OBSERVATIONAL RESEARCH
Observational research is based on things seen. It is the classic method of scientific inquiry. It involves not only the ability to perceive events as they occur but also to nose for fine
details that others may take for granted. According to Sctizet et al (1976) citied in Des Wildon,
Esiri and Onwubere (2008), the basic principle of observational research is that it is an attempt to
summarize, systematize and simplify the representation of an event rather than provide an exact representative of it.
Observational research is commonly applied in the behavioural sciences and is also regarded as the gathering of primary data by the researcher’s own direct experience (observation)
of relevant people, actions and situations without necessarily asking from the respondents.
Observation can yield information which people may be unwilling or unable to provide. There are different types of observational research which include structured, unstructured, participant,non-participant and disguised or covert observation.
Observational research (or field research) is a type of correlational (i.e., non-experimental) research in which a researcher observes ongoing behavior. There are a variety of types of observational research, each of which has both strengths and weaknesses. These types are organized below by the extent to which an experimenter intrudes upon or controls the environment.
Observational research is particularly prevalent in the social sciences and in marketing. It is a social research technique that involves the direct observation of phenomena in their natural setting. This differentiates it from experimental research in which a quasi-artificial environment is created to control for spurious factors, and where at least one of the variables is manipulated as part of the experiment. It is typically divided into naturalistic (or “nonparticipant”) observation, and participant observation. Cases studies and archival research are special types of observational research. Naturalistic (or nonparticipant) observation has no intervention by a researcher. It is simply studying behaviors that occur naturally in natural contexts, unlike the artificial environment of a controlled laboratory setting. Importantly, in naturalistic observation, there is no attempt to manipulate variables. It permits measuring what behavior is really like. However, its typical limitations consist in its incapability exploring the actual causes of behaviors, and the impossibility to determine if a given observation is truly representative of what normally occurs.
With the observational method (sometimes referred to as field observation) animal and human behavior is closely observed. There are two main categories of the observational method — naturalistic observation and laboratory observation.
The biggest advantage of the naturalistic method of research is that researchers view participants in their natural environments. This leads to greater ecological validity than laboratory observation, proponents say.
Ecological validity refers to the extent to which research can be used in real-life situations.
Proponents of laboratory observation often suggest that due to more control in the laboratory, the results found when using laboratory observation are more meaningful than those obtained with naturalistic observation.
Laboratory observations are usually less time-consuming and cheaper than naturalistic observations. Of course, both naturalistic and laboratory observation are important in regard to the advancement of scientific knowledge.
TYPES OF OBSERVATIONAL RESEARCH
Observation (watching what people do) would seem to be an obvious method of carrying out research in psychology. However, there are different types of observational methods and distinctions need to be made between:
1. Controlled Observations
2. Natural Observations
3. Participant Observations
In addition to the above categories observations can also be either overt/disclosed (the participants know they are being studied) or covert/undisclosed (the research keeps their real identity a secret from the research subjects, acting as a genuine member of the group).
Covert observational research - The researchers do not identify themselves. Either they mix in with the subjects undetected, or they observe from a distance.
The advantages of this approach are:
(1) It is not necessary to get the subjects’ cooperation, and
(2) The subjects’ behaviour will not be contaminated by the presence of the researcher. Some researchers have ethical misgivings with the deceit involved in this approach.
Overt observational research - The researchers identify themselves as researchers and explain the purpose of their observations. The problem with this approach is subjects may modify their behaviour when they know they are being watched. They portray their “ideal self” rather than their true self. The advantage that the overt approach has over the covert approach is that there is no deception.
In general observations, are relatively cheap to carry out and few resources are needed by the researcher. However, they can often be very time consuming and longitudinal.
Controlled Observation
Controlled observation is a type of observational study where the conditions are contrived by the researcher. This type of observation may be carried out in a laboratory type situation and because variables are manipulated is said to be high in control. The Dement and Kleitman study is an example of controlled observation. The weakness of the method is that it will be low in ecological validity compared to naturalistic observation. If participants are aware they are being studied they behave differently.
Controlled observations (usually a structured observation) are likely to be carried out in a psychology laboratory. The researcher decides where the observation will take place, at what time, with which participants, in what circumstances and uses a standardised procedure. Participants are randomly allocated to each independent variable group.
Rather than writing a detailed description of all behaviour observed, it is often easier to code behaviour according to a previously agreed scale using a behavior schedule (i.e. conducting a structured observation).
The researcher systematically classifies the behaviour they observe into distinct categories. Coding might involve numbers or letters to describe a characteristics, or use of a scale to measure behavior intensity. The categories on the schedule are coded so that the data collected can be easily counted and turned into statistics.
