Introduction
Ethnographic research refers to methods of scientific inquiry, predominantly in the humanities and social studies, that focus on studying life, its patterns and attributes, the culture of communities, rituals, and traditions of particular social groups. Since culture is given special attention in this type of research, ethnographic studies aim to describe social phenomena through the prism of traditions and customs unique to a given community.
The primary data collection method in ethnographic research consists of observation, interviews, and participant observation. In this method, the researcher obtains qualitative data and examines participant diaries and personal notes to find common, recurring patterns and specific outliers. Unlike research based on a quantitative paradigm using statistical analysis, ethnographic research is highly subjective. However, given the focus of such research, namely the study of socio-cultural attributes of a community, this method is fully justified.
A range of research questions explores a particular social pattern to varying degrees and depths. The diversity of cultural practices, behavioral styles, and the nature of the communities being studied creates a potentially endless number of research questions. As part of the ethnographic work project, the constructs of the husband’s family’s social attitudes toward the acceptance (or non-acceptance) of a future wife for communities in Southeastern Europe are of heightened interest.
It is fair to say that attitudes toward women differ significantly among cultures (Jayachandran, 2021). While European and North American women have essentially the same rights as men, free to pursue education, careers, and occupations they enjoy, women in other cultures are bound by patriarchal requirements (Jayachandran, 2021). Thus, unlike women in developed and progressive countries, women in Afghanistan do not have even those minimal civil liberties: They are not allowed to receive higher education, drive a car, walk in the park, or pursue a career (UN, 2023). The assumption is that a woman’s acceptance into her husband’s family is based on fundamental attitudes toward women in a particular culture.
A woman free and independent of men in developed countries may be warmly welcomed by her husband’s family, or she may be rejected as unsuitable. This is the phenomenon of freedom in that people are not limited in their judgments and choices, so different outcomes are possible. Even when a man loves his woman very much, and the family does not accept her, there are quite a few real-life examples where such a romantic union is successful (Swihart & Wooten, 2007).
In countries that are based on rigid patriarchal customs (which are often closely correlated with radical Islam as the dominant religion of society), a woman’s fate is primarily predetermined (Jayachandran, 2021). The chance that her husband’s family will not accept such an unfree woman is minimal because she has been chosen in advance. Additionally, the restrictions and demands placed on women in such countries inhibit the expression of creative freedom and freedom of thought, so it is unlikely that her husband’s family would dislike such a woman.
Kosovo, the geographic center for ethnographic study in this paper, belongs to the countries of Southeastern Europe on the Balkan Peninsula. Without considering political-administrative issues, the culture of Kosovo’s communities is described as European and not traditionally patriarchal; the role of women is rapidly expanding (Soderberg, 2022). Kosovar women are achieving seats in parliament, building careers, and performing all the same social functions as women from progressive Western countries. Thus, based on the assumptions, the research question of interest could be formulated as follows: “What role is given to family rituals and traditions in southeastern European families in accepting a future spouse into her husband’s family circle?”
Obligations of the Author-Ethnographer
When conducting ethnographic research, the author of the study must make several commitments to produce reliable and accurate results that are not weakened by bias. The essence of the requirements described in detail below is to reinforce the quality of conducting ethnographic research, systematizing, and structuring processes to ensure high accuracy and validity of the results. Intentional or accidental abandonment of them, in turn, will cause severe deterioration of the results and a lack of any practical value from the conclusions obtained.
First, the ethnographer must conduct an in-depth study of the culture in question. Since the research question, namely the role of family traditions in the readiness to accept a woman into her husband’s family circle, as shown above, is determined by social constructs, preparation is critical (Pink et al., 2022). An in-depth study of Southeastern European culture involves historical analysis and reading relevant academic literature.
