   The results of the study presented are ethnographic data which are the product of systematic and sustained observation.11.   Critique the introduction according to:– the literature reviewThe authors’ review of literature was conducted and integrated in the discussion part of the article although previous studies were not referred t o by specific articles, the names of authors and publication years were given. Moreover, the literature reported supported the selected qualitative method used in the study.–      study purposeThis study, â€Å"The Glass Phallus Pub (lic) Masculinity and Drinking in Rural New Zealand† by Hugh Campbell, examined the various ways in which pubs operate as a social site, where male power is constructed in rural communities.   Another is to examine the way in which symbolic notions of rurality are integral to the construction of gendered power in rural space.12.   Critiques the Method according to– the sample selectionThe sample of the study population was large (150-200) men who worked in farm service industries, were farm workers, owned or managed small farm service firms, or (a minority) were bachelor farmers.   Manual laborers on farms and in the farm service industries constituted the majority, but men from the agricultural petite bourgeoisie also were presented consistently.The participant sample selected basically on their performance known as the after-work drinking session.   The temporal parameters of after-work drinking strongly influenced which local men could join the pub (lic) performance of masculinity.   In addition to the fact that this study was the result of two periods of fieldwork within 5 years of ethnographic research, all the above mentioned criteria achieved the data saturation required.– the study designA participatory ethnographic study using formal and informal interviews was conducted to frame the design of the study (p.262). The method used was appropriate for this study as it sought to examine the various ways in which pubs operate as a social site, where male power is constructed in rural communities.   Also to examine the way in which symbolic notions of rurality are integral to the construction of gendered power in rural space.In addition, the qualitative interviews were undertaken to und erstand the experiences and all that they entail.– data collection proceduresData collection procedure used which was formal and informal interviews and were consistent with the purpose of the study since the study was a qualitative.   Moreover, 200 hours of participatory ethnographic fieldwork (in the pubs), made an even greater abundance of informal discussion and dialogue with members of the community.– researcher’s roleThe researcher’s role is to conduct interviews (formal or informal) using the participatory ethnographic fieldwork.– the issue of timeThis study was done for approximately 5 years of living in the community. The researcher has done interviews and discussions not just in the pubs but also in various locales such as sports clubs, churches, and voluntary organizations, and in the subjects` workplace.– materials/instruments usedThe strategies and tools involved in data collection includes ethnographic audiotaped interviews w hich includes open-ended, broad â€Å"grand tour† questions followed by more focused and in-depth discussions; participant observations were conducted in a variety of places; photography was extensive.13.   Critique the Results according to– findingsAnalysis from data obtained revealed two major characteristics of pub drinking performance, which are the conversational cockfighting and the disciplines of drinking. These two combine to ensure that a particular version of masculinity, here called pub(lic) masculinity reproduce itself.   A further finding is that masculinity in this kind of performative situation develops a degree of invisibility.– tables, graphs or chartsNo tables, graphs, or charts were included in the study.– statistical data and tests usedNo statistical data or tests were used as this is a qualitative study. So no sample data were given.   Only some conversation or descriptive data were presented.-discussionThe discussion of the res ult was done comprehensively and thus thoroughly-limitationsThe researcher realized the difficulties of analyzing an invisible masculinity and argues that rendering masculinity is an important task for any sociological analysis of both public leisure sites in rural society.-implications– The significant implication of this study is that rural sociologists must move quickly beyond viewing rural pub as just another aspect of the rural idyll but it is more of the operation of gendered power in rural communities, and as a site where rural masculinities are enacted and defended.ReferenceRobson, C. (1993) Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists andPractitioner-Researchers. Blackwell.