This method was used by Albert Bandura to study aggression in children (the Bobo doll studies). A lot of research has been carried out in sleep laboratories as well.
Controlled observations are usually overt as the researcher explains the research aim to the group, so the participants know they are being observed. Controlled observations are also usually non-participant as the researcher avoids any direct contact with the group, keeping a distance (e.g. observing behind a two-way mirror).
Strengths
1. Controlled observations can be easily replicated by other researchers by using the same observation schedule. This means it is easy to test for reliability .
2. The data obtained from structured observations is easier and quicker to analyze as it is quantitative (i.e. numerical) - making this a less time consuming method compared to naturalistic observations.
3. Controlled observations are fairly quick to conduct which means that many observations can take place within a short amount of time. This means a large
sample can be obtained resulting in the findings being representative and having the ability to be generalized to a large population..
Limitations
1. Controlled observations can lack validity due to the Hawthorne effect/demand characteristics. When participants know they are being watched they may act differently.
Naturalistic Observation
Naturalistic observation is a type of observational study where participants’ spontaneous behaviour is recorded in their own environment. Interference is kept to a minimum and therefore such studies are said to have high ecological validity.
However, because variables are not manipulated they are said to lack control. This lack of control makes replication difficult and there are also risks of observer bias and ethical issues of invasion of privacy.
Naturalistic observation (i.e. unstructured observation) involves studying the spontaneous behaviour of participants in natural surroundings. The researcher simply records what they see in whatever way they can. Compared with controlled/structured methods it is like the difference between studying wild animals in a zoo and studying them in their natural habitat.
With regard to human subjects Margaret Mead used this method to research the way of life of different tribes living on islands in the South Pacific. Kathy Sylva used it to study children at play by observing their behaviour in a playgroup in Oxfordshire.
Strengths
1 By being able to observe the flow of behaviour in its own setting studies have greater ecological validity.
2. Like case studies naturalistic observation is often used to generate new ideas. Because it gives the researcher the opportunity to study the total situation it often suggests avenues of enquiry not thought of before.
Limitations
1. These observations are often conducted on a micro (small) scale and may lack a representative sample (biased in relation to age, gender, social class or ethnicity). This may result in the findings lacking the ability to be generalized to wider society.
2. Natural observations are less reliable as other variables cannot be controlled. This makes it difficult for another researcher to repeat the study in exactly the same way.
3. A further disadvantage is that the researcher needs to be trained to be able to recognise aspects of a situation that are psychologically significant and worth further attention.
4. With observations we do not have
manipulations of variables (or control over extraneous variables) which means cause and effect relationships cannot be established.
Participant Observation
Participant observation is a type of observational study where the observer is also a participant in the activity being observed. This may be with or without the participants’ knowledge. If the researcher is undisclosed the study should be high in ecological validity and very in-depth and detailed information can be gained. The Rosenhan study is an example of participant observation. However, participant observations may be hard to carry out, especially when trying to record behaviour without the participants becoming aware. The researcher’s presence may alter the participants’ behaviour and there are problems of bias as the observer may become very involved with the participants.
Participant observation is a variant of the above (natural observations) but here the researcher joins in and becomes part of the group they are studying to get a deeper insight into their lives. If it were research on animals we would now not only be studying them in their natural habitat but be living alongside them as well!
This approach was used by Leon Festinger in a famous study into a religious cult who believed that the end of the world was about to occur. He joined the cult and studied how they reacted when the prophecy did not come true.
Participant observations can be either cover or overt. Covert is where the study is carried out 'under cover'. The researcher's real identity and purpose are kept concealed from the group being studied. The researcher takes a false identity and role, usually posing as a genuine member of the group. On the other hand, overt is where the researcher reveals his or her true identity and purpose to the group and asks permission to observe.
Limitations
1. It can be difficult to get time / privacy for recording. For example, with covert observations researchers can’t take notes openly as this would blow their cover. This means they have to wait until they are alone and reply on their memory. This is a problem as they may forget details and are unlikely to remember direct quotations.
2. If the researcher becomes too involved they may lose objectivity and become bias. There is always the danger that we will “see” what we expect (or want) to see. This is a problem as they could selectively report information instead of noting everything they observe. Thus reducing the validity of their data.