Such a study aims to gain initial insights into how social constructs are generally organized in the community under study. An illustrative example that further explains the meaning of this commitment would be the comparison of Afghan and Western women discussed above. Since a minimal analysis made it clear that patriarchal traditions do not burden Kosovo women to the same extent as Afghan women, it is evident that questions about women’s fundamental civil rights should be removed from the study. At the same time, fulfilling this obligation allows more in-depth interpretations of the findings in the context of other community traditions and rituals. When this commitment is considered, the depth, quality, and complexity of the analysis produced are expected to increase.
Second, the ethnographer must commit to constant and unbiased observation. Since ethnographic research is based on observational methods, such observations must be systematic and unbiased. It is unacceptable to be lenient with this type of data acquisition and record only the information and observations that seem convenient and appropriate to the hypothesis — an approach that significantly biases the final results (Pink et al., 2022). In addition, the observation should be maximal and thus cover the most significant number of potential rituals or activities the families perform. Ideally, the ethnographer attends such gatherings and observes or requests that a video be set up for observation.
A third obligation is to increase the range of data collected, if permissible. As part of this commitment, the ethnographic author is responsible for conducting the observation and interviewing the family member participants. Such work significantly expands the quantity of data and, among other things, increases its quality.
Observational analysis in isolation increases the subjectivization of the study because it reflects only one side (Jones & Donmoyer, 2021). For example, asking the father of a family to keep a diary and then passing it on to the author would only reflect the father’s opinions and contain only the information that the individual reflected. Increasing the list of collected opinions helps minimize the subjectively positive effect on the results.
Fourth, the ethnographic author will have a large amount of qualitative information to analyze once the data is collected. The obligation of this level includes the need to analyze and interpret all data, not just that which seems most illustrative (Pink et al., 2022). For example, if the mother of the family prepares a traditional dinner during the reunion, gives a gift to the bride, and lights candles to create a special family dinner tradition, all three social symbols and rituals must be considered. Such a commitment increases the depth of the analysis. It helps create a more complete picture of how the social construct under study works.
Fifth, the ethnographic author commits self-reflection and an assessment of personal influence on data collection. As suggested above, the direct participation of the author (a stranger) in a family dinner at such a critical moment for the partners can negatively affect the quality of the data collected. Family members may behave differently than if the stranger were not present, including because of the so-called Hawthorne effect (Mostafazadeh-Bora, 2020). Thus, the researcher must assess their role and influence on data collection quality and create specific assumptions to help reduce this influence.
Finally, the ethnographic author must make a significant commitment to ensure confidentiality. Participants relevant to the study must agree to participate and be made aware of the goals and objectives unless they are intentionally misled by the researcher (Eckerd et al., 2020). The data collected should be anonymized and subsequently published in such a way that readers have no way of identifying the participants. As part of this commitment, it is essential to adhere to the ethical principles and norms of the research project that are appropriate to the level and type of research in question.
Relevance of the Commitment
The commitments suggested above have a crucial fundamental function for the research being conducted, namely, to enhance the quality of the results obtained. It is essential that the six commitments cited are not exclusive, and in practice, their range can be broader — only the main ones have been listed. A second important factor is that the obligations cannot be used in isolation. It is not enough to obtain only the consent of participants or only to increase the quantity of data collected — the key attribute is the fulfillment of all commitments in combination (Jones & Donmoyer, 2021).
A literate and effective synthesis of commitment helps to ensure the depth of the research being done and to produce more accurate and closer-to-reality results (Pink et al., 2022). Performing them provides the opportunity to integrate and connect the constructs discovered, making the analysis broader and more holistic rather than focused on individual social patterns.
Activity Theory
Many theories related to the ethnography of communication have already been presented in the class under study. These include theories of face, speech acts, person-referring forms, relational dialectics, cultural terms for speaking, norms, rules, and narrative. Before focusing on one, describing each of them briefly makes sense. Strictly speaking, face theory postulates the social constructs and patterns of behavior that individuals use to maintain their image and value in the community.
The theory of speech acts helps to explore communication between community members regarding informational value and as a way of forming social relationships. The theory of person-referring forms explores how referring to a person, whether by name, pronouns, or other titles, is mediated by the influence of socio-cultural predictors. The theory of relational dialectics helps explore the motivating forces, conflicts, and contradictions that arise during communication in the community under study.
