The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How can we capture the subject’s perspective? An evidence-based approach for the social scientist
Open accessAbstract
This paper addresses the methodological gap that impedes the collection of empirical data on subjective experience. It describes a new family of methods for social science research (Subjective Evidence-Based Ethnography: SEBE). The methods are based on: first-person audio-visual recording with a miniature video-camera worn at eye-level (‘subcam’); confronting subjects with these first-person recordings to collect their subjective experience; formulating the findings and discussing the final interpretation with the subjects. These procedures enable subjects to reconstruct and describe their psychological state at the moment of action, especially their goals, by reviewing films of their own activity recorded from their own perspective with subcams. These films provide situated records of actual activity in natural environments, without the need of an external observer. This approach, by providing both detailed records of actual activity and evidence-based accounts of the subject’s own mental processes, supports grounded progress in ethnography, psychology, ergonomics, sociology and the social sciences in general. There are also applications for training and cross-cultural contacts. The techniques are described in sufficient detail for the reader to make use of them. Examples of applications are provided and limitations are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hutchins, E. (1995) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1881.001.0001 · Cited by 10,801
Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2004) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144230 · Cited by 7,433
Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life
Lave, J. (1988) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609268 · Cited by 5,148
Episodic memory: from mind to brain
Tulving, E. (2002) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135114 · Cited by 4,950
Gorillas in our midst: sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events
Simons, D. J., & Chabris, C. F. (1999) · Perception · doi:10.1068/p281059 · Cited by 3,181
Cattaneo, L., & Rizzolatti, G. (2009) · Archives of Neurology · doi:10.1001/archneurol.2009.41 · Cited by 3,137
Cited by
Rewriting the Language of Creativity: The Five A's Framework
Glăveanu, V. P. (2013) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0029528 · Cited by 660
Creativity as a Sociocultural Act
Glăveanu, V. P. (2015) · The Journal of Creative Behavior · doi:10.1002/jocb.94 · Cited by 368
Polizzi, G. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103859 · Cited by 206
Why are smartphones disruptive? An empirical study of smartphone use in real-life contexts
Heitmayer, M., & Lahlou, S. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106637 · Cited by 108
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Lahlou, S.
- Venue
- Social Science Information
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-08-31
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 3-4
- Pages
- 607-655
- ISSN
- 0539-0184 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7412
- OpenAlex
- W1975979558
- Cited by
- 166
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 27.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How can we capture the subject’s perspective? An evidence-based approach for the social scientist. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0539018411411033
- The paper
- Lahlou, S. (2011). How can we capture the subject’s perspective? An evidence-based approach for the social scientist. Social Science Information. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018411411033
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.