REFERENCES
Hale, J. (2011). The 3 Basic Types of Descriptive Research Methods. Psych Central . Retrieved on November 2, 2015, from http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2011/09/27/the-3-basic-types-of-descriptive-research-methods/
McLeod, S. A. (2015). Observation Methods. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/observation.html
Observational research is based on things seen. It is the classic method of scientific inquiry. It involves not only the ability to perceive events as they occur but also to nose for fine
details that others may take for granted. According to Sctizet et al (1976) citied in Des Wildon,
Esiri and Onwubere (2008), the basic principle of observational research is that it is an attempt to
summarize, systematize and simplify the representation of an event rather than provide an exact representative of it.
Observational research is commonly applied in the behavioural sciences and is also regarded as the gathering of primary data by the researcher’s own direct experience (observation)
of relevant people, actions and situations without necessarily asking from the respondents.
Observation can yield information which people may be unwilling or unable to provide. There are different types of observational research which include structured, unstructured, participant,non-participant and disguised or covert observation.
Observational research (or field research) is a type of correlational (i.e., non-experimental) research in which a researcher observes ongoing behavior. There are a variety of types of observational research, each of which has both strengths and weaknesses. These types are organized below by the extent to which an experimenter intrudes upon or controls the environment.
Observational research is particularly prevalent in the social sciences and in marketing. It is a social research technique that involves the direct observation of phenomena in their natural setting. This differentiates it from experimental research in which a quasi-artificial environment is created to control for spurious factors, and where at least one of the variables is manipulated as part of the experiment. It is typically divided into naturalistic (or “nonparticipant”) observation, and participant observation. Cases studies and archival research are special types of observational research. Naturalistic (or nonparticipant) observation has no intervention by a researcher. It is simply studying behaviors that occur naturally in natural contexts, unlike the artificial environment of a controlled laboratory setting. Importantly, in naturalistic observation, there is no attempt to manipulate variables. It permits measuring what behavior is really like. However, its typical limitations consist in its incapability exploring the actual causes of behaviors, and the impossibility to determine if a given observation is truly representative of what normally occurs.
With the observational method (sometimes referred to as field observation) animal and human behavior is closely observed. There are two main categories of the observational method — naturalistic observation and laboratory observation.
The biggest advantage of the naturalistic method of research is that researchers view participants in their natural environments. This leads to greater ecological validity than laboratory observation, proponents say.
Ecological validity refers to the extent to which research can be used in real-life situations.
Proponents of laboratory observation often suggest that due to more control in the laboratory, the results found when using laboratory observation are more meaningful than those obtained with naturalistic observation.
Laboratory observations are usually less time-consuming and cheaper than naturalistic observations. Of course, both naturalistic and laboratory observation are important in regard to the advancement of scientific knowledge.
TYPES OF OBSERVATIONAL RESEARCH
Observation (watching what people do) would seem to be an obvious method of carrying out research in psychology. However, there are different types of observational methods and distinctions need to be made between:
1. Controlled Observations
2. Natural Observations
3. Participant Observations
In addition to the above categories observations can also be either overt/disclosed (the participants know they are being studied) or covert/undisclosed (the research keeps their real identity a secret from the research subjects, acting as a genuine member of the group).
Covert observational research - The researchers do not identify themselves. Either they mix in with the subjects undetected, or they observe from a distance.
The advantages of this approach are:
(1) It is not necessary to get the subjects’ cooperation, and
(2) The subjects’ behaviour will not be contaminated by the presence of the researcher. Some researchers have ethical misgivings with the deceit involved in this approach.
Overt observational research - The researchers identify themselves as researchers and explain the purpose of their observations. The problem with this approach is subjects may modify their behaviour when they know they are being watched. They portray their “ideal self” rather than their true self. The advantage that the overt approach has over the covert approach is that there is no deception.
In general observations, are relatively cheap to carry out and few resources are needed by the researcher. However, they can often be very time consuming and longitudinal.
Controlled Observation
Controlled observation is a type of observational study where the conditions are contrived by the researcher. This type of observation may be carried out in a laboratory type situation and because variables are manipulated is said to be high in control. The Dement and Kleitman study is an example of controlled observation. The weakness of the method is that it will be low in ecological validity compared to naturalistic observation. If participants are aware they are being studied they behave differently.
Controlled observations (usually a structured observation) are likely to be carried out in a psychology laboratory. The researcher decides where the observation will take place, at what time, with which participants, in what circumstances and uses a standardised procedure. Participants are randomly allocated to each independent variable group.
Rather than writing a detailed description of all behaviour observed, it is often easier to code behaviour according to a previously agreed scale using a behavior schedule (i.e. conducting a structured observation).
The researcher systematically classifies the behaviour they observe into distinct categories. Coding might involve numbers or letters to describe a characteristics, or use of a scale to measure behavior intensity. The categories on the schedule are coded so that the data collected can be easily counted and turned into statistics.