The theory of cultural terms for conversation develops how community values, individually and collectively, influence how community members communicate. The theory is similar to the theory of norms and rules, which is about the influence of social and cultural norms on the patterns of community members’ interactions. Finally, the last class concept studied was the theory of narrative, which explores how people use narratives and stories to interact with other community members and how such narratives are constructed. Each of the theories described is unique and responds to the study of specific social patterns of the community. Still, this section of the paper will focus most heavily on the theory of personhood.
Theory of Face
As previously mentioned, facial theory is a social and ethnographic theory that explores the ways and methods that members of society use to create and maintain their faces, images, and socially perceived status. This theory is based on an important social construct, namely status (that is, face or image). In the academic literature, there is no unequivocal idea of what social status is and how it should be defined. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, social status should be understood as “the relative rank that an individual holds, with attendant rights, duties, and lifestyle, in a social hierarchy based on honor or prestige” (Cunningham, 2019, para. 1). The Oxford Dictionary offers a similar interpretation: “A position to which an individual has been assigned in a social group determined by the attitudes toward him or her of other members of the group.
The attitudes may be influenced by several factors, including the individual’s income, occupation, and family” (OR, n.d.-a, para. 1). Cheng and Tracy (2020) define social status as “one recurrent feature of social species is the differential degree of deference and advantage conferred on some individuals and denied to others” (p. 261). Steen et al. (2020) offer a succinct but good definition of such status, namely “a person’s own perception” (p. 2). Thus, in synthesizing the four proposed interpretations, in this paper, social status (image, face) can be defined as a person’s self-perception of himself and his role in the community, substantiated by some social achievements or disappointments.
Face theory was developed as part of the study of patterns of interaction between people. The author of this theory, Erving Goffman, postulated that the face is some element that every person has and that can be maintained (acquired) or lost, depending on the circumstances that occur (Merunková & Šlerka, 2019). An illustrative example would be an individual who values the qualities of a hard-working, responsible, and executive employee. Such an individual recognizes his or her positive traits both internally and externally through active affirmation. This face, it is safe to say, helps the individual feel more confident and, in a sense, is a source of pride for the individual (Merunková & Šlerka, 2019; Raab, 2022). It is also true that the face is a way of social identification.
Everyone strives to identify with a particular society. Such identification is an individual’s social need. It reflects an intrinsic need to belong to a social group, to be part of it both functionally and symbolically (Haslam et al., 2021). Goffman looked more broadly at “facial” identification and proposed a definition of expressive order as some set of signs, symbols, and phenomena that are valid for a particular interaction (Raab, 2022). In other words, any interaction (“drama”) between two or more people is accompanied by the fulfillment of an expressive order. The more qualitatively this order is observed, the stronger the “strong face” the individual can retain.
The individual who seeks to save face does not want to get out of the drama in progress. Fulfilling the expected norms, functions, and values that are fair to that community helps the individual to save face. It is different when an individual intentionally or accidentally steps out of the expected role, in which case, the face is lost (Raab, 2022; Merunková & Šlerka, 2019).
Facial preservation helps the individual manage his or her self-identity and form a positive self-image. Positive aspects of such face preservation are the support of inner confidence, emotional stability, and engagement in community drama. Maintaining personal boundaries when meeting a relative, friend, or stranger is an example of supporting one’s own social status. The opposite is also true: any deviation from the norms of social interaction characteristic of a given community results in a loss of face.
Conflicts in a social group result from discrepancies in the views and values of the participants. In such a conflict, the parties involved will inevitably lose face, whether accusers or victims, as the stability of the social drama is broken (Merunková & Šlerka, 2019). If a person loses face due to disrupted communication, they could potentially experience humiliation, alienation, and a loss of confidence. Such loss is an undesirable outcome of social interaction, so the individual’s efforts should be directed toward providing strategies that help preserve face.
