Ethnomethodology

Harold Garfinkel first coined the term Ethnomethodology.

It is defined as the study of the body of common-sense knowledge and the range of procedures and considerations by means of which the ordinary members of the society make sense of, find their way about in, and act on the circumstances in which they find themselves.

It is concerned with methods people use to construct, account for and give meaning to their social world.

• For instance, in a conversation, people may use humor or sarcasm to convey emotions or intentions. These methods of communication are not just about exchanging information but also about constructing shared meanings and understanding. By interpreting these methods, individuals give meaning to their social world, shaping how they relate to one another and how they perceive the context of their interactions.

Ethnomethodology is not a methodology, but rather a study of methodology, because it does not have a formal methodology, but is the study of, “member’s methods”, the methods of others.

• An example would be studying how people understand and navigate everyday social interactions, such as how they establish turn-taking in conversations. Ethnomethodologists don’t just observe the content of conversations; they focus on the unwritten rules and methods people use to maintain the flow of dialogue, like pausing or using gestures to signal when it’s another person’s turn to speak. These “members’ methods” are often unspoken but essential to making sense of social interactions, and ethnomethodology studies how individuals rely on these implicit rules to make social order possible.

Ethnomethodologists argue that there is no inherent or pre-existing social order, as many other sociological perspectives suggest. Instead, they believe that social order is continuously created and maintained through everyday interactions. People constantly produce and reinforce social norms and structures in their daily behaviors and conversations, rather than adhering to an established, objective order.

• For example, the way people politely interrupt or initiate conversations in queues shows that social order is constructed in real-time, based on shared understandings of what is appropriate in those situations.

Social life appears orderly to members of society only because members actively engage in making sense of their social world.

• For example, when people follow social norms like greeting each other politely or standing in line, they are actively contributing to a sense of order, even though these behaviors are based on collective expectations rather than any inherent, external rule.

The point of Ethnomethodology according to Zimmerman is to explain how the members of society go about the task of seeing, describing and explaining order in the world in which they live in.

A key concept in ethnomethodology is reflexivity, which refers to how our sense of social order is created through ongoing conversational processes. In other words, the way people talk, respond, and interpret each other’s actions in everyday interactions actively shapes and reinforces the social order.

• For instance, when two people engage in a conversation, their responses are not only influenced by what is being said but also by the social expectations and norms that are constructed in real-time, thus creating a shared understanding of how to behave in that interaction. This reflexive process highlights how social order is not something static, but something continually produced through communication.

Another key point in ethnomethodology is indexicality, which means that the meaning of an object or phenomenon is context-dependent and can vary based on the situation. In other words, the way people understand something is not fixed but is shaped by the context in which it occurs.

• For example, the term “home” may mean a physical house in one context, but in another, it might refer to a feeling of comfort or belonging. The meaning of “home” changes depending on the conversation, the people involved, and the circumstances. Indexicality emphasizes that meaning is not universal but is always tied to specific interactions and contexts.

Ethnomethodologists are highly critical of mainstream sociology for portraying individuals as mere “cultural dopes”—people who blindly follow and enact the standardized norms and directives dictated by society. They argue that this view overlooks the active role individuals play in constructing and interpreting their social world. Rather than passively following societal rules, people are seen as actively engaged in creating social order through their everyday actions and interactions.

• For example, when individuals navigate social norms like politeness or appropriate behavior in different contexts, they are not just following predefined scripts, but actively shaping the meaning and structure of those interactions.

Ethnomethodology has faced several criticisms:

1. Detached view of society members: Critics argue that ethnomethodologists take a detached, almost mechanical approach to studying social interactions, focusing on minute details of behavior without considering the broader social structures or individual intentions that drive those actions. This can make their analysis seem overly narrow and detached from the real motivations of social actors.
2. Lack of goals: Sociologist Anthony Giddens criticizes ethnomethodology for lacking a clear sense of direction or purpose in its analysis. According to Giddens, by focusing solely on how individuals create social order through their interactions, ethnomethodologists fail to account for the goals and intentions that guide those interactions, making their perspective seem incomplete.
3. Triviality of focus: Alvin Gouldner criticizes ethnomethodology for focusing on trivial aspects of everyday life and uncovering insights that are already widely known. He argues that ethnomethodology often examines the obvious, mundane elements of social interaction that everyone is aware of, without providing any truly new or profound insights into the nature of society or social structure.

Despite its criticism, Ethnomethodology had its impact on linguistics – particularly on pragmatics. Ethno-methodological studies of work have played a significant role in the field of human-computer interaction, informing design by providing engineers with descriptions of the practices of users.