Serendipia y etnografía
reflexión epistemológica
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7289.2026.1.46573Palabras clave:
Ciencia, Conocimiento, Serendipia, Abducción, EtnografíaResumen
La serendipia es prácticamente una inevitabilidad en la investigación científica, especialmente en las ciencias sociales y cuando se favorecen los enfoques cualitativos. Sin embargo, su relevancia epistemológica aún se tiene poco en cuenta. Por ello, propongo debatirla en el contexto de la investigación etnográfica. La reflexión toma la forma de un ensayo y se orienta hacia la comprensión de las propiedades de la serendipia, las inferencias abductivas que presupone, su asociación intrínseca con la etnografía y las principales manifestaciones que asume durante el trabajo de campo. A partir de esta reflexión, es posible destacar
que el abordaje etnográfico es a la vez condición y expresión de la serendipia, propiciando imprevistos, descubrimientos y razonamientos inductivo-abductivos que conducen a posibilidades plausibles de interpretación que antes no habían sido consideradas. En el ejercicio etnográfico sobre el terreno, la serendipia no se limita a situaciones estrictamente cognitivas, sino que también se manifiesta en otros ámbitos que condicionan el análisis y la conceptualización.
Descargas
Citas
Åkerström, Malin. 2013. Curiosity and serendipity in qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology Review 9 (2): 10-18. https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.09.2.02.
André, Paul, MC Schraefel, Jaime Teevan, e Susan T. Dumais. 2009. Discovery is never by chance: designing for (un)serendipity. Proceeding of the seventh ACM conference on creativity and cognition. https://doi.org/10.1145/1640233.1640279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1640233.1640279
Arfini, Selene, Tommaso Bertolotti e Lorenzo Magnani. 2020. The antinomies of serendipity: how to cognitively frame serendipity for scientific discoveries. Topoi 39 (4): 939-948. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-018-9571-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-018-9571-3
Atkinson, Paul. 2013. Ethnography and craft knowledge. Qualitative Sociology Review 9 (2): 56-63. https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.09.2.06.
Bajc, Vida. 2012. Abductive ethnography of practice in highly uncertain conditions. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 642 (1): 72-85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716212438197. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716212438197
Bedessem, Baptiste, e Stéphanie Ruphy. 2019. Scientific autonomy and the unpredictability of scientific inquiry: the unexpected might not be where you would expect. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 73: 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2018.08.002.
Bourcier, Danièle, e Pek Van Andel. 2011. La sérendipité: le hasard heureux. Hermann.
Cammann, Schuyler. 1967. Christopher the Armenian and the Three Princes of Serendip. Comparative Literature Studies 4 (3): 229-258. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40467695.
Campa, Riccardo. 2008. Making science by serendipity: a review of Robert K. Merton and Elinor Barber’s The travels and adventures of serendipity. Journal of Evolution and Technology 17 (1): 75-83.
Catellin, Sylvie. 2014. Sérendipité: du conte au concept. Éditions du Seuil.
Catellin, Sylvie, e Xavier Hautbois. 2012. Le rôle de l’imaginaire dans la découverte. Revue Alliage 70: 19-21. http://revel.unice.fr/alliage/index.html?id=4051.
Coffey, Amanda. 2018. Doing ethnography. Sage.
Collins, Randall. 1994. Why the social sciences won’t become high-consensus, rapid-discovery science. Sociological Forum 9 (2): 155-177. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01476360. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01476360
Copeland, Samantha. 2019. On serendipity in science: discovery at the intersection of chance and wisdom. Synthese: An International Journal for Epistemology, Methodology and Philosophy of Science 196 (6): 2385-2406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1544-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1544-3
Cornu, Roger. 1984. Porte ouverte sur la cuisine de la recherche. Terrain – Revue d’Ethnologie de l’Europe 2: 45-50. https://doi.org/10.4000/terrain.2800. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/terrain.2800
Dalsgaard, Steffen. 2013. The field as a temporal entity and the challenges of the contemporary. Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale 21 (2): 213-225. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12012
Darbellay, Frédéric, Zoe Moody, Ayuko Sedooka, e Gabriela Steffen. 2014. Interdisciplinary research boosted by serendipity. Creativity Research Journal 26 (1): 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2014.873653. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2014.873653
Daynes, Sarah, e Terry Williams. 2018. On ethnography. John Wiley and Sons.
De Rond, Mark. 2014. The structure of serendipity. Culture and Organization 20 (5): 342-358. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759551.2014.967451. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14759551.2014.967451
Donzelli, Aurora. 2019. Discovering by surrendering: for an epistemology of serendipity against the neoliberal ethics of accountability. Antropologia 6 (1): 163-183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04225-5.
Fabietti, Ugo. 2016. Errancy in ethnography and theory: on the meaning and role of “discovery” in anthropological research. In Serendipity in anthropological research: the nomadic turn, organizado por Haim Hazan e Esther Hertzog, 32-46. Routledge.