Goffman’s theory suggests several additional aspects of how interactions between individuals occur. Communication is allowed at the level of individual interactions between two people and at the level of an individual interacting with some collective entity. Such an entity can be a stable social group, whether it is members of the same family, a group of long-time friends, or a sports or religious team — in other words, any association of people based on strong traditions, rituals, and values (Honyukova et al., 2020).
An excellent example of the relationship between an individual and a collective person is the acquaintance of a woman with her future husband’s family, described in the last chapter. In this case, the woman (individual person) is first a stranger to her husband’s family (collective person), which has its own stable values, symbols, and traditions. Reputation and social status extend to the entire family, and each family member seeks strategies to maintain a common image.
It is crucial to further emphasize that face preservation or loss norms vary considerably among cultures. For example, values that are fair to one community, such as the average family from Southeast Europe, may be alien and incomprehensible to an Afghan family (Jayachandran, 2021). For this reason, the strategies an individual takes to maintain social status in a given society can differ dramatically between cultures.
Moreover, using the same tactics can have a positive effect in one case and a negative effect in another. To give another example, we can look again at two families from different cultures. It is acceptable for a woman from Kosovo to discuss her career, professional plans, and personal freedoms with her husband’s family. However, such a discussion in an attempt to save face among the Afghan family will inevitably lead to misunderstanding and even denial of the woman’s values.
Interpreting Fieldwork
Ethnographic research emphasizes fieldwork, that is, data collection from the immediate site of origin. In the context of ethnography, this responds to opportunities to observe, conduct interviews, and collect other qualitative information relevant to describing the social constructivism of a given community. An important role is assigned to patterns of interpersonal communication, which, however, as before, finds differences in definitions.
Manning (2020) defines interpersonal communication as the interaction between a limited number of individuals. Govindaraju and Seruji (2022) define this type of communication as “a sole method of communication between people to emphasize what is happening between them, regardless of location or existence” (p. 31). The Oxford Handbook suggests that interpersonal communication is “communication between a minimum of two parties in which meaningful exchange is intended with the sender trying to effect a response from a person or group // the message may be received by the person for whom it was intended or by people for whom it was not intended, or both” (OR, n.d.-b, para. 1). These notions provide some insight into what interpersonal communication should generally be understood as.
Communication between two people (or a small group of people) is different in terms of ethnographic research and social constructivism. This paradigm focuses on what precisely interlocutors exchange. Ethnographic communication implies that information, symbols, and meanings are exchanged (El Biadi, 2020). Thus, interpersonal communication is realized not only on the verbal but also on the nonverbal level and contributes to the formation of a communicative bond between individuals.
Ethnographically, this type of communication generates patterns of social interaction, in the course of which the cultural values and norms of a given community are transmitted. From a social constructivist perspective, interpersonal communication helps people identify themselves as part of a group and shapes the reality in which such individuals reside in their social roles. This section focuses on interpersonal communication, and a fieldwork example is used for review.
Description of Fieldwork
Fieldwork is any observations, experiences, and notes that have been collected from the scene of events taking place. Strictly speaking, they are the researcher’s personal observations that are of high practical value for further analysis. The material of such fieldwork is a personal example of the author that occurred during the course of getting to know her husband’s family. Below is the original text of this fieldwork material.
“Two years ago, in the charming country of Kosovo, I nervously prepared for a momentous occasion, namely, my first meeting with my husband’s family. The day was filled with excitement and trepidation as I knew how important it was to make a favorable impression. But what I did not know was that this meeting would teach me a valuable face-saving lesson. As I crossed the threshold of their welcoming home, my heart filled with a mixture of anticipation and anxiety.
The room radiated warmth, and the aroma of freshly brewed Turkish coffee greeted me. With a smile on my face, I greeted my new family, hoping to convey my genuine happiness at being part of their lives. Seated at the dining table, we began a conversation on the fine line of getting to know each other. During the exchange of stories and laughter, I could not help but notice the delightful painting that adorned the wall of this room. It depicted a breathtaking mountain landscape that caught my attention.
