The observation field on research of the family experience of the caretaker^*

ABSTRACT

Introduction:

This study addresses the researchers dip in "field of observation", reflecting on their scope and relevance.

Objective:

Understand the field of observation's potential in comprehensive research that addressed family experience of life and care.

Methods:

It covered the corpus' composition of analysis of a Master's Thesis and analyzed the researchers' records on field of observation, compiled in a Research Journal.

Results:

This study highlights the importance of researcher's openness to findings of the family life, being affected by and giving way to what it experiences. The observable does without being noticed through the trained senses over time on the field; and, concomitantly the interview, complements it beyond itself.

Conclusion:

The uniqueness of the perceptions, experienced in the field of observation for each researcher, broadens the possibilities to understand the context and nuance of meaning of family experience, forming the corpus of the study.

Keywords:
Observation; Qualitative Research; Nursing Research

RESUMO

Introdução:

Este estudo tematiza o mergulho do pesquisador no "campo de observação", refletindo sobre sua abrangência e pertinência.

Objetivo:

Compreender as potencialidades do campo de observação em pesquisa compreensiva que abordou experiência familiar de vida e cuidado.

Métodos:

Abrangeu a composição do corpus de análise de uma Dissertação de Mestrado e analisou os registros das pesquisadoras sobre o campo de observação, compilados em Diário de Pesquisa.

Resultados:

Evidencia-se a importância da abertura do pesquisador às descobertas do cotidiano familiar, sendo afetado e conferindo sentidos àquilo que nele vivencia. O observável prescinde ser notado por meio dos sentidos apurados ao longo do tempo; e, concomitante a entrevista, complementa-a para além do dito.

Conclusão:

A singularidade das percepções, vivenciadas no campo de observação por cada pesquisador, amplia as possibilidades de compreender o contexto e o matizar de significados da experiência familiar, dando forma ao corpus do estudo.

Palavras-chave:
Observação; Pesquisa Qualitativa; Pesquisa em Enfermagem

RESUMEN

Introducción:

Este estudio tematiza el buceo del pesquisidor en "campo de observación", refletando su cobertura y pertinencia.

Objetivo:

Comprehender las potencialidades del campo de observación en pesquisa comprehensiva que abordó experiencia familiar de vida y cuidado.

Métodos:

Abarcó composición del corpus de análisis de Disertación de Master y analizó registros de pesquisidoras sobre el campo de observación, compilado en Diario de Pesquisa.

Resultados:

Se evidenció la importancia de abertura del pesquisidor a las descubiertas del cotidiano familiar, siendo afectado y dando sentido aquello que él vivencia. El observable prescinde ser notado por medio de sentidos apurados al longo del tiempo en campo; concomitante a entrevista, la complementa para además del dicho.

Conclusión:

La singularidad de percepciones, vivenciadas en campo de observación por cada pesquisidor, amplia las posibilidades de comprehender el contexto y matizar de significados de experiencia familiar, dando forma al corpus del estudio.

Palabras clave:
Observación; Investigación Cualitativa; Investigación en Enfermería

INTRODUCTION

This study addresses the observation as an important strategy for collecting information on research, taking as its starting point some general and formal guidelines on it, in qualitative terms. It is also based on the methodological path "Field of observation" in a study that sought to understand the family experience of living and care, bringing some reflections on the scope and relevance of the subject of observation for understanding this experiment.

Initially, it is interesting to place the observation as a technique already commonly used in social research, which has enabled detailed descriptions of places, objects, situations, interactions, bringing the researcher close to contexts and people, being considered increasingly important in the field work. Also for allowing a very detailed description of cultures and social situations experienced in daily life¹. This way, studies trying to understand this dimension of the experienced begin to employ more observation more constantly at collecting information.

As a rule, one prescribes a certain distance calculated between the observer and the study participants. And, as such distance becomes more or less surrounding towards the presence of both the observer and the observed, designating a face to face relationship and at its opposite pole, the one of the complete observer². Therefore, there appears to be concern in guiding the researcher's perspective to the desired information based on scripts that guide to a certain extent, what to watch.

