1

You’ve Got the Disease: A Critical Review

Introduction

This paper reviews the article ‘You’ve got the disease: how disgust in child culture shapes
school bullying’ (Hakim, 2020) by Dr Eran Hakim, a post-doctoral fellow in the Laboratory for the
Study of Pedagogy at Ben-Gurion University in Israel (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, 2021).
The article appeared in Ethnography and Education, currently considered a Q1 journal in Cultural
Studies and a Q2 journal in Education (Scimago Journal & Country Rank, 2021). It employs an
ethnographic approach to studying children’s culture, specifically the role of disgust in shaping
bullying, and claims that understanding children’s culture is essential in comprehending school
bullying. This paper will firstly describe and analyse the conceptualisation of the study, followed by
evaluating the appropriateness of the research design including ethical considerations, critiquing the
quality of analysis, and finally evaluating the findings.

Conceptualisation

The conceptualisation of this ethnographic research is lacking in clarity. Whilst the title
appears to contain a research statement, the abstract and introduction only briefly touch on the idea
of disgust, suggesting that the research problem is in fact much broader. The article begins with an
introduction outlining the topics for discussion: school social life, bullying as understood through the
lens of children’s culture, the role of the cultural construct of disgust in bullying, how bullying is
reshaped in the absence of a ‘leading bully’, and the introduction of Anat, a student who was the
subject of intense bullying. These topics are engaging and well described, however; no clear research
question or problem is stated. According to Aurini et al., “good conceptualization involves moving
from a general topic to a clear research problem” (2016, p. 9). The reader must infer the research
problem using the title, abstract and introduction; this reader would have framed the question, ‘how
does school social life shape the cultural construct of disgust, and how does this contribute to
collective bullying?’ As an early post-graduate student with no research experience, this is possibly
a flawed and poor-quality question, an issue which would have been avoided by the inclusion of a
clearly framed research question. Dr Hakim originally began the research to “study the social life of
elementary school students” (Hakim, 2020, p. 214) but was so moved by the bullying observed that
the research focus shifted. Ethnographic theorising should be an iterative process, where questions
drive data collection and collected data drives questions (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007).
Malinowski (2014) posits that ‘foreshadowed problems’ are an essential part of ethnography and must
 2

be reflected upon and revised in quality research design. It is suggested that the change in research
focus created data-driven theorising that, while interesting and worthy of study, was not subjected to
a fully iterative process and thus not fully conceptualised.

Contextualisation and definitions of the key ideas follows. These are presented
unambiguously and thoroughly contextualised in the relevant literature. The researcher makes clear
the definitions and assumptions underlying the terms bullying and disgust. These are linked to
theoretical perspectives in the literature using an interpretivist paradigm with the view to gain a deeper
understanding of how children interact as social beings, constructing their own culture and meaning
(Neuman, 2013). This section of the article meets the four goals of a literature review as outlined by
Neuman (2013). Firstly, the researcher demonstrates familiarity with the literature, establishing
credibility (Hakim, 2020; Neuman, 2013). Secondly, the path of prior research is presented, and the
study is contextualised within it. A summary of the current research is then offered, with important
gaps and questions identified; namely, what role does children’s culture play in bullying and what is
the structure of bullying in the absence of a lead bully? (Hakim, 2020). Finally, the researcher shows
that he has learned from others and is contributing new ideas stimulated from the literature (Neuman,
2013). The paper concludes with a return to the literature to contextualise findings. Of particular note
is the connection to similar studies in schools “across different geographical locations and diverse
cultural conditions” (Hakim, 2020, p. 212) with comparable findings; this adds to credibility and
generalisability, despite the narrow focus on one class (Creswell, 2020).