Unbeknownst to me, this painting had deep meaning in the family — it was not just a landscape, it was a cherished family heirloom. When my gaze lingered on its beauty, I remarked with genuine enthusiasm, “What an amazing view! It reminds me of the majestic mountains I saw on a recent trip to Switzerland!” There was silence in the room, and I immediately sensed that my words had caused unintentional confusion and resentment. In that brief moment, I was immediately aware of my mistake, a profound oversight.
The weight of my mistake came over me, and I realized that the picture that had caught my attention had a much deeper meaning than I had realized at the time. Embarrassment overwhelmed me, and I searched desperately for a way to correct my mistake. In an attempt to smooth the edges, I quickly shifted the conversation, searching for words that could convey my sincere remorse. “You know,” I interjected, and my voice filled with sincerity, “mountains have always fascinated me. Their strength and beauty remind me of the unbreakable bonds of family.” As these words escaped my lips, the tension began to dissipate.
My new relatives realized I was sincerely trying to make amends for my mistake. They appreciated my quick thinking and admired my ability to gracefully navigate the situation, saving harmony from a potentially embarrassing moment. Soon, the room was filled with smiles and understanding. My husband’s mother, whose eyes reflected warmth and forgiveness, said quietly: “Ramize, your words are truly profound. Family ties really are like mountains-they are strong, enduring, and able to withstand any storm.
In that tender moment, a new layer of understanding opened before me. I learned that the painting had deep meaning because it was a memorial to my husband’s father, who had tragically died during the Serbian war in Kosovo, in the mountains. It was a symbol of their family’s strength, resilience, and enduring spirit.
From that day on, my relationship with my husband’s family began to flourish. They saw in me the humility and grace under pressure that was evident in our first meeting. They recognized my genuine love and respect for their traditions and values. My desire to save face and my tireless efforts to foster mutual understanding were a testament to my character and the strength of our bond.
This story serves as a reminder of the importance of saving face. Through this experience, I learned the power of quick thinking and the importance of humility in difficult situations. It has also taught me the importance of maintaining harmony and respect even in the face of unintentional mistakes.”
Describing this story in terms of Hymes’ SPEAKING mnemonics is acceptable. The author (Ramize) and the husband’s family, represented by the husband’s mother (Participants), met during a family dinner at the husband’s family home (scene). The ending is the reason for this meeting, namely, the realization of the first acquaintance between the author and the man’s family.
The speech acts described in the story were pointing to the picture, unintentional conflict, an attempt to smooth over the sharp edges, and a truce. Ramize’s tone of voice is respectful and humble, as she is a guest in her husband’s family home. The communication took place in the house and was realized in a real format, that is, offline, in the same language.
Because it was the first meeting and because it was important for Ramize to make a good impression on her husband’s family, among the communication norms used were a respectful tone, deference in conversation, an effort to reduce the depth of conflict, and an attempt to gain trust. Finally, the genre of the circumstance was dialogue, with minimal added humor and a heavy emphasis on informational awareness and respectfulness.
Analysis of the Fieldwork
As the above fieldwork material suggests, the main focus of the story is built around facial preservation, family traditions, the desire to create a positive social image, and the rituals the family community undertakes in order to maintain stability. In addition, the story describes the strategies that the author undertakes to restore face and form a strong and sustainable relationship with the collective face. Face, as described in the last chapter, is a perceived social construct that is important to maintain out of a sense of social identity, inner confidence, and self-esteem.
The very beginning of the story describes the anxiety and excitement that the author (the narrator) feels before meeting her husband’s family. These feelings turn out to be valid from several perspectives. First, the individual’s encounter with new, previously unfamiliar people can cause panic since it is not entirely clear what values these people reflect and whether there will be a match between them.
Secondly, which was emphasized, the new social group is the family of the narrator’s husband. Obtaining their recognition is responsible for the formation of a stable and trusting relationship between the individual and the collective and, thus, favorable communication later on. Thus, if the first meeting had gone poorly and the author had not been able to impress this family, it is possible that further relations with them would have been difficult, unstable, and stressful.