Observation is also usually considered an auxiliary technique in research that triangulates with the interview1being generally subsidiary to this. This way, the gathering of information is done often through the interview in its many aspects, given the primacy of speech as trustworthy record of reality, or at least what can be "told" about the same.

This study assumes that the notice is given by the various means of human perception, extrapolating therefore what the eye perceives. It happens in the midst of the interviewer's interaction with the person being interviewed, both plunged into the context of the experienced moment, deeply affected by what is being narrated. It is understood, therefore, that the observation is primarily a sensorial and situational experience.

It is important to note that the observation can be thematized both from a perspective of objectivity - to provide 'concrete evidence of reality' through the eyes 'almost exempt' or 'neutral' - as a more impressionistic perspective - that considers contributing to a whole construction of a look and other human senses. In this second perspective, the observation is shown in the open and not being directive assumes that your corpus is constructed along the fieldwork. This is made from elements that are being emphasized and deepened gradually by the researcher as to take relief in the history of the people as well as the senses and meanings learned from the collection of information by the researcher³.

The concept of field as a social space of relations between people who share a common interests, but that do not have necessarily the same resources and skills, is taken⁴. But his most original sense, as "the seeding ground", also seems quite fruitful. This way, it is understood that in a research situation, the observation field is an "Open" field that will take shape there from less predictable social relations as experienced in their own contexts and surrounded by situations of deep affective nature for the person who tells his story and therefore also affects the researcher.

Thus, the collection of information on research, it is considered that the researcher is diving in an field of observation. Rather, he is placed in an open experience observable in a wide field of possibilities and therfore it's understood that the observation can not be reduced to a technique that projects itself a priori.

So, faced with this primacy of listening that guides the research, it specifies the initial questions concerning the observation: if the study design prescribes an open and interested listening, how should be the watchful eye? Or how can the researcher open himself to observation and this to that? And how and why observe?

This way, the relevance of this study is to explore in a research situation, the closely intertwined relation of the observer with the field he observes. In this respect, the wealth of gathered information comes from the power of the senses and intuitions of the investigator; what also shows potency in this field to raise expectations and various images, as well as elements that cross the own research situation - among them, their assumptions - and that position the researcher in the field of observation.

Based on these prerogatives, this article has a goal to understand the potential of the observation field, from comprehensive research that addressed life experience and care of a family. It was based on the research situation for young researchers, reported through the perspective of one of them, having an original study⁵ with germinal ideas that have been developed here.

The purpose was to increase the understanding of observation in their ability to deploy and highlight some of the multiple dimensions of human experience, graspable through the different senses of the researcher and, finally, to emphasize its potential as a privileged strategy on training in qualitative research.

This study shows as innovative by covering the field of observation simultaneously with the in-depth interview. This way, we present the conducted research design and, in it, this field of the observable, showing some of his constituing elements.

METHODS

It is a qualitative study of the field of view in the composition of the corpus of a master's thesis analysis, in which the objective was to encompass the experience of life and care of a family who experiences a chronic illness situation.

The paths chosen by the researcher to "do science" are part of its commitment to understand people's/families daily lives. In this effort, the researcher collectively build a route that most closely matches the understanding of what they experience and their criteria are no longer universal, but rather relative, contextual and historical⁶.

This way, is evident the preparation and path of the researchers over the course of this research, namely, the before, during and a posteriori to the field of observation of the dissertation. This, in turn, involved a work cell consisting of a master's degree and two Scientific Initiation Fellows, undergraduate students in Nursing.

The study participant's family was represented by D.L., her daughter J., her son in law G. and her grandchildren N1. and N2, all of which reside in the same house, in Cuiabá. - MT. The family matriarch, D.L., is the mother of nine children, has complications from Diabetes Mellitus and at the time of this study, she lived with J., who takes care most directly of the mother, in addition to caring for the house and the small children.

In electing the story of life to address the life experiences and care of D.L. and J. it was interesting to note and highlight the different episodes of the events, given that, to recall their stories, the events described by them did not hold a chronology. At the same time, it was important to give some temporal conformation to what was narrated in every encounter, understanding the stress of their experiences, as stated by the authors:

[...] To make the understanding [of the History of Life] the researcher is giving another conformation to those narrated memories, within a logic that it extracts the set of narratives, but following another path, specific to the study and the choices made "to emphasize" the narrated experiences^3:59.

