Tertia island study - arguement

“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 by their own biological parents. Recently another anthropologist, Dr. Karp, visited the group of islands that includes Tertia and used the interview-centered method to study child-rearing practices. In the interviews that Dr. Karp conducted with children living in this group of islands, the children spent much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. Dr. Karp decided that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture must be invalid. Some anthropologists recommend that to obtain accurate information on Tertian child-rearing practices, future research on the subject should be conducted via the interview-centered method.”

Here in this article author is talking about the study of anthropologist in the island Tertia. Author is considering the study of two anthropologist who visited the Tertia and given their conclusion. Analysis of one anthropologist says that children of the Tertia reared by entire village rather then only parent. While the study of another anthropologist says that children of Tertia reared by their parent rather then village people.

First observer Dr. Field analyze that the children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. His this result was observation centered. According to his observation in the Tertia he concluded this. But we know that mentality and the thinking power of the every person is different and we can not trust the result came from and single person. Because the matter which one may ignore would be very important for someone else. More there is nothing about the way of observation done by Dr. Field is given so we can not trust the result of his study.
Second time Dr. Karp another Anthropologist visited the Tertia and his analysis was Interview centered. He concluded from his study that childred in the Terpia reared by their biological parent only rather then people of village. His this result contradicts the result of the Dr. Field. But here in the observation of the Dr. Karp there is nothing about the method and way of analysis is given. For interview centered analysis one has to conduct interview of all people in exact number and manner in very particular manner. If one take interview of 100 people from one region of the city and then he conclude his result from that then it’s not going to give the correct result.
To conclude the result about the Tertian Children, one has to study the tradition in which the children in the Tertia reared from last few century. In addition the interview of children from all around the area with interview of village people required to make the conclusion about how children of Tertia reared. Some other anthropologists say that it required some more research and interview centered method to analyze how children of Tertia reared. But they did not say anything about how they should be interviewed and what parameters should be considered in order to make the study.

So as it stands, authors argument are not compelling. In order to conclude how the children of Tertia reared one has to make detailed study and research based on both personal observation as well interview and has to focus on some other related parameters.