Third, there is an interaction between the individual and the collective during this encounter. It may not be clear to the narrator how pressured the values of the collective person will be, whether they will be responsive, and whether they will be able to show benevolence toward the narrator. Taken together, the initial anxiety felt by the author is a non-obvious consequence of trying to keep a face even before the social drama has been played out.
Face, as a pattern of ethnographic communication, manifested itself in other forms of this story. Paying attention to the picture hanging on the wall could have occurred in two alternative scenarios. In the first, the narrator looks at the painting and inwardly appreciates its beauty without making her thoughts public. This scenario would have been true if it had not been important for the narrator to formulate dialogue and maintain communication as part of her new acquaintance.
Therefore, such a seemingly insignificant subject for dialogue with her husband’s family as a painting was used as an object of discussion, which was demonstrated in the second scenario. Thus, it was important for the author not only to appreciate aloud the beauty of this painting but also to be heard by others whose attention and appreciation are important to the narrator. This argument also confirms the need to keep a face since referring to art objects and appreciating their beauty and meaning is a way to earn the trust of the people in whose home this painting hangs.
Remarkably, Ramize did not dwell on the moment in which she admired the painting. It was important for the author to say that the mountain scenery of the painting reminded her of the Swiss countryside, where she had recently visited. This phrase should also be taken in terms of the theory of face preservation, for the author was trying to earn credibility and gain appreciation for her words about her recent journey. The aim was hardly to receive encouragement, that is, praise for Ramize’s visit to Switzerland. On the contrary, with this phrase, consciously or unintentionally, the woman was trying to self-identify and present herself to a new group through the prism of social constructs of travel, observation, and comparison.
The most striking manifestation of face preservation as a pattern of ethnography of communication is evident in the attempt to reduce the severity of the conflictual misunderstanding that occurred. The moment Ramize realized what an accidental mistake she had made in not recognizing the story of this picture and drawing a parallel to her journey, and when this comparison was not reflected by family members, an attempt was made to preserve face. The importance of maintaining this social status was justified by the desire to build a trusting and benevolent relationship with her husband’s family. From Ramize’s point of view, the problem is obvious: The girl, who was already very excited about getting acquainted, had made a mistake and wanted to take any action that would help her save face.
The reaction of the collective family, represented by the mother of this family, is also worth discussing separately. It was obvious to her that Ramize was in disarray, and she really did not mean to offend anyone with her comparison. However, it is also important for the mother, as a member of the collective, to maintain this social status so she does not enter into a direct confrontation. As the story implies, no one expressed an open opinion that such a comparison was offensive; the offense and misunderstanding were expressed nonverbally. When an “apology” was made to the collective face, however, the mother of the family took it upon herself to express goodwill and honesty, agreeing with Ramize’s thesis of the importance and strength of family bonds.
In terms of confrontation, it was critical for each member of this social drama to save face. For Ramize, face is a way to build a strong relationship with her husband’s family. For the family, the face is the ability to self-identify and show what kind of environment the husband came from and how they relate to their member’s wife. Although there was no open and direct conflict between the participants in the communication interaction, Ramize began to lose face the moment she made an inappropriate comparison.
At this point, it is safe to say there were two alternative outcomes. In the first, Ramize does not notice or does not want to notice the offenses of her new relatives, and the confrontation deepens between them. It is possible that the story would not have led to an open conflict at the scene, but it could have been an unexpected counterargument many years later.
In the second scenario, both Ramize and these family members understand their position, and the most responsible and proactive actors implement strategies to preserve their social face. Given the deep interest of the members of this community in building trust and warm relationships, the second scenario was chosen by all. It is also important to emphasize that the initiative to “apologize” came from Ramize, who was at the same time the key actor in this confrontation.