This method was used by Albert Bandura to study aggression in children (the Bobo doll studies). A lot of research has been carried out in sleep laboratories as well.
Controlled observations are usually overt as the researcher explains the research aim to the group, so the participants know they are being observed. Controlled observations are also usually non-participant as the researcher avoids any direct contact with the group, keeping a distance (e.g. observing behind a two-way mirror).
Strengths
1. Controlled observations can be easily replicated by other researchers by using the same observation schedule. This means it is easy to test for reliability .
2. The data obtained from structured observations is easier and quicker to analyze as it is quantitative (i.e. numerical) - making this a less time consuming method compared to naturalistic observations.
3. Controlled observations are fairly quick to conduct which means that many observations can take place within a short amount of time. This means a large
sample can be obtained resulting in the findings being representative and having the ability to be generalized to a large population..
Limitations
1. Controlled observations can lack validity due to the Hawthorne effect/demand characteristics. When participants know they are being watched they may act differently.
Naturalistic Observation
Naturalistic observation is a type of observational study where participants’ spontaneous behaviour is recorded in their own environment. Interference is kept to a minimum and therefore such studies are said to have high ecological validity.
However, because variables are not manipulated they are said to lack control. This lack of control makes replication difficult and there are also risks of observer bias and ethical issues of invasion of privacy.
Naturalistic observation (i.e. unstructured observation) involves studying the spontaneous behaviour of participants in natural surroundings. The researcher simply records what they see in whatever way they can. Compared with controlled/structured methods it is like the difference between studying wild animals in a zoo and studying them in their natural habitat.
With regard to human subjects Margaret Mead used this method to research the way of life of different tribes living on islands in the South Pacific. Kathy Sylva used it to study children at play by observing their behaviour in a playgroup in Oxfordshire.
Strengths
1 By being able to observe the flow of behaviour in its own setting studies have greater ecological validity.
2. Like case studies naturalistic observation is often used to generate new ideas. Because it gives the researcher the opportunity to study the total situation it often suggests avenues of enquiry not thought of before.
Limitations
1. These observations are often conducted on a micro (small) scale and may lack a representative sample (biased in relation to age, gender, social class or ethnicity). This may result in the findings lacking the ability to be generalized to wider society.
2. Natural observations are less reliable as other variables cannot be controlled. This makes it difficult for another researcher to repeat the study in exactly the same way.
3. A further disadvantage is that the researcher needs to be trained to be able to recognise aspects of a situation that are psychologically significant and worth further attention.
4. With observations we do not have
manipulations of variables (or control over extraneous variables) which means cause and effect relationships cannot be established.
Participant Observation
Participant observation is a type of observational study where the observer is also a participant in the activity being observed. This may be with or without the participants’ knowledge. If the researcher is undisclosed the study should be high in ecological validity and very in-depth and detailed information can be gained. The Rosenhan study is an example of participant observation. However, participant observations may be hard to carry out, especially when trying to record behaviour without the participants becoming aware. The researcher’s presence may alter the participants’ behaviour and there are problems of bias as the observer may become very involved with the participants.
Participant observation is a variant of the above (natural observations) but here the researcher joins in and becomes part of the group they are studying to get a deeper insight into their lives. If it were research on animals we would now not only be studying them in their natural habitat but be living alongside them as well!
This approach was used by Leon Festinger in a famous study into a religious cult who believed that the end of the world was about to occur. He joined the cult and studied how they reacted when the prophecy did not come true.
Participant observations can be either cover or overt. Covert is where the study is carried out 'under cover'. The researcher's real identity and purpose are kept concealed from the group being studied. The researcher takes a false identity and role, usually posing as a genuine member of the group. On the other hand, overt is where the researcher reveals his or her true identity and purpose to the group and asks permission to observe.
Limitations
1. It can be difficult to get time / privacy for recording. For example, with covert observations researchers can’t take notes openly as this would blow their cover. This means they have to wait until they are alone and reply on their memory. This is a problem as they may forget details and are unlikely to remember direct quotations.
2. If the researcher becomes too involved they may lose objectivity and become bias. There is always the danger that we will “see” what we expect (or want) to see. This is a problem as they could selectively report information instead of noting everything they observe. Thus reducing the validity of their data.
REFERENCES
Hale, J. (2011). The 3 Basic Types of Descriptive Research Methods. Psych Central . Retrieved on November 2, 2015, from http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2011/09/27/the-3-basic-types-of-descriptive-research-methods/
McLeod, S. A. (2015). Observation Methods. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/observation.html
No comments:
Post a Comment