Types of Observations (Strengths & Weaknesses)

controlled observation

involves observation of behaviours in a situation contrived by researcher usually conducted in a lab type setting eg: milgram can also occur in participants normal setting

naturalistic observation

involves observing participants in their natural environment without interference from researcher often used where it would be unethical manipulate variables

which experiment had 2 observers but had no interrupter reliability?

Piliavan et al had 2 observers but they are not observing the same thing = so NO inter-rater reliability

what is the best observation to increase validity?

a covert observation (so participants don't change their behaviour) double blind observations to reduce observer bias use a clearly operationalised coding system

coding frames

allows for more specific behaviours to be observed within a behaviour category codes/abbreviations can be used to record the severity of behaviours or a different sub-type within a category

time sampling

behaviour, as specified on a predetermined checklist is observed and recorded at specific time intervals (e.g.: every 10 minutes for a period of 15 seconds)

unstructured observation

observation involving recording of a non-specific wide range of behaviours, everything that may be relevant is recorded

structured observation method

observer records specified range of behaviours using predefined coding categories for behaviour

inter-rater reliability

researchers observing the same behaviour and coding the behaviour in the same way - two people must be observing the same thing using the same criteria

if there is low inter-rater reliability ...

the coding of behaviour is either vague or lacks validity the observers are not observing the same event

if there is no manipulation of IV what can't be established?

cause and effect

behavioural categories

clearly defined behaviours are identified which can be observed and recorded - these may be placed on a checklist and tallied every time the behaviour occurs

what is the best observation to increase reliability?

clearly operationalised coding system check inter-rater reliability train researchers to use coding system conduct a pilot study to check behaviour categories

participant observation

collecting data when the researcher is involved with the participants within the social setting

non participant observation

collecting date when the researcher remains separate from the person they are observing, the observer doesn't engage with the participants in a social setting

what must the observers do in order to provide inter-rater reliability?

they must agree on what was observed.

overt observation

participants are aware they're being observed role of observer is known to the participants

covert observation

participants do not know they are being watched the observer may be participant or non-participant

Observation

when a researcher observes and records participants behaviour but does not manipulate any variables

double blind observations

when the observers don't know the hypothesis of the experiment - they are merely recording the behaviours they see without knowing the reason why

event sampling

every occurrence of behaviour, as specified on a predetermined checklist is observed and recorded (tallied) within a specified period of time

weaknesses of event sampling

- can be hard if lots of behaviour occurs at once - can miss events not coded for - gives no indication of time spent on each behavioural category - gives no indication of order in which events occurred

weaknesses of time sampling

- can miss important events: is difficult to record as many different behaviours in time sampling than in event sampling - records are more difficult to obtain as timings have to be precise: if indicated by timer making a noise, can increase risk of demand characteristics

positives of observation as a method

- can see how people behave rather than how they say they behave - allows us to study variables it would be unethical to manipulate (e.g.: behaviour in prisons) - useful as pilot to generate hypothesis for future research

strengths of controlled observation

- data recording likely to be reliable as equipment can be used and researchers can be obvious - higher validity as extraneous variables can be controlled for - greater range of behaviours can be observed compared to experiments

negatives of observation as a method

- difficult to replicate - does not provide us with thoughts or feelings only behaviour - no manipulating variables so can't establish cause effect - observer bias - observer effect - time consuming and requires careful preperation

positives of structured observation

- easier to record: know exactly what you are looking for - easier to establish inter-rater reliability - operational definitions can be developed in pilot study before data collection starts to be certain the researchers are including all the key actions - improving validity

strengths of non participant observation

- easier to remain objective about the situation as they are not involved - no influence on behaviour - participants are not being deceived

negatives of covert observation

- ethical issues (no consent/withdraw) as they are unaware are being observed - if observer is identified or suspected, open to demand characteristics reducing validity - if observer is participant observer may be difficult for them to collect data accurately but not unobtrusively

weaknesses of naturalistic observation

- extraneous variables not likely to be controlled so reduces validity - difficult to ensure reliability of data collection as recording equipment wouldn't be obvious - if observers are identified/suspected by participants reduces validity as social desirable answers/demand characteristics could occur

negatives of unstructured observation

- harder to record, by attempting to record everything, overbear may miss/ignore important aspects - harder to establish reliability - some date collected may be irrelevant or detract from important features - open to observer bias, without operationalised checklist, recording may be inconsistent and subjective

weaknesses of participant observation

- harder to remain objective: being involved in social group can make the observer subjective - can influence behaviour - reducing validity: if they are aware they're being observed - ethical issues (deceit): if role of observer not known to the participants

positives of covert observation

- increases validity - less likely to be aware are being observed so more likely to act in genuine way - less social desirability/demand characteristics

positives of unstructured observation

- increases validity - not having a limited checklist of behaviours means the data is richer and more complete - applicable to a wide range of contexts - detailed descriptions of behaviours means the observer gives more complete picture of situation: more holistic

strengths of event sampling

- less likely to miss predefined events - can record every occurrence of each behaviour to give complete result - increased validity and reliability - records are easy to obtain/analyse as they are just totals

strengths of time sampling

- more representative over time - can give representation of order of events over time - easier, more reliable observations

strengths of participant observation

- only way to observe behaviour (cult/gangs) - can give observer insight into real participants emotions and motives - if participants are unaware of observers role they might reveal more than they otherwise would: date collected has greater accuracy and detail - if participants unaware of observers role they may behave more naturally in the environment: increasing validity

strengths of naturalistic observation

- participants are in their normal environment so more likely to react in realistic way - less likely to be aware are being observed to behave in more genuine way - reactions can be observed within a complete complex social situation - useful for obtaining observations in situations where intervention would be unetical

weaknesses of controlled observation

- participants are in unfamiliar environment so may act differently, reducing validity of results - participants will be aware are in artificial situation, responses may not reflect what they would normally do - social situation is limited so can't completely represent reality of complex social setting

strengths of overt observation

- reduces ethical issues

negatives of structured observation

- reductionist - can reduce validity as simple behaviours could be misinterpreted by observer - open to observer bias - having predeterimd behavioural categories may limit results if new behaviours are apparent during study

weaknesses of overt observation

- social desirability/demand characteristics: behaviours may not reflect what they would normally do because they know they're being watched - decreases validity

weaknesses of non participant observation

- unable to observe certain behaviour - less detail and accuracy - if participants are aware they're being observed is likely to effect behaviours making then less genuine reducing validity - if participants are unaware they're being observed raises ethical issues (consent/withdraw)