The direction of each study is evident, therefore, from the reorganization work of the narratives that make up the experience of illness and care of each participating family in the study. Such reordering is done following the logic of each interviewed person present in its recall effort of the occurred facts⁷.

For approach and apprehension of what's experienced by the family, simultaneous use of in-depth interview and observation writing his life story was considered appropriate. The in-depth interview was conducted as a "conversation with intention" in which people openly narrate their experiences of life and care, in a recall effort "to tell"³. The choice of this strategy occurred because it was not directive but conducted in a proper manner, as the interviewer and the interviewee pursue "narrative threads' which are woven by each person. The researcher was preceptive to attentive, open and interested listening³, So that it can produce forms of narrative understanding of these threads.

Interview participated J. and D.L. who were invited to talk freely about their past, in a recall of the events that marked their lives. The gradual deepening of their stories was made in four conference meetings, conducted over a year, all occurred at the residence of J., by choice of the family. At the first meeting, the interview took place with J. and D.L. and the others separately in order to find the individuality and particularity of their experiences.

In the field work, the interview was always conducted by one researcher, emphasizing careful listening directed towards the interviewed. The entire interview was recorded to allow its transcript in its entirety and the avaliation of oral and own expressions of the interviewees.

The observation allowed a "I try to look at" the facts of everyday people in their social and family environment, in order to describe and deduce lessons from their ways of life and care⁵. It was carried out individually by each of the three researchers, so that, together, they entailed a register with different perceptions and perspectives. Observational records were made during and a posteriori of each interview meeting, preferably on the same day that it occurred, taking advantage of the most recent memory of the meeting. Such records were further complemented in the interview transcription work, as other scenes and field perceptions emerged from the memory.

Also was considered as important the record of doubts, insigths and inferences experienced by each researcher during the study. The detailed annotations allow to explain how its building a close relationship of the researcher with his subject and object of study, the initial empirical and theoretical reflections and the way the collection strategies are being employed, show that the researcher assumes position of neutrality in this research. Such conduct was relevant because it highlights even elements of observation that motivated the researchers to report and reflect on the field of observation presented in this study.

The observation records, which make up the corpus of this study contain as a whole both the perceptions of researchers coming from the field of observation, as their reflections in terms of the research itself, with emphasis on the employment of strategies, especially observation imbricated with the interview. This set of information, arising from the interview and observation by each researcher, named 1, 2 and 3, made up the Research Diary3 compiled of 50 pages typed in a Word document, source Times New Roman, Size 12, 1.5 space, corresponding to the period of December 2013, beginning the fieldwork, to October 2014, date of the present study.

Along the transcription of each interview meeting, the reading of the observations is resumed to remember anything that might have been forgotten. As a first strategy to include such extras, we used the feature to assemble "text balloons/reminders" next to the transcript to put relevant comments to that narrative. This way, the observation helped in remembrance and understanding of the situations witnessed during the interview. Over time, the "text balloons/reminders" were taking shape and occupying the spaces between the narrative and did not fit anymore as small notes, but rather were part of the field context and own narratives, making it essential to their compression.

This way, during the laborious and time-consuming transcript of the interview of work, a flowing was observed of their own memories triggered in large part by the narratives of respondents; other memories also emerged from sharing of the reading of the Research Journal by three researchers. So this recall was valued to complement the observation record.

This study had ethical approval of the matrix research to which it is linked under the umbrella of ethical principles set out in Resolution No. 196 of October 10, 1996, by the National Health Council, still in force at the time, later replaced by Resolution No. 496 of December 12, 1996, by the National Health Council. There was informed consent of the participants by signing the Free and Informed Consent Agreement, and in the disclosure of results, was respected the anonymity with the use of pseudonyms to interviewees and those cited by them.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

From the results of this study it is interesting to explore the construction of observation by the researcher or the "eyes to see":

[...] I give myself to looking, so that my eyes are wise. The look is a song that the eyes play. Stuff of a poet... They poets are the ones who talk about the looks. (I wrote "The poets are the ones who know about the looks", but I quickly corrected this. Everyone knows about the looks. Everyone watches the looks intently, because it is them, not the eyeballs, signaling life and especially love. But only the poets can speak about them). I write to change looks. This is not science. It's art. [...] The ability to discriminate does not belong to the eye. Belongs to the look. But it requires an inner light^8:1.

