emic and etic perspectives: what are they, and 6 differences between them?

These two points of view put the focus of psychosocial research in different fields.

The emic and etic perspectives applied in scientific knowledge have allowed us to acquire different views on social phenomena. Their antecedents are to be found in structuralist linguistics, however they have been transferred in an important way to sociology and anthropology, since they allow us to elaborate different answers and explanations of social behavior.

As an introduction, we will see below what is and where do etic and etic perspectives come from? where the etic and emic perspectives come from, as well as some of their main differences.as well as some of their main differences.

From linguistics to social behavior

The concepts of "etic" and "emic" are neologisms first introduced by the American linguist Kenneth Pike, to refer to how social behavior occurs and is understood. Etic corresponds to the suffix of the word "phonetic", and "emic" corresponds to the word "phonemic".

Phonetics is a branch of linguistics that studies the sounds we make. that studies the sounds we produce to communicate. As a concept it refers to the sounds of language that are based on a taxonomy of active speech, as well as their environmental effects understood as acoustic waves.

Phonemics, on the other hand, is another branch of linguistics and refers to the ability of listeners to not only hear but to identify and manipulate phonemes (the minimal phonological units that belong to each language). It refers to the sounds that are in the implicit consciousness, or non-consciousness, and that help speakers identify different expressions of their own language.

Pike takes these terms to develop two epistemological perspectives that would allow understanding social behavior as an analogy of the main linguistic structures. That is, he tries to apply the principles by which linguists discovered phonemes, morphemes and other units of language to discover emic units of social behavior.

6 differences between emic and etic perspectives

The etic and emic perspectives in the social sciences have been useful in offering different explanations for what motivates social behavior. In other words, they have arisen in an attempt to answer, for example, why certain human groups behave in a specific way, why they interact as they do, or how it is that they have organized themselves in a certain way.

Broadly speaking, the answers to these questions have taken two paths. On the one hand, there are those who say that the motives for social behavior can only be understood through the explanations that the actors themselves give for these motives.. This would be an emic position.

On the other hand, there are those who say that social behaviors, and their motives, can be explained by the direct observation of someone else. by means of direct observation by an outsider. This would be an etic position. According to Pike, the use of an etic and emic perspective can have important ethical implications and undertones, especially when descriptions are translated into instrumental measurements.

Below we will briefly look at five differences that have a bearing on how we research and understand our societies and behaviors.

1. Observer-participant relationship

An emic perspective seeks to ensure that there is a context of interaction in which the observer and the informant meet and conduct a discussion on a and conduct a discussion on a particular topic.

On the other hand, an etic perspective defines and describes social behavior by considering primarily the logic of the observing actor. It prioritizes the structure that exists beyond the actors' minds.

2. The motive of social behavior

Faced with the question of what events, entities or relationships are like, an emic perspective would say that the answer is in the heads of the people who are the protagonists of these events, entities or relationships.entities or relationships.

On the other hand, when faced with the same question, an etic perspective would say that the answer lies in the observable behavior of the people who are the protagonists of these events, entities or relationships.

3. Validity of explanatory knowledge

Emic is a perspective that works from the actors' point of view. The events of everyday life, customs, habits, rituals, etc., are not defined by those who perform them, and this is considered as the valid definition.

As understood in relation to meanings or non-conscious structures, emic is considered a perspective that is difficult to defend in terms of scientific rigor..

Etic is a perspective that is approached from the observer's point of view. Here cultural events, customs, habits, daily life, etc., are explained on the basis of the description made by the person who is watching (not the one who acts those events), and that is the explanation that is considered valid.

4. Similar perspectives

An emic perspective is closer to a subjectivist perspective of knowledge, while an etic perspective is closer to the objectivist paradigm of knowledge. perspective is closer to the objectivist paradigm of knowledge..

5. Related methodologies

The emic perspective is interested in the social construction of meaning, in questioning and exploring the emic purposes of behavior. Therefore, an example of methodology is the descriptions based on interviews with social actors.

On the other hand, the etic perspective, which is more interested in the descriptions of the external agent, can carry out, for example, comparative research between what is observed and what is not, comparative research between what is observed in different cultures, for example..

6. They are not always so different

The emic and etic perspectives are approaches that may not coincide, and what is more: they are often understood and used as completely exclusive descriptions.

Kenneth Pike and Marvin Harris (an American anthropologist who took up and developed Pike's theories), have problematized this and have managed to exemplify at what moments the etic and emic views coincide, and at what moments they distance themselves from each other, as well as the consequences of such coincidences and distances.

One of the things that people interested in the emic and etic perspectives have had to ask themselves has been how are mental belief systems, language and behavior itself connected?. In other words, it has also been necessary to question whether what we say about what we do gives a true picture of the motives for the behavior; or whether what we see that we do is actually what gives a closer idea of the motives for the behavior itself.

Sometimes what we do matches what we say about what we do, sometimes it does not. And this is largely why the emic and etic perspectives cannot be sharply separated, but must be understood in relation. They are approaches that can be useful and complementary in understanding our social behavior..

Bibliographical references:

• Harris, M. (1976). History and significance of the emic/etic distinction. Annual Review of Anthropology. 5: 329-350.