Final answer:
Counts' study on Kandoka village isn't detailed in the references, but methods from other ethnographic examples suggest a combination of ethnographic fieldwork, socio-economic analysis, and collaborative approaches may have been used.
Step-by-step explanation:
Counts' study on Kandoka village is not detailed in the provided references. However, the methodologies used by various anthropologists and researchers in studying different communities can give insights into the possible approaches Counts may have employed. For instance, Gatschet's research among the tribes of the Grand Ronde Reservation involved collecting field notes on languages and cultural practices, already indicating a blend of linguistic and cultural anthropology. Similarly, Linkie et al.'s study surrounding Kerinci Seblat National Park used propensity score matching to measure the effects of development schemes on deforestation rates, demonstrating a socio-economic analysis combined with environmental data. Additionally, Zenk's collaboration with the Grand Ronde tribe for language preservation, and Lassiter's involvement with the Kiowa communities illustrate the application of participatory and collaborative methodologies within anthropology.
Considering these examples, Counts may have applied a combination of ethnographic fieldwork, socio-economic analysis, and participatory research to study the cultural, linguistic, environmental, and social aspects of Kandoka village life. This could encompass a variety of techniques, including interviews, observation, language analysis, and collaboration with community members.