In this sense, it is understood that in the job of information collection, the researcher is closely linked with things, people, events, scenarios, scenes... Anyway, it is in a field that opens before him and in which builds and expands its sensory possibilities to realize and compose multiple sensory images beyond the seeing eye.

Such an understanding stipulates to discuss the researcher's relationship with the field observation, the production of the sensitive eye, the perceptions others are developing, expanding what is observable by itself, widening, finally the understanding of observation as research strategy. It is noteworthy that such an understanding takes place in close connection with the history of life and, in it, the conduct of in-depth interview.

Certainly, the challenge faced over the collection of information was to combine the in-depth interview with the observation, so the researchers absorbed the full field of own perceptions, with heightened senses and open, through which they flowin what was noticeable broadly and beyond what was anticipated and that would direct their attention.

Preceding the entry into the field, we felt the need for a workshop, in which the three researchers, with the matrix of the research group, best exercised this experience of observing open and subtly implied in it elements. This way, I asked two of the researchers to observe scenes of their daily life, describing them thoroughly. The description of each researcher was read in the group, raising many reflections on fieldwork, calling attention to the diversity of the things that happened, cenes, signs, emotions, looks, sounds and smells⁵ learned by each one.

From this exercise, the field work focused on in-depth interview anchored in observation. From this research process came some lessons, particularly on observation, which will be presented below. These lessons better train the look of the researchers, given the rigor which that research requires.

The field of observation: some reflective elements

The observation by the researchers results from all of their perceptions of what is visible, but also what it shows as implicit in the observable field, graspable by watching, gestures, body, of the situation, intuition and other human senses.

Thus, the sensitive observation of scenes of everyday family gave relief both to silence and to tell if gradual J., in an effort to understand what was going on with him:

[...] At various moments J. delay to respond, as if remembering something [...] (Note of Researcher 1).

The researcher must be careful to interpret the narratives and notes that the voices allow us to hear and, in equal amounts, be sensitive to understand the silence of participants⁹.

The direction of the researcher to the noticeable in every family scene requires that his attention is focused at the same time the events they experience happen. So after each interview was registered, thoroughly, what marked each of the researchers. Also during the transcription of the interviews, observation elements could be added to the narrative in order to contextualize the scenes and narrative threads which interviewed sought in memory, relating them to the life of D.L. and her family. An example of the importance of the completion of the observation a posteriori It is the one that allowed the report on the presence of children in the environment, highlighting how they behaved during the interview date, interest in always being around, being part of the conversation, even if only as spectators:

[...] What caught my attention was the presence of children that were always around, even wanting to be close, listening and assisting in search of family documents (Note of Researcher 1).

[...] Children curious by the previous crying (J.) and by the conversation they found interesting at that moment, are sitting in the kitchen, listening to everything (Note made during transcription).

Thus, watching children allowed, in this study, to involve them as an important part of understanding about everyday family care. This way, the transcription process and, in it, the recalling of the scenes by the researchers, contributed to the recovery of familiar scenes, whose narrative context was presented to their watchful eyes.

In everyday observation the relationship between family members was also noticeable. It was noticed that J. did not bother with the presence of nephews that remained alert there all the time. Later, she did not hide her tears with the arrival of her brother, nor was inhibited by his presence:

At that moment J.'s brother arrives, the two shake hands. He comes to fetch the children who are in her home. They talk a bit, and I ask J. if she wants to stop the interview and she said no. Nothing bothered her, not even the presence of nephews and now the arrival of brother (Note made during transcription).

These subtle elements of family life, not revealed in speech, allowed to reflect on the relationship that J. has with her family, not hiding her emotions, or avoid talking about issues which referred to family conflicts.