The importance of the research is established through contribution to theoretical perspectives

critique of bullying interventions. The researcher claims to contribute to status construction theory
through the lens of decidualization theory. Unfortunately, ‘decidualization’ is a spelling error
removing meaning and context [it is related to the endometrium; entirely irrelevant (Ng, 2020).] An
investigation of the source material reveals deindividuation theory as the intended meaning; this
theory states that collective bullying is more aggressive and allows individuals reduced personal
responsibility (Rivers, Duncan, & Besag, 2007). This aligns with the findings; however, the impact
of the claim to contribute to status construction theory is obstructed by the error. The researcher
claims victims of bullying will benefit from the research, based on the findings that suggest traditional
interventions are ineffective in collective bullying where one student is socially constructed as
‘disgusting’, and recommending transfer to a new environment as the most favourable outcome
(Hakim, 2020).
 3

Research Design

The research design, including sampling and data collection procedures, was appropriate;
however, could have benefited from data triangulation and deeper discussion of ethical
considerations. Ethnographic data collection methods were employed over fourteen months (Hakim,
2020). Ethnography can illuminate perspectives of culture-sharing groups (Angrosino, 2007), provide
deep understandings through emic perspectives (Picken, 2019), and is appropriate when
understanding of a culture-sharing group is required (Creswell, 2020). As the researcher’s aim was
to understand children’s culture to illuminate issues around bullying, ethnography is highly
appropriate.

The researcher was immersed in the environment before deciding to focus on bullying; due to
this change in focus, no discussion of sampling occurs. The setting and sample were determined from
the ethnographic data; however, the original reasoning behind sampling choices is not discussed. This
does not impact the research design quality, as it is common for ethnographies to arise from
interesting situations or events occurring in settings where a researcher is already embedded,
generating new foreshadowed problems (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007).

Data collection procedures are clearly described and appropriate to ethnography. The
researcher employed modified participant-observation, taking field notes, and striving for exact
quotes; however, no audio was recorded. Additionally, the researcher interviewed students and
teachers at regular intervals. Ethnographers have a wide range of methods available to them, including
interviews, fieldwork, and document analysis; this creates the possibility of data triangulation to
increase credibility (Picken, 2019) and it is argued that triangulation is a key factor in quality
ethnography (Angrosino, 2007; Castagno, 2011). Wolcott (2008) names three elements of data
collection in quality ethnographies: experiencing, enquiring and examining. It is suggested that
triangulation of data would have benefited the researcher by enhancing the ‘examining’ element; for
example, document analysis could have been employed to gather data from bullying incident reports,
planning documents concerning bullying intervention lessons, and school anti-bullying policy
documents. Modified participant-observation was engaged in due to the researcher’s focus on
“minimising the use of my adult privileges” (Hakim, 2020, p. 214). The delicate nature of conducting
ethnographic research with children (Huf & Dennis, 2020) can create trust and ethics issues if adults
attempt to fully participate as a child (Galman, 2015) therefore the method of reduced participation
was appropriate.

Ethnographers must consider ethical issues including informed consent and participant
anonymity, as well as preventing exploitation of the people studied (Atkinson & Hammersley, 2019;
 4

Picken, 2019). Pseudonyms are employed, protecting privacy while still humanising the research; the
subjects are presented to the reader as more than just data (Kwame Harrison, 2018). Ethical
procedures of parent and child permission and consent were appropriately discussed; however, the
intense level of bullying directly witnessed by the researcher raises ethical issues of intervention, as
well as child mental health and safety. The researcher states, “a thorough discussion on how I found
my way through the ethical ‘gray matter’ that ethnographers of children face when they witness
violence and abuse goes beyond the scope of the current paper” (Hakim, 2020, p. 214). Whilst it is
appreciated that a lengthy discussion may not have been accepted for publication due to space
constraints, it is argued that some discussion is nevertheless necessary, beyond the stated, “I tried to
help” (Hakim, 2020, p. 214). The researcher required evidence of bullying in order to conduct the
research and help victims of bullying, seeming to operate within consequentialist ethics for the greater
good (Tait, 2021) however; this allowed constant exclusion and targeted attacks on Anat to continue
for the entire year. It is strongly suggested that further discussion of this ethical issue should have
been included.

