Opravy

In this argument, some of the anthropologists recommend that the best way to gather accurate information on Tertian child – rearing practices is conducting Dr. Karp research named Via the interview centered method.

This research indicates that children who are living in this group of islands include Tertia, are talking about their parents more than other people in that area.

Dr. Karp Argued that his research showed that Dr. field research which revealed that Tertian children were reared by the whole village twenty years ago, not by their own family, is invalid.

How over, this argument is problematic in several respects First of all, it is believed that the talking about their biological parents more than other people by Tertian children is the reason why the observation centered approach is irrational .it should be noted that talking about their biological parents doesn’t mean that Tertian children didn't rear other village families rather that by their own parents.

Perhaps children tend to talk more about their parents because they separated from family sometimes, as result of this they were more curious about their own parents.

If this is the case, Dr.Krap had a remiss conclusion about observation centered method by Dr.Field .let,s assume that interview-centered method is a true assumption.

Yet, there is an obscure issue in this argument. Dr .

Karp research was held in a group of islands includes Tertia.The mere fact is that we don’t have accurate data about survey result.it is unclear the result of interview – centered method in Tertia was same as the result of entire research.

Thus, the like between anthropologists recommendation and Dr. Field,s findings is unclear.

Secondly, the Dr. Karp research that the author cites might be unreliable in any of three respects.

First, the survey results depend on the honesty and integrity of the children.

Perhaps if parents knew about the interview, it is very common that they thought their children, how to respond to interview, just before the meeting.Second, the survey results depend on comparison with result of Dr .Field survey.

Due to the fact that these researchers conducted in different methods, times and conditions, that makes it very difficult to obtain any positive or negative opinion about both of them.

Since The author has not accounted for these possibilities, there are not cogent reasons in order to take the anthropologist's recommendation seriously.