This way we stress the importance of research to be open to the findings of daily family life, that occur in every meeting with the family, thanks to the fruitful overlap between observation and in-depth interview.

In this routine, the note is all that that can be noticed over time through the observer's senses. So at arriving at the residence of J. for the first meeting with the family, were observed and recorded various details of the house, as if everything was jumping to the eye, given the novelty. This way, many details were noted by each researcher, according to the records of the arrival for the first time, at the D.L. house:

[...] We went to the house of daughter J. and when we got there, we found a brick house with a white gate, garden with plants and D.L. lying in a hammock on the porch and a man (her son in law) along with his wife (J.) washing the house, which has no floor. They were also the two children, the couple's children, a girl appearing to be around 06 years and a boy of around 03 years of age (Note of Researcher 1).

[...] The street at the house has no asphalt, and sewage runs in the open, the houses are very simple and without any luxury. We arrived and the house had a white painted metal gate and, upon entering, I noticed that the yard had building materials in the corners (clay tiles, Eternit and wood), and the ground was covered with stone "gravel", the first room of the house, and the only one we know, had an area of about 4x3 meters in it we find the G., the N1. and N2. (son in law and L.'s grandchildren) and L. was there too, lying on a checkered blue hammock, wore a light green sweater dress and on the net hung the bag of the probe and next to the area was the wheelchair she used. L. is nergo and has dark hair with a lot of white hairs, is well weakened as a result of diseases, diabetes and hypertension, which is marked by the weight loss she has suffered. G. and J. were cleaning the house (Note Researcher 2).

[...] We went through an unlocked gate and, I think when new, it was white, but today it's old and lost most of the paint. We enter through the lower gate, which is built into the sliding gate, and found ourselves in a large open area of land, with some plants and which also serves as a garage. In this space, on that day, were two white cars parked on opposite sides, so that the gate was pretty much in the middle of them, one of the cars was a Beetle and the other a Gol. The first car appeared not to be in use for a long time, it appeared not to be in working condition, different from the one that really seems to be the family's means of transport (Note Researcher 3).

It is important to note things, objects, people and everything that refers to the scenario where the family builds its everyday live because the mental images, which are formed from each description, help to understand the way of life in which D.L. and her family are involved. In addition, there is a composition of images by the set of observations under the different perceptions of the researchers. This set enables other researchers in the reading of this empirical material and can compose images that approach this everyday situation. This fact was evidenced in meetings with the research group, in which they discussed the experience of this family, and those who participated in the meetings could "be transported" to this moment through the detailed description consisting of what was seen and experienced in every encounter with D.L. and J.

To be able to reveal the ways of being particular to each person and the participating family under study, we sought an approximation of their reality, being necessary to observe spaces, structures, objects, people, alone or in groups, their actions, events, durations¹, among other elements that were presented to the watchful eyes of the researchers.

Such a dip in the field of observation challenges the researchers to deal with individual subjectivities, which includes understanding the experiences, meanings and senses woven into the events experienced by each one, that during the interviews and field observations are perceived, among others, through verbal expressions, dialogues and voice tones¹⁰.

The gradual and continuous work to exercise observation enabled, a meeting to another, looking to become increasingly observent and at the same time, determined, Paying attention to elements not perceived yet. The entrance gate of the house already mentioned, for example, does not have the same importance in subsequent meetings and nor do its details stand out; while the urge to see what had not yet had been observed happened at each encounter.

This way, the need was emerging to observe all that I did not notice on the first day and with this premise that I would had to have eagle eyes, soon I was watching the gate (ah, but the gate I had already seen, so I'll give importance to other details that went unnoticed). The first thing was the Volkswagen Beetle that another researcher described above, and despite the size, I could not see it in the previous visit. The White Beetle was there, in the middle of the yard, as being part of the house and being taken care of with love (Note Researcher 1).

With an attentive and expanded look at each meeting the observation records were shared in order to better understand what was being noticed and noted individually; this provided notice elements differently observed, as the Beetle.

