Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture, he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than

Could you review the arguments? Thanks!
====

The recommendation negates both the conclusion made by Dr. Field and the investigation approach employed.

1. Situation might have changed over the past twenty years
- Twenty years is a long time. People who were children twenty years ago are a totally different generation.
- It is possible that twenty years ago people lived closer to one another, and children were indeed brought up by the entire village
- Question: has this part of the culture changed over the past twenty years in Tertia?

2. The interview results are based the whole group of islands. It is unclear that how children in Tertia specifically have answered the question
- It is possible that people Tertia have different child-rearing practices with other islands in the group.
- Question: how children in Tertia specifically have answered the question?

3. Talking more about their biological parents does not necessarily indicate parents have a greater influence on them in terms of child-raising practice.
- Talking is vague term
- Maybe during to some cultural practices the children happen to spend more time with their biological parents at the time being interviewed.
- Question: does talking more about biological parents mean the children are not reared by other adults?

4. Even if Dr. Field did draw an invalid conclusion, that does not invalidate the observation-centered approach.
- Dr. Field may fail to correctly employ the observation-centered approach
- Maybe observation-centered approach becomes more appropriate now after twenty years