Edge Ethnography as an Ultimate Research Method in Criminal Justice

Edge Ethnography as an Ultimate Research Method in Criminal Justice

Introduction

Criminal justice processes have evolved over the years in the United States and beyond. Information and findings are vital for a large and weighty criminal case and argument. One of the research methods that have dominated the current criminal justice system is edge ethnography. As the world becomes more of a global village, the calls for a more integrated society and nation are abysmally heightening. Research methods are vital in illuminating empirical light of sophisticated crime and justice phenomena through avenues of elusive methodologies. Studies and policy changes in crime and criminal justice systems have been embedded under the surface of methodological exclusivism. Edge Ethnography is an approach of qualitative and methodological exclusivism that embarks on in-depth insights of the stigmatized, socially marginalized settings and populations where criminal justice systems undertake potentially dangerous and threatening exposures. In this paper, the main focus is on the position, role, and impact of edge ethnography as a tool and approach of criminal justice systems and operations.

Literature Review

1. Miller & R. Tewksbury, (2010) ascertains edge ethnographic approach as best comprehended as conventional qualitative methods such as in-depth interviewing and deep engagements of participant observations. The inherent challenges of the mainstream qualitative approach are significantly reduced(Winstanley, S. and Hales, L., 2015). According to their study, due demonstrated the researcher’s independent nature in terms of study environment and intensity of interaction.
2. Brougham and C. Uttley (2017) used the term edge ethnography to study and illuminate full participation and covert methodologies to perform research tasks. The duo also explored the capacity to take comprehensive risks to understand the entire study process. They confirm the risk levels that are felt and endured by the inexperienced population of researchers both at work and outside commitment. Being part of the more comprehensive novice researchers, they are primarily concerned with their response rate at the costly expense of their safety(G. Sharp & E. Kremer, 2006).

Worley et al. (2016) struggled with the disaster of ethical dilemmas during edge ethnography research. The emotional dangers posed by the situations he faced were traumatizing.  He walked in the environment of illegal drug abusers, physical assaults, and door money theft incidences (Ellrich, 2016). Experts also narrowed down to the violence of the inherent system and all things that push a repulsive instinct against the normalcy grain. The anecdotal account of Worley and the company is another gym story to keep fit and enjoy a cognitive behavior and discovered (Ellrich, 2016).  Here, learners og the same class potential requirements have become former. The current future implications of edge technology.

Methos in the past were severe points of significant challenges in healthcare systems and the coronavirus. In their work, T. Bernard and R. Engel. They have worked tirelessly to depict the infamous earlier and preparedness of theories. According to the clients, there are three main bases for election authorization. The obscure environment of justice and trail theories give them a reason to smile about the Mainstream, conflict, or Marxists. Very few people are even key to face world destroy and stop ceasing to the excess establishment of increased clarity in the body with significant selection attributes.

Methods

A cross-sectional research phenomenon moves to bridge the gaps and risks to give intelligent forces in the past. The research was addressing the following study questions

1. What are the most prevalent risks endured by social scientists studying criminal behavior and social deviance?
2. Do factors such as data collection methods, gender, age, education level, country of research, and research settings impact the occurrence and prevalence of risk?
3. Does the occurrence of social deviance translate to criminal behavior?

The targeted population for the study was criminal law enforcers, primary criminologists, and social sociologists studying criminal behavior and social deviance. With the sample population, both qualitative and quantitative methods were used to experience risks. Hence, the sample was dominated by social scientists and criminal justice enforcers with experience in the field and non-field research on criminal behavior and social deviance.

Results

Over 1500 professionals in social justice realms were invited for the online survey study. A total of 1100 individuals accessed the online survey platform. Thirty-five of them responded with no answers during the survey process. Thus left 1,065 survey interactions for analysis and recommendations. Eight hundred indicated that they have experience in social deviance and criminal behavior studies. Of the successful respondents, 300 were victims of risk situations given their involvement in criminal justice operations and studies. On demographic grounds, criminologists were 70%, sociologists were 20%, and criminal justice enforcers were 10%.

Discussion

From the data reviews and analysis made, it is beyond doubt that risk exists and edge ethnography is an indispensable reality. The most prevalent risks mentioned by the sample of respondents were majorly fear, emotional stress, and an ethical dilemma (Johnson, 2011). Reports on occurrences such as hostage, detainment under the confinement of authorities, and rape were considerably low. However, this does not utterly negate their importance. The most exciting thing is that the highest number of risks were attached to professional, personal, or emotional nature.

Prior to the research, limited knowledge and understanding of types of risks were available. The information discovered from this research offers a strong foundation and awareness of the systemic attributes behind the infamous edge ethnography. While the statistical indicators of the occurrence of legal, physical, and health risks were low, such results had severe implications for current and future studies (Borgersen, 2017). Untrained personnel is a disaster entering dangerous areas, and settings are more vulnerable to risks and potential harm. Unskilled and the untrained population opens the gates for more adversities, given their weaknesses in risk anticipation and unpreparedness for the worst. Unawareness of the risks compounds the complexity of the research, and unpreparedness causes unreliable results and even hazardous implications on the researcher. From the study, rape brought out an unusual trend that denied the traditional stand that the irate practice is an exclusively female affair.

Conclusion

The research was done on the full realization of an exploratory mind, with the overarching objective and goal of creating a sense for the categories of risks that form the broader context of edge ethnography and the challenges of social deviance and criminal demeanor.  As the risk types were illuminated, an intimate and authentic comprehension of rims’ nature was not intriguingly exposed and realized. The backlash can be overthrown through integrated future research encounters with respondents being the most experienced in the risk phenomenon of criminal justice and the wider edge ethnography sphere.