This way, determining the look was something being constructed, during the meetings, with no pre-established script, based on the perception of peculiarities of the researchers themselves and how what was seen was described. Also, what was noted above had not received descriptive minutiae at the following meeting, as if it was "filtering" the familiar elements and basing only on what was new in the field, or what had changed.

So there isn't a way to see that is ready and finished, but rather in the course of the meetings the look will be investigating, about to go to realize minutiae hitherto unnoticed. It appears that the look of each observer is different in essence⁸; and it is starting from such a difference that the looks complement each other, filling in gaps of the same scene, the record of what is noted by each.

There are also quite discrete elements to the look of each observer, as outlined a smile on his childhood memories by J. when she said of her former home; or the expressive gestures of D.L., through the economy of her speech, to demonstrate their disposition in the interview meeting:

So my house was of wattle and daub, was made of Straw, right, what the was home from there... Right (break)... So, it was fun (saying this smiling, like a good childhood memory) (J. Narrative following a Note during the transition).

She (D.L.) used a lot of hand signals too, mostly with her hands and with facial expression, which made short words spoken by her during the interviews and transcribed here, as many "Uh-huh" More exciting and more meaningful (Note Researcher 3).

These elements noticeable in other ways not contained in the speeches and even silence make for important images and meanings to understand the family experience. Its capture is dependent on the sensitivity of each researcher. Note is also made to the importance of the different perceptions, in complementary looks since each researcher noted what was outstanding, Producing quite different records, despite being in the same field of observation.

So, it is assumed that the researcher is affected by the elements present in the field of observation, because his position is not neutral, rather he gives sense and meaning to what he experiences. Similarly, he creates, gradually, an affectionate relationship with the study participants. So, to be affected by the field, also involves the interviewer's perceptions in relation to respondents in an attempt to understand even how this relationship will be established during the meetings, which marked the record below:

[...] We note, in many ways, greater willingness on the part of D.L., which was more smiling and seemed more at ease than the first time we met (Insights from Researchers 2 and 3).

In the interview situation, as to get the person to count more openly about their life stories, the researcher must get use of elements to gain their trust. Such elements, facilitating the establishment of a relationship of familiarity and complicity, make themselves necessary given that the interview situation puts people in contact who usually do not know eachother and who do not always have a lot in common¹. Over time, such a relationship of familiarity and complicity can develop the relationship between the researcher and the people.

Also, to observe how these relationships are built over the meetings becomes important for understanding the context of each narrative, as well as the possibility of narrowing the very relationship between people and the researcher. This way, for example, the smiles and the willingness of respondents to narrate their stories are noted as signs of narrowing this relationship.

Throughout the meetings, the details showed that observation grew and the way records were made were complemented with what had been perceived in the narratives. This way, became evident the complementarity of observation in relation to the narrative threads of family history.

In this regard, observation becomes important in a way that it places the narratives in the context in which they were said and how they were said. Even when the observed elements are presented in gestures, smiles and silences, these help to the researcher to better understand the "unsaid" in the context of what has been told:

[...] At this time J. looks at the floor and falls silent, as if making an effort to recall the scenes of her childhood in minute detail. And as to the delay, I believe it has been somewhat difficult to turn these memories into words (Note made during transcription).

Thinking on observation as a seam that permeates and merges the speakeable and unspeakable elements of a narrative, for several moments she builds link between the narratives, ie weaves them to the point of making understand and imagine what happened there. This way, the open observation stimulates research in the creation of imagery, assisting in the weaving of meanings⁵.

Also, the observation allows members to note and describe events that occur in the middle of the interview, like J. gesturing amid talk of D.L., without interrupting her, which makes the researcher note that a reference is made to it and redirects the interview:

At this time, the daughter J. gestures as if he did not agree with the mother (Note made during transcription).

- Can you tell us J., where are you living? You are from this time too? (Researcher in dialogue with J.)

- No, it's like.. She lived in Acorizal upto 17 years after she was born, right... she came to Mimoso with 17 (J.).

Note that imbricated watching the in-depth interview allows details that are not graspable by other modes in the comprehensive research approach, making the construction of a more dense and dynamic corpus, therefore widely using their own senses and intuition to extend understanding the care of family life⁵.

