Unlike the symbolic interactionism which studies the subjective judgement of symbols or text from people at the time of interaction, ethnomethodology studies how the social order is produced in and through the process of social action. It studies how ordinary people construct a stable social work from their day to day social action. It focuses on how people of society interact and maintain social status in society. Ethnomethodology has a root in phenomenology but it is a rigid framework than phenomology. It studies indigenous understanding of methods based on methodical ways of organizing practical affairs. It consider only observable and reportable data for organizing practical affairs.
During the research, researchers using ethnomethodology rely on conversation analysis and a rigorous set of techniques for systematically observing and recording what happens when people interact in a natural setting. On the basis of these recordings or observation researchers must classify the actions people take when they are in a group. Ethnomethodology follows qualitative research philosophy because it uses grounded theory, subjectively analysis and interpretation. Direct observation and recording are the main tools of data collection and use either contain analysis or narrative analysis or both as data analysis methods. Ethnomethodology is not used for the judgement of behaviour of people in society but for the classification of people into different groups on the basis of their action and interaction with other people in society.
Dowling, N. (2007). Ethnomethodology: Time for a Revisit? A Discussion Paper. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 44(5), 826-833.
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodology. New Jersey: Prentice-hall, Inc.
Sach, H. (1995). Lectures in Conversation (Vol. I and II). Blackwell Publishing. https://archive.org/details/HarveySacksLecturesOnConversationVolumesIIITheEstateOfHarveySacks1995/mode/2up