Introduction An instrument for breaking down scenes

The Ritual Spaces Matrix is a coding instrument. It operates as a practical analytical map rather than a merely descriptive resource.

Its purpose is to transform complex spatial situations into comparable units by separating four dimensions: the place where the scene becomes legible, the action that structures it, its degree of exposure to observation, and the dominant social function of the resulting configuration.

The categories are deliberately straightforward. The aim is not to reduce the complexity of fieldwork but to prevent interpretation, description, and evidence from being conflated in a single narrative.

01 · Purpose What the matrix seeks to capture

The matrix distinguishes four variables:

Combining the four variables produces a minimum unit of analysis that can subsequently be compared across other scenes, places, and case studies.

02 · Unit of Analysis One row represents one scene

The matrix does not privilege narrative continuity. If a situation changes in an analytically significant way, a new row must begin.

A person may, for example, approach a building, stop, wait, and eventually pass through an entrance. Although these actions form part of a continuous sequence in time, they do not necessarily constitute a single analytical scene.

03 · Analytical Separation Three levels that must not be confused

04 · Variable 1 Space

Space identifies the operative spatial setting within which the scene becomes meaningful.

The wider district is not coded by default. The spatial unit closest to the action is selected: an entrance, staircase, lobby, pontoon, terrace, street, waiting area, and so forth.

This rule prevents socially distinct configurations from being grouped together merely because they occur within the same urban area.

05 · Variable 2 Ritual

Ritual records the dominant action structuring access, attention, or participation within the scene.

The term does not necessarily imply a formal ceremony. It is used to identify spatially organised actions that are sufficiently recognisable to constitute a unit of observation.

Van Gennep (1960) and Turner (1969) provide a classical foundation for studying transitions and thresholds, while Goffman (1959) and Edensor (2001) extend the analysis to behaviour, presentation, and spatial practices.

06 · Variable 3 Visibility

Visibility assesses the degree to which a scene is exposed to third-party observation.

It does not measure spectacle, perceived importance, or the researcher’s emotional response. It measures only the extent to which an action remains visible within a field of observation.

07 · Variable 4 Function

Function identifies the dominant social effect produced by the observed configuration.

The matrix deliberately restricts this dimension to four categories:

Lamont and Molnár (2002) are particularly useful for understanding the production of boundaries, while Bourdieu (1984) supports the subsequent interpretation of distinction and symbolic capital.

08 · Matrix Model scenes

The original matrix includes the following model scenes. They are retained here as operational examples of combinations of the four variables.

These rows are illustrative. Final coding of a case must be based on an observed scene and its corresponding field note.

09 · Coding Rules Coding rules

10 · Decision Rule When should a new row begin?

This rule preserves comparability without requiring every minor bodily movement to be treated as a separate scene. The change must be analytically substantive.

11 · Field Note The matrix does not replace field description

The simplification is deliberate. The grid retains only the variables needed to compare scenes.

The Field Note must preserve what would otherwise be lost through coding: context, duration, sequence, material setting, observable actors, exceptions, uncertainty, and possible interpretations.

Precision belongs to the field note, not the grid.

12 · Conceptual Support Supporting theoretical framework

The matrix does not seek to translate a single sociological theory into a scoring system. It draws on different frameworks for the subsequent interpretation of coded configurations.

13 · Analytical Limits What the matrix does not seek to demonstrate

The matrix organises spatial and behavioural evidence. Motivations, identities, intentions, and subjective meanings require additional sources.

14 · Coding Sheet Minimum coding sheet

15 · Workflow From observation to case study

The resulting cases do not replace the matrix. They use it to move from individual observations to broader analytical configurations.

16 · Case Applications Where the instrument is tested

Case pages provide the setting in which the matrix is applied, checked against evidence, and potentially revised in light of fieldwork.

17 · Related Research Connections with the model

← Luxury & Sociology of the Tourist

Visitor Typology →

An instrument tested through cases

The matrix is not regarded as a closed system. Its usefulness depends on its ability to describe real scenes coherently without replacing evidence with theoretical categories.

The cases make it possible to assess whether the four variables remain sufficiently clear, whether scenes can be separated consistently, and whether contextual information can be adequately preserved in field notes.

The instrument is tested through cases, revised when the evidence requires it, and retains its basic comparative logic.

19 · Research Provenance Relationship to fieldwork

The Ritual Spaces Matrix was conceived as an instrument for structuring observations of luxury, tourism, and social differentiation in the fieldwork conducted in Monaco.

It can be applied to photography, video, and direct observation, provided the scene can be located spatially and coding remains separate from subsequent interpretation.

Where visual evidence is included in the Monaco Visual Fieldwork Archive (MVFA), it can provide additional traceability for the coded scene.

20 · Documentation Archive and traceability

MVFA — Broader Visual Fieldwork Collection: Scope and Documentation
MVFA documentation →

Monaco Research Observatory · OSF
Public repository →

DOI
10.17605/OSF.IO/FV293

21 · Bibliographic References References · APA 7

From complex scenes to comparable patterns

The Ritual Spaces Matrix begins with a straightforward methodological decision: not to treat a complex spatial sequence as a single narrative.

Each scene is located, linked to a dominant action, classified according to its visual exposure, and associated with an operationally defined social function.

Theoretical interpretation comes afterwards. This separation makes it possible to study how different spaces in Monaco organise visibility, movement, attention, boundaries, and participation without confusing observation with interpretation.