In this sense, the observation helped the researchers to understand the care and family life in order to weave the narrative together on the events that were occurring concomitantly the interview. One example is the scene described below, in which small careful gestures of N1 were observed, D.L.'s granddaughter.:

[...] there hung on one of the side edges a bladder probe, which was already completely full of urine, a fact reported in the form of a notice by the girl to the mother at a given time: "Mom, you have to take Grandma's pee" (Note Researcher 3).

Thus, the observations involve significant elements of the narrative, giving shape and substance to the narrative threads, contribute to further understanding of these and conformation scenes that occur during the interview. In this study, it was learned that observing is not for judgement but, yes, for description and understanding, filling spaces not achieved with only narratives.

Understanding the way people tell their stories and contextualize is a laborious effort of the researcher. Giving meaning to the conversations is to add the sense of what was reported to him by the people and what the researcher was able to observe in the field¹¹.

Therefore, observing every detail amidst what is said and the "unsaid", such as gestures, gaze, body movements, the swing of the hands, the face of the speaker or stopping to talk, allows the observer to delve into other ways of adding up, pushing the limits of speech.

It is understood that observation is a strategy which allowes to assign meanings to the field of observation, in addition to weave together the in-depth interview, elements that complement the understanding of the life story told.

Still, in relation to the complementary narratives, notice the careful gestures that were not narrated by the family might be noticed by the attentive observation of the researchers. Being aware enabled them to see also the dependence of J. has towards D.L., in a way, anchored in her narrative and recalling the facts, probably due to the weakness of her memory.

The story told is the interpretative elaboration of what is lived through the recollection of memory and boost the events experienced in the redemption of the past. However, this can be hostage to the forgotten, demanding, from then the researcher the use of other modes triggering memory so there can be a course of events³.

So, when observing a certain hesitancy by D.L. in narrating the facts of her life, he went to reflect on the best driving mode of the interview and to seek strategies to get her to talk more openly about her life:

Another difficulty I had to face was how to get D.L. to talk more because, at various times, she takes time answering, as if she was remembering something.I will try to thread the beginning of my speech with the end of their answers; let's see if she opens more this way (Note Researcher 1).

This way, considering the narrative threads as the essence of telling about D.L. and her family, it was decided to conduct a separate interview, respecting her narrative time as well as making use of memory drive features such as the family photo album, which enriched the possibilities of the interview with her.

It is understood that the the observer position should be one that which allows empathy, sensitivity to emerge, being permeable to strangeness that can happen, since it is an open and unexpected observation field.

The researcher is not neutral in the field, he relates to people and, as he gets to know them and becomes known to them, both the position of the researcher and participants is modified, increasing the interaction, always dependent on empathy and engagement between them¹².

Bear in mind that each observer carries their own life experiences and these, in turn, will help in the gradual construction of the observation that must be one of understanding and not judgmental. So, to infer the significant observable elements and conduct an in-depth interview, the researchers entered the open field, making it a personalized experience, being permeated with his own life experiences.

CONCLUSION

The potential of the field of observation, as an open experience, was found slowly as evident, to the point that it was possible to understand the nuance of the meanings of life experiences and care of D.L. and her family. These were subject to observation, both towards the closer relationship with the respondents, as to the aware and intuitive look of the researchers. Important was, therefore, the field permanency and preparation for the realization of every encounter, seeking the most accurate perception of everyday life.

In this understanding, he employed the other human senses, allowing realize the silences, smiles and gestures, not graspable with only narratives. Therefore, the observations made it possible to understand aswell, the text context, ie, that which permeated the story that was told; and also the context in which they lived and how their relationships are constituted. Herewith, was included the relationship between researchers and interviewed.

Also, the observation reports were quite personalized since they carried the uniqueness of the look of each researcher, all different from each other because each was shaped by unique experiences.

It is noteworthy also that the researcher as an observer position should describe carefully and thoroughly their observations, so that your report can approach the situations lived everyday by the people and their family, because what was noticed by him is also important to understand these live experiences.

