Interviews With Gang Members in California

Ethnography Field Trip

Identify the methods used in this study -- were they effective?

The research was conducted through interviews on the street and elsewhere, and also they were given a formal questionnaire to complete. The researchers only conducted research on these individuals if they met two criteria: a) if they openly acknowledged that they were in fact members of a gang; they also needed to be between the age of 14 and 24 to qualify; and b) they could be youths not linked to a gang but the same age and in the same neighborhood as those identified in "a."

How did the researcher know whether or not the individual was lying or was in fact a gang member? This is a pertinent question because most gang member do not, "as a rule, talk to researchers, anthropologists, sociologists, etc." In this case gang members would verify that those being interviewed were in fact members or just being coy and deceptive, according to the report.

A formal questionnaire given did not of course ask for a name but delved into school experiences ("Do you remember any of teacher's names?"); and the questionnaire also asked about home life ("How was/is your relationship with your Mom / Dad?"). The questionnaire also inquired about why the person dropped out of school and if any relatives have been incarcerated.

In the initial interview the researcher switched from English to Spanish which made the interviewee more comfortable. Some of the challenging issues during the initial contact with gang members included: some gang members called others "snitches" for participating, making it difficult; just walking up to an apparent gang member in a barrio takes a certain amount of steel nerves; asking gang members to "self-report" is not considered good science because the participant may project what he or she would like to be thought of, not the real person as others see him or her.

Question TWO: What were some of the challenges and how did they address them? Did they succeed? Defining who is and who isn't a member of a gang is problematic, but it seems that the researchers conducted scholarly investigations into how police departments define and identify gang members, and those descriptions were known and understood out front. For example the California Youth Gang Task Force indentifies a person with a "close association" to a known gang member as being a gang member. The researchers did their homework and found that many Latinos who are not in gangs have "boyhood pals, cousins, uncles and even brothers who are in gangs" -- but that doesn't mean they are bona fide members of a gang. Hence the "guilt by association" rule of thumb was a challenge -- and they succeeded in getting past it.

Knowing the "wannabes" from the real gang members created a challenge for this research as well. Sorting out the truth was a challenge when it comes to the clothes worn by gang members. School officials are seen as "overreacting" by designating certain gang-looks, because non-gang members and even suburban youth from wealthy families are known to wear certain styles that are identified (incorrectly) with gangs.