The Study

Kinoshita, his wife, and children lived at Fuji-no-Sato between September 1982 and October 1983 while he did the research. His main methods were participant observation and semistructured interviews; but a third method—unobtrusive measures—was used to verify and refine the material that emerged from the main methods.

The participant observation technique was originally developed in anthropology to study small communities, usually in preliterate and little-known cultures. It is based on a holistic approach in which, instead of focusing on specific preconceived issues, the researcher moves into a small community and shares the way of living of the people there. He tries to interpret and understand their life in its totality, as an integrated whole, and as an adaptation to a particular environment, with a particular history. As such, anthropological fieldwork is first and foremost an attempt to understand behavior as the subjects themselves understand it—an "emic" ap-

proach—and only secondarily an attempt to test preconceived models or theories—the "etic" approach. Fieldwork often lasts at least a year, as this project did, so the researcher can observe infrequent as well as frequent events. Kinoshita discovered, for example, that the Fuji-no-Sato clinic is extremely busy with serious cases, including some deaths, only during winter months. In a new community like this one, a year is also enough time to see some historical evolution: The role of the residents association changed significantly toward the end of the study.

Until recently (Hochschild, 1973; Johnson, 1971; Kayser-Jones, 1981; Kiefer, 1974; Meyerhoff, 1978; Perkinson, 1980; Ross, 1977), there were few participant observation studies of the aged. We feel this is a deficiency that needs correcting. As Keith (1980b) points out, there are four common problems in gerontology for which participant observation is a good solution: (1) a setting and/or a specific problem that is little known, (2) particularly complex and sensitive issues, (3) informants who are unable or unwilling to report accurately, and (4) collective or emergent realities that must be understood in their own terms. A study of a retirement community in Japan addresses the first and fourth problems and to some extent the second as well.

Kinoshita participated in and observed both daily routine and occasional and unscheduled events in the community. He and his family lived much the same as the residents at Fuji-no-Sato, using the same services and suffering the same inconveniences. During the first three months, he experienced almost every kind of daily activity in order to become familiar with the community and the residents; thereafter, as he became aware of the more significant issues, he focused on those. Kinoshita also participated in seasonal festivities and helped plan events like trips. Participant observer roles even included working at the clinic (day and night shifts) and riding in the community's ambulance. Interactions between the staff and residents and among staff were also observed. Kinoshita attended regular staff meetings and spent quite a bit of time with the staff informally. In August 1983, Kiefer spent ten days at Fuji-no-Sato, talking with staff and getting a feel for the setting.

The other major method, interviewing, was part of the initial plan as well. In order to assure that interviews focused on live issues, Kinoshita spent three months at Fuji-no-Sato before drawing

up the semistructured questionnaire from which statistical norms could be drawn. This allowed him to use the interviews to probe emerging significant issues in some depth. This second function required that the questionnaire be partly open-ended. There is a strong tendency to suppress open dissent in this community, and the open-ended interviews gave residents a rare opportunity to vent private feelings about common issues—feelings that might well have led to conflict had they become public. For example, opinions on issues such as problems at the clinic or management policies were generally suppressed if they disagreed with the public position of the residents association. (See also Chapter 11.) Although they were usually cautious in public, the residents disclosed dissenting views quite freely in the interviews.

The interviews served another function as well: Not all full-time residents joined group activities, and little was known about the "loners" from participant observation.

Interview sessions took an average of two and a half hours each. For some residents, these became emotional or social counseling sessions, and in such cases, it was not unusual for Kinoshita to spend four or five hours with the respondent. He kept tabs on these "problem" residents throughout the research period. In most cases, residents were interviewed during visits to their apartments—a significant departure from the usual pattern of social contact in this community. Interview sampling reflected residential patterns and marital statuses. One hundred forty-three residents were asked for interviews, and all but six agreed.

Unobtrusive measures, or nonreactive measures, as they are sometimes called, were also important in this research. The absence of this useful technique in ethnographic research may reflect the difficulty for researchers to know in advance whether they will have access to unobtrusive data. For instance, Kinoshita discovered that various records kept by the staff revealed a great deal about the life of the residents only after he had become familiar with Fuji-no-Sato.