Quality of Analysis

Data analysis methods were briefly discussed and included daily field note analysis, coding
of data units (records of interactions between students) into themes, and coding of bullying events
into subcategories (Hakim, 2020). The researcher followed Glaser and Strauss’s ‘constant
comparative method’ by analysing similarities and differences between data units and categories, to
refine them (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007). The discussion, while brief, is clear and describes how
analysis was conducted using the principles of thematic analysis to organise and categorise the data
(Guest, MacQueen, & Namey, 2012). Examples of the categories and subcategories are listed, with
particuar mention of the bullying subcategory “generating/maintaining distance” (Hakim, 2020, p.
215), the coding of which revealed to the researcher a deeper understanding of collective bullying
without a clear leader (Hakim, 2020). The researcher drew clear links between data, themes, codes
and theory, a sign of quality data analysis (Guest, MacQueen, & Namey, 2012). For example, the
subcategory ‘generating/maintaining distance’ was linked to Thornberg’s theory of bullying as stigma
(Thornberg, 2015). The researcher added to the current understanding of shared social exclusion by
illuminating a case where the bullied student had no option for building resistance through the known
path of forming a group with other stigmatised students, being the only subject of bullying in the
context (Hakim, 2020). The researcher’s ability to analyse data, construct meaning and extend
significance linked to theory increases validity (Guest, MacQueen, & Namey, 2012).
 5

Limitations and issues of relability and validity were not explicitly discussed. In any
ethnography, “credibility mandates that canons of reliability and validity be addressed” (LeCompte
& Goetz, 1982, p. 32). A limitation of ethnography is that in building relationships to gain an emic
perspective, researchers may unintentionally alter the cultural structures they are immersed in
(Castagno, 2011). In this case, Dr Hakim struggled with whether to intervene when witnessing
bullying. A further limitation is generalisation; findings about specific culture-sharing groups may
not be generalisable to other populations (Hammersley, 2017). However, as the researcher was
investigating a gap in the literature, that of deepening understanding of disgust as a factor in collective
bullying, further research would be required to test the generalisability of the findings. This raises the
issue of reliability, the possibility that a study can be replicated (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982).

Dr Hakim addresses external reliability by clearly identifying his role in relation to the
children studied, explicitly outlining assumptions and theories about bullying that informed the
research, and by describing in detail the methods of data collection (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982). The
current study, being in a natural setting and related to a unique bullying situation, cannot be exactly
reproduced (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982), not to mention that orchestrating a situation where a child
was intentionally bullied would be highly unethical. In ethnography, therefore, reliability is generally
accepted to be achieved through explicit description and discussion of methods and data analysis such
that others could conduct similar research and corroborate findings (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982). The
researcher has successfully utilised thick description and explicitly outlined methods used; although,
due to the brevity of the discussion on data analysis, it could be argued that reliability is diminished.
In ethnography, however, it is understood that journal-length articles are limited, and deep discussion
of data analysis procedures may be impractical, therefore the brevity of the discussion is not regarded
as a major flaw (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982).

Research validity requires that conditions in a study match those in real life; this is a strength
of ethnography as it involves real people being observed and interviewed in natural settings
(LeCompte & Goetz, 1982). The current study is argued to have high validity, as it occurred in the
natural school setting over fourteen months, giving ample time to ensure the conditions were true to
life. The duration of the study allowed for constant and iterative data analysis, which was discussed
by the researcher. The researcher built rapport with students and teachers, which is argued to increase
the validity of observational and interview data, being gained within an environment of trust (Riemer,
2011).
 6

Critical Reading of Findings

Despite the initial lack of clarity in the research question, the findings are outlined clearly.
The researcher is reflexive, acknowledging his bias and impact. This contrasts traditional realist
ethnographic style, becoming critical ethnography, with the goal of challenging social inequality, a
component of what is currently considered to be good ethnography (Kwame Harrison, 2018). The
division of the findings into three subheadings increases clarity for the reader. Each section begins
with thick description and moves towards analysis and interpretation, making conclusions and
drawing inferences; this aligns with recommended ethnographic structure, being progressively more
focused (Creswell, 2020; Hammersley & Atkinson, 2019). The researcher clearly links theory, data
and conclusions drawn, increasing validity (Kwame Harrison, 2018) and creating well-contextualised
findings with balanced detail; enough but not excessive (Wolcott, 2008). The themes described in the
etic framework develop naturally from the emic perspectives analysed (Kwame Harrison, 2018).