Fine, Gary e James Deegan. 1996. Three principles of Serendip: insight, chance, and discovery in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 9 (4): 434-447. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951839960090405. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0951839960090405
Florczak, Kristine. 2015. Serendipity: a delightful surprise that requires insight. Nursing Science Quarterly 28 (4): 267-271. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894318415599227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894318415599227
Gallenga, Ghislaine, e Gilles Raveneau. 2016. Dynamiques temporelles et sérendipité dans les recherches contemporaines. Temporalités. Revue de Sciences Sociales et Humaines 24. https://doi.org/10.4000/temporalites.3474.
Gallenga, Ghislaine, e Olivier Wathelet. 2022. Incertitudes et temporalités: du rôle de la sérendipité dans le contexte de l’anthropologie en entreprise. Nouvelles Perspectives en Sciences Sociales 28 (1): 367-402. https://doi.org/10.7202/1097502ar.
Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books.
Giabiconi, Julie. 2013. Serendipity… mon amour? On discomfort as a prerequisite for anthropological knowledge. Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale 21 (2): 199-212. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12013
Glăveanu, Vlad. 2020. A sociocultural theory of creativity: bridging the social, the material, and the psychological. Review of General Psychology 24 (4): 335-354. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268020961763.
Glăveanu, Vlad. 2022. What’s “inside” the prepared mind? Not things, but relations. In The art of serendipity, organizado por Wendy Ross e Samantha Copeland, 23-39. Palgrave Macmillan.
Goodman, Leo. 1961. Notes on the etymology of serendipity and some related philological observations. Modern Language Notes 76 (5): 454-457. https://doi.org/10.2307/3040685. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3040685
Harrison, Anthony. 2018. Ethnography. Oxford University Press.
Hazan, Haim, e Esther Hertzog. 2016. Serendipity in anthropological research: the nomadic turn. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315608426
Herzfeld, Michael. 2014. Serendipitous sculpture: ethnography does as ethnography goes. Anthropology and Humanism 39 (1): 3-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/anhu.12031. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/anhu.12031
Holmes, Samuel. 1961. Louis Pasteur. Dover.
Howell, Signe. 2017. Two or three things I love about ethnography. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 7 (1): 15-20. https://doi.org/10.14318/hau7.1.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14318/hau7.1.004
Iribarne, Philippe. 2013. Sérendipité et sciences sociales: enseignements d’une expérience vécue. SociologieS. https://doi.org/10.4000/sociologies.4529.
Jacobsson, Katarina, Kristina Göransson, e David Wästerfors. 2013. Introduction to the special issue Curiosity and serendipity in qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology Review 9 (2): 6-8. https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.09.2.01
Jones, Julie, e Sal Watt. 2010. Ethnography in social science practice. Routledge.
Kohn, Tamara. 2010. The role of serendipity and memory in experiencing fields. In The ethnographic self as resource: writing memory and experience into ethnography, organizado por Peter Collins e Anselma Gallinat, 186-199. Berghahn Books.
Lahelma, Elina, Sirpa Lappalainen, Reetta Mietola, e Tarja Palmu. 2014. Discussions that ‘tickle our brains’: constructing interpretations through multiple ethnographic data-sets. Ethnography and Education 19 (1): 51-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2013.828476. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2013.828476
Le Courant, Stefan. 2013. What can we learn from a “liar” and a “madman”? Serendipity and double commitment during fieldwork. Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale 21 (2): 186-198. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12015
Madden, Raymond. 2022. Being ethnographic: a guide to the theory and practice of ethnography. Sage.
Makri, Stephann e Ann Blandford. 2012. Coming across information serendipitously - part 1: a process model. Journal of Documentation 68 (5): 684-705. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411211256030. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411211256030
Marletta, Michael. 2017. Serendipity in discovery: from nitric oxide to Viagra. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 161 (3): 189-201. https://www.amphilsoc.org/sites/default/files/2017-12/attachments/Marletta.pdf.
Martínez, Francisco. 2018. The serendipity of anthropological practice. Anthropological Journal of European Cultures 27 (1): 1-6. https://doi.org/10.3167/ajec.2018.270102.
Martins, Humberto, e Paulo Mendes. 2016. Trabalho de campo: envolvimento e experiências em antropologia. ICS.
Melas, Alessandra. 2017. Cournot’s notion of hasard: an objective conception of chance. Axiomathes 27 (6): 685-697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-017-9333-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-017-9333-7
Merton, Robert K. 1948. The bearing of empirical research upon the development of social theory. American Sociological Review 13 (5): 505-515. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2087142
Merton, Robert K. 1957. Social theory and social structure. The Free Press.
Merton, Robert K. 1965. On the shoulders of giants. The Free Press.
Merton, Robert K. 1973. The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. The University of Chicago Press.
Merton, Robert K. 1996. On social structure and science. The University of Chicago Press.
Merton, Robert K., e Elinor Barber. 2004. The travels and adventures of serendipity: a study in sociological semantics and the sociology of science. Princeton University Press.