It is unknown how the meeting would have ended if Ramize had not paid attention to the resentment and misunderstanding that arose. However, it was probably the fact that the woman was not only able to quickly assess that her comparison was inappropriate but also took steps to “apologize” and was decisive in the collective’s approval. As the story suggests, Ramize’s initiative and response impressed the family members, who became willing to go along because they understood the importance of building a trusting relationship, the randomness of the mistake, and Ramize’s good intentions.
Conclusion
The study of the ethnography of communication allows for a deeper and more detailed examination of the patterns of social interaction observed in a given community. This paper has provided an in-depth analysis of the theoretical rationale for ethnographic research, proposed a relevant question, described the construction of Face Theory, and interpreted the fieldwork. The essay demonstrates that it is important for individuals engaged in social drama to maintain face, so when the status is threatened, determined attempts can be made to maintain it.
The paper also showed that turning to the ethnography of communication in order to conduct exploratory analysis, identify social constructs, and search for connections between concepts inherent in a community must stem from a deep understanding of the culture in question. Since communities from different cultures differ in the level of values, norms, rituals, and traditions, resorting to the same methods without prior preparation is destructive and can reduce the quality of the results obtained.
References
Cheng, J. T., & Tracy, J. L. (2020). Why social status is essential (but sometimes insufficient) for leadership. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(4), 261-263. Web.
Cunningham, J. M., Lewis, R., & Lotha, G. (2019). Social status. Britannica. Web.
Eckerd, S., DuHadway, S., Bendoly, E., Carter, C. R., & Kaufmann, L. (2021). On making experimental design choices: Discussions on the use and challenges of demand effects, incentives, deception, samples, and vignettes. Journal of Operations Management, 67(2), 261-275. Web.
El Biadi, P. M. (2020). Ethnography of communication [PDF document]. Web.
Govindaraju, V., & Seruji, Z. (2022). Interpersonal communication and relationship: A conceptual review between educators and undergraduate students. Multicultural Education, 8(6), 30-37. Web.
Haslam, C., Haslam, S. A., Jetten, J., Cruwys, T., & Steffens, N. K. (2021). Life change, social identity, and health. Annual Review of Psychology, 72, 635-661. Web.
Honyukova, L., Kleshnya, H., Ordenov, S., & Skyba, I. (2020). Social development axiological fundamentals in the information age [PDF document]. Web.
Jayachandran, S. (2021). Social norms as a barrier to women’s employment in developing countries. IMF Economic Review, 69(3), 576-595. Web.
Jones, J. A., & Donmoyer, R. (2021). Improving the trustworthiness/validity of interview data in qualitative nonprofit sector research: The formative influences timeline. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 50(4), 889-904. Web.
Manning, J. (2020). Interpersonal communication [PDF document]. Web.
Merunková, L., & Šlerka, J. (2019). Goffman’s theory as a framework for analysis of self-presentation on online social networks. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 13(2), 243-276.
Mostafazadeh-Bora, M. (2020). The Hawthorne effect in observational studies: Threat or opportunity?Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 41(4), 491. Web.
OR. (n.d.-a). Social status. Oxford Reference. Web.
OR. (n.d.-b). Interpersonal communication. Oxford Reference. Web.
Pink, S., Fors, V., Lanzeni, D., Duque, M., Sumartojo, S., & Strengers, Y. (2022). Design ethnography: Research, responsibilities, and futures. Taylor & Francis.
Raab, J. (2022). The theory-method-link in Erving Goffman’s sociology of the interaction order. Przegląd Socjologiczny, 71(4), 63-86.
Soderberg, N. (2022). Kosovo’s democracy demands gender equality. NDI. Web.
Steen, P. B., Poulsen, P. H., Andersen, J. H., & Biering, K. (2020). Subjective social status is an important determinant of perceived stress among adolescents: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health, 20, 1-9. Web.
Swihart, P. J., & Wooten, W. (2007). The first five years of marriage: Launching a lifelong, successful relationship. Tyndale House Publishers.
UN. (2023). Afghanistan: UN experts say 20 years of progress for women and girls’ rights erased since Taliban takeover. United Nations. Web.