The elements observed in the fieldwork of this study have not been previously defined by a script what to observe, considering that being in the field needs to be an open experience. The field observation showed up full of visible and invisible elements, said and unsaid, noticeable amid the chain of events in their own research situation. This way, each researcher found himself immersed in this field, through the diversity of scenery, events, people, relationships that were noted differently by each one, as what affectedthem.

The complementarity of these observations produced quite rich observation records and, given the simultaneous observation with the in-depth interview, expanded the possibilities for understanding this family experience.

Finally, the field of observation brought elements that also meant and shaped the corpus of the study and, therefore, this study shows the importance of the researcher emerging, exercising their perceptions and noting elements that catch the eye.

• *
  Study linked to the matrix research entitled "The health institutions and the judiciary as mediators in Effective Law Homeland health: Therapeutic Itineraries Analysis users/Families in SUS/MT", developed under the "Research Group Nursing, Health and Citizenship "(GPESC) of the Nursing School of the Federal University of Mato Grosso (FAEN/UFMT), funded by the Notice to support research UFMT - Campus headquarters/Issue 001.

REFERÊNCIAS

• ¹
  Poupart J, Deslauries J, Groulx L, Laperrière A, Mayer R, Pires A. A pesquisa qualitativa: enfoques epistemológicos e metodológicos. 2ª ed. Petrópolis: Editora Vozes; 2008.
• ²
  Minayo MCS. O desafio do conhecimento: pesquisa qualitativa em saúde. 14ª ed. São Paulo: Hucitec/Abrasco; 2014.
• ³
  Araújo LFS, Dolina J, Petean E, Musquim CA, Bellato R, Lucietto GC. Diário de pesquisa e suas potencialidades na pesquisa qualitativa em saúde. Rev. Bras. Pesq. Saúde. 2013 jul/set;15(3):53-61.
• ⁴
  Bourdieu P. O poder simbólico. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Bertrand Brasil; 2001.
• ⁵
  Santos PRM, Brito ACC, Silva LS, Araujo LFS, Bellato R. O campo de observação em pesquisa compreensiva: a vivência de jovens pesquisadoras. Resumos dos trabalhos apresentados no IV Congresso de Investigação em Enfermagem Ibero-americano e de Países de Língua Oficial Portuguesa; 2014, jul. 21-25; Coimbra, Portugal. Coimbra: Revista de Enfermagem Referência; 2014. p. 216.
• ⁶
  Costa AP, Souza FN, Souza DN, organizadores. Investigação qualitativa: inovação, dilemas e desafios. Coimbra: LUDOMEDIA/UC/UA/PUC-GOIÁS/UFR-PE; 2014.
• ⁷
  Bellato R, Araujo LFS, Faria APS, Santos EJF, Castro P, Souza SPS et al. A história de vida focal e suas potencialidades na pesquisa em saúde e em enfermagem. Rev. Eletr. Enf. [on line]. 2008; [citado 2014 abril 11]; 10(3):[aprox.8 telas]. Disponível em: http://www.fen.ufg.br/revista/v10/n3/pdf/v10n3a32.pdf
  » http://www.fen.ufg.br/revista/v10/n3/pdf/v10n3a32.pdf
• ⁸
  Sobre a ciência e sapiência. Folha de São Paulo [on line] (São Paulo). 2004 nov 28. Disponível em: http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/sinapse/ult1063u916.shtml
  » http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/sinapse/ult1063u916.shtml
• ⁹
  Li J. Ethical Challenges in Participant Observation: A Reflection on Ethnographic Fieldwork. The Qualitative Report. 2008 mar;13(1):100-115.
• ¹⁰
  Aluwihare-Samaranayake D. Ethics in qualitative research: A view of the participants' and researchers' world from a critical standpoint. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 2012;11(2):64-81.
• ¹¹
  Minayo MCS. Qualitative analysis: theory, steps and reliability. Ciênc. Saúde Coletiva. 2012 mar; 17(3):621-26.
• ¹²
  Minayo MCS, Guerriero ICZ. Reflexividade como éthos da pesquisa qualitativa. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2014 abr;19(4):1103-112.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  2016

History

• Received
  24 July 2015
• Accepted
  11 Apr 2016