Namian, Dahlia, e Carolyne Grimard. 2013. Pourquoi parle-t-on de sérendipité aujourd’hui? Conditions sociologiques et portée heuristique d’un néologisme «barbare». Introduction du Dossier. SociologieS. https://doi.org/10.4000/sociologies.4490.
Oliver, Kendrick. 2019. The lucky start toward today’s cosmology? Serendipity, the “big bang” theory, and the science of radio noise in Cold War America. Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences 49 (2): 151-193. https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2019.49.2.151.
Olivier de Sardan, Jean-Pierre. 1995. La politique du terrain sur la production des données en anthropologie. Enquête 1: 71-109. https://doi.org/10.4000/enquete.263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/enquete.263
Pearce, R. M. 1912. Chance and the prepared mind. Science 35 (912): 941-956. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.35.912.941. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.35.912.941
Peirce, Charles. 1931-1958. The collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Vol. 1-8. Harvard University Press.
Pieke, Frank. 2000. Serendipity: reflections on fieldwork in China. In Anthropologists in a wider world: essays on field research, organizado por Paul Dresch, Wendy James e David Parkin, 129-150. Berghahn Books.
Pink, Sarah. 2021. The ethnographic hunch. In Experimenting with ethnography: a companion to analysis, organizado por Andrea Ballestero e Brit Winthereik, 30-40. Duke University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/9781478013211-004
Reichertz, Jo. 2009. Abduction: the logic of discovery of grounded theory. Forum: Qualitative Social Research 11 (1). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-11.1.1412.
Remer, Theodore. 1965. Serendipity and the three princes: from the Peregrinaggio of 1557. University of Oklahoma Press.
Rivoal, Isabelle, e Noel Salazar. 2013. Contemporary ethnographic practice and the value of serendipity. Social Anthropology 21 (2): 178-185. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12026
Ross, Wendy, e Samantha Copeland. 2022. On creativity and serendipity. In The art of serendipity, organizado por Wendy Ross e Samantha Copeland, 1-21. Palgrave Macmillan.
Sacramento, Octávio. 2014. Atlântico passional: mobilidades e configurações transnacionais de intimidade euro-brasileiras. Tese de Doutoramento. ISCTE-Instituto Universitário de Lisboa. http://hdl.handle.net/10071/8790.
Sacramento, Octávio. 2016. Localizações e itinerâncias: crónica de um trabalho de campo transatlântico. In Trabalho de campo: envolvimento e experiências em antropologia, organizado por Humberto Martins e Paulo Mendes, 179-199. ICS.
Schaffhauser, Philippe. 2017. Ethnographie du verbe et ethnographie du signe: autour de l’abduction de Peirce et de la question de l’expérience d’observation en sociologie. Cahiers de Recherche Sociologique 62: 157-175. https://doi.org/10.7202/1045618ar.
Schritt, Jannik. 2022. An ethnography of public events: reformulating the extended case method in contemporary social theory. Ethnography 23 (1): 38-59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466138119891446.
Shore, Cris. 2008. Audit culture and illiberal governance: universities and the politics of accountability. Anthropological Theory 8 (3): 278-298. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463499608093815. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1463499608093815
Silva, Pedro G., Octávio Sacramento, e José Portela. 2011. Etnografia e intervenção social: por uma praxis reflexiva. Colibri.
Silva, Pedro G., Octávio Sacramento, e Vera Mendonça. 2015. Proximidade, reflexividade e crítica: o lugar da etnografia na intervenção social. Cuadernos de Trabajo Social, 28 (1): 25-35. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_CUTS.2015.v28.n1.46678. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_CUTS.2015.v28.n1.46678
Silver, Sean. 2015. The prehistory of serendipity: from Bacon to Walpole. Isis 106 (2): 235-256. https://doi.org/10.1086/681977. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/681977
Simard, Magali, e Danielle Laberge. 2015. From a methodology exercise to the discovery of a crisis: serendipity in field research. Project Management Journal 46 (2): 47-59. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21482. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21482
Tilche, Alice, e Edward Simpson. 2017. On trusting ethnography: serendipity and the reflexive return to the fields of Gujarat. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 23 (4): 690-708. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.12695. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.12695
Van Andel, Pek, e Danièle Bourcier. 2013. De la sérendipité dans la science, la technique, l’art et le droit. Leçons de l’inattendu. Hermann.
Whyte, William F. 1943 2005. Sociedade de esquina: a estrutura social de uma área urbana pobre e degradada. Zahar.
Wolcott, Harry F. 2005. The art of fieldwork. AltaMira Press.
Wolcott, Harry F. 2016. Ethnography lessons: a primer. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315428970
Wyart, Aude e Nicolas Fait. 2013. Le hasard peut-il bien faire les choses? La sérendipité à travers deux récits croisés de terrain. SociologieS. https://doi.org/10.4000/sociologies.4513.
Yaqub, Ohid. 2018. Serendipity: towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy 47 (1): 169-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.10.007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.10.007
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 Octávio Sacramento
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