The recommendations include earlier intervention and consideration of relocation in the case
of collective bullying, as this appears immune to traditional bullying prevention methods (Hakim,
2020). The link between the study and findings is clear, however; the findings are not completely
convincing due to the lack of clarity in the research question. The suggested question, ‘how does
school social life shape the cultural construct of disgust, and how does this contribute to collective
bullying?’ appears to have clear answers which addressed gaps in the research. These gaps were
regarding the role of disgust in bullying as well as the impact and structure of collective bullying. It
is suggested that further research into this area, with a focus on the success or lack thereof of bullying
interventions, is needed.

Conclusion

Dr Hakim has produced an interesting and valuable study which could contribute to
understanding of the role of disgust and child social culture in collective bullying, and hopefully
improve the lives of bullying victims, allowing them to be heard and helped earlier. Despite slight
lack of clarity in the research question and conceptualisation, the research design of an ethnography
was appropriate for becoming immersed in children’s culture in order to gain an emic perspective and
deeper understanding of the issues and difficulties surrounding bullying. The study could have
benefited from data triangulation and a deeper discussion of ethics; however, the clear and reflexive
analysis of the data led to logically sequenced and clearly outlined findings.
 7

References

Angrosino, M. (2007). Doing ethnographic and observational research. Sage Publications.

doi:10.4135/9781849208932

Aurini, J. D., Heath, M., & Howells, S. (2016). The how to of qualitative research. Sage
Publications.

Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. (2021, June). Laboratory for the Study of Pedagogy.
Retrieved from Ben-Gurion University of the Negev:
[Link]

Castagno, A. E. (2011). What makes critical ethnography "critical"? In F. J. Riemer, S. D. Lapan, &
M. T. Quartaroli (Eds.), Qualitative research: An introduction to methods and designs (pp.
373–390). John Wiley & Sons.

Creswell, J. W. (2020). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative

and qualitative research (Vol. 6). Pearson.

Galman, S. (2015). Mischief-making of one kind/and another: unruliness and resistance in rural
preschoolers' free play. Ethnography and Education, 10(3), 310-324.
doi:10.1080/17457823.2015.1050684

Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2012). Applied Thematic Analysis. Sage
Publications. doi:10.4135/9781483384436.n3

Hakim, E. (2020). You've got the disease: how disgust in child culture shapes school bullying.
Ethnography and Education, 16(2), 210-225. doi:10.1080/17457823.2020.1864655

Hammersley, M. (2017). What is ethnography? Can it survive? Should it? Ethnography and
Education, 13(1), 1-17. doi:10.1080/17457823.2017.1298458

Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: principles in practice (Vol. 3). Routledge.

Huf, C., & Dennis, B. (2020). Ethnographic research in childhood institutions: participations and
entanglements. Ethnography and Education, 15(4), 445-461.
doi:10.1080/17457823.2020.1722951

Kwame Harrison, A. (2018). Ethnography: Understanding qualitative research. Oxford University

Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780199371785.001.0001
 8

LeCompte, M. D., & Goetz, P. J. (1982). Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic
research. Review of Educational Research, 31-60.

Malinowski, B. (2014). Argonauts of the western pacific. Taylor & Francis.

Neuman, L. (2013). Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches (Vol. 7).
Pearson Education.

Ng, S. W. (2020). Endometrial decidualization: The primary driver of pregnancy health.

International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 21(11), 4092.
doi:[Link]

Picken, F. (2019). Ethnography. In M. Walter (Ed.), Social research methods (Vol. 4, pp. 392-409).
Oxford University Press.

Riemer, F. (2011). Ethnographic research. In F. J. S. D. Lapan (Ed.), Qualitative research: An

introduction to methods and designs. 163-188: John Wiley & Sons.

Rivers, I., Duncan, N., & Besag, V. E. (2007). Bullying : A handbook for educators and parents.
Greenwood Publishing Group.

Scimago Journal & Country Rank. (2021, June). Ethnography and Education Ranking. Retrieved
from Scrimago: [Link]

Tait, G. (2021, June 2). EUN676 Case Study and Ethnography: Week 5 Ethics [Workshop Notes].
Retrieved from
[Link]
1

Thornberg, R. (2015). School Bullying as a Collective Action: Stigma Processes and Identity
Struggling. Children and Society, 29, 310–320. doi:10.1111/chso.12058

Wolcott, H. F. (2008). Ethnography: A way of seeing (Vol. 2). AltaMira Press.