Abstract
The complex epistemological and methodological problems of data‐quality control or ethnographer bias in anthropological research as they relate to the use of the native languages and/or the use of native‐interpreter informants are critically reexamined. Summarizing the 1939–1940 Mead‐Lowie debate, the paper suggests, on the basis of a close review of selected classic ethnographies of Africa, various ways by which the quality of comparative cross‐cultural data could be meaningfully improved. [methodology of cross‐cultural research, epistemological issues in anthropology, use of native languages in fieldwork, ethnography of Africa, history of anthropology]
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
