Chapter 6 Flashcards
ALL SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH REQUIRES
CAREFUL OBSERVATION
Research based on observational methods can be broadly classified as primarily
quantitative or qualitative
Qualitative research
focuses on people behaving in natural settings and describing their world in their own words.
quantitative research
tends to focus on specific behaviors that can be easily quantified (e.g., counted).
Qualitative researchers
generally emphasize collecting in-depth information on a relatively few individuals or within a very limited setting
quantitative investigations
generally include larger samples
The conclusions of qualitative research
are based on interpretations drawn by the investigator
conclusions in quantitative research
are based upon statistical analysis of data
Both quantitative and qualitative approaches are
valuable and provide us with different ways of understanding behavior
Naturalistic observation
is sometimes called field work or simply field observation. It is a descriptive method in which observations are made in a natural social setting.
naturalistic observation has roots in
anthropology and the study of animal behavior and is currently widely used in the social sciences to study many phenomena in all types of social and organizational settings.
The goal of naturalistic observation is to provide
a complete and accurate picture of what occurred in the setting, rather than to test hypotheses formed prior to the study. To achieve this goal, the researcher must
keep detailed field notes—that is, write or dictate on a regular basis (at least once each day) everything that
has happened. Field researchers rely on a variety of techniques to gather information, depending on the
particular setting.
In addition to taking detailed field notes, researchers conducting naturalistic observation usually use
audio or video recordings
The naturalistic observation researcher’s first goal is to describe the
the setting, events, and persons observed. The second, equally important goal is to analyze what was observed. The researcher must interpret what occurred, essentially generating hypotheses that help explain the data and make them understandable
The final report, although sensitive to the
chronological order of events, is usually organized around the structure developed by
the researcher. Specific examples of events that occurred during observation are used to support the researcher’s interpretations.
A good naturalistic observation report will support the analysis by using
multiple confirmations. For example, similar events may occur several times, similar information may be reported by two or more people, and several different events may occur that all support the same conclusion.
The data in naturalistic observation studies are primarily
qualitative in nature; that is, they are the
descriptions of the observations themselves rather than quantitative statistical summaries. Such qualitative
descriptions are often richer and closer to the phenomenon being studied than are statistical representations. However, it is often useful to also gather quantitative data. Depending on the setting, data might be gathered on income, family size, education levels, age, or sex of individuals in the setting. Such data can be reported and interpreted along with qualitative data gathered from interviews and direct observations.
Two related issues facing the researcher are whether to be a
participant or nonparticipant in the social setting
and whether to conceal his or her purposes from the other people in the setting.
participant observation
A technique of observing a situation wherein the observer takes an active, insider role in the situation.
A potential problem with participant observation
is that the observer may lose the objectivity necessary to conduct scientific observation. Remaining objective may be especially difficult when the researcher already
belongs to the group being studied or is a dissatisfied former member of the group. Remember that
naturalistic observation requires accurate description and objective interpretation with no prior hypotheses. If a researcher has some prior reason to either criticize people in the setting or give a glowing report of a
particular group, the observations will likely be biased and the conclusions will lack objectivity.
Should the researcher remain concealed or be open about the research purposes?
Concealed observation may be preferable because the presence of the observer may influence and alter the behavior of those being observed. Imagine how a nonconcealed observer might alter the behavior of high school students in many situations at a school. Thus, concealed observation is less reactive than nonconcealed observation because people are not aware that their behaviors are being observed and recorded. Still, nonconcealed observation may be preferable from an ethical viewpoint: Consider the invasion of privacy when researchers hid under
beds in dormitory rooms to discover what college students talk about. Also, people often quickly become used to the observer and behave naturally in the observer’s presence. The decision of whether to conceal one’s purpose or presence depends on both ethical concerns and the nature of the particular group and setting being studied.
observation in public places when anonymity is not threatened is considered
exempt research. In these cases, informed consent may not be necessary. Moreover, in nonconcealed observation, informed consent may be given verbally or in written form. Nevertheless, researchers must be sensitive to ethical issues when conducting naturalistic observation. Of particular interest is whether the observations are made in a public place with no clear expectations that behaviors are private.
Naturalistic observation obviously cannot be used to study
all issues or phenomena. The approach is most
useful when investigating complex social settings both to understand the settings and to develop theories
based on the observations. It is less useful for studying well-defined hypotheses under precisely specified
conditions or phenomena that are not directly observable by a researcher in a natural setting
Field research is also very difficult to do. Unlike a typical laboratory experiment, field research data
collection cannot always be scheduled at a convenient time and place. In fact, field research can be extremely
time-consuming, often placing the researcher in an unfamiliar setting for extended periods. In the Graham et al. (2006) investigation of aggression in bars, observers spent over 1,300 nights in 118 different bars (74 male– female pairs of observers were required to accomplish this feat).
in more carefully controlled settings such as laboratory research, the procedures are well defined and
the same for each participant, and the data analysis is planned in advance. In naturalistic observation research, however, there is an
ever-changing pattern of events, some important and some unimportant; the researcher must record them all and remain flexible in order to adjust to them as research progresses. Finally, the process of analysis that follows the completion of the research is not simple (imagine the task of sorting through the field notes of every incident of aggression that occurred on over 1,300 nights). The researcher must repeatedly
sort through the data to develop hypotheses to explain the data and then make sure all data are consistent with the hypotheses.
Although naturalistic observation research is a difficult and challenging scientific procedure, it yields
invaluable knowledge when done well.
Systematic observation
Observations of one or more specific variables, usually made in a precisely defined setting. This research approach is much less global than naturalistic observation research. The researcher is interested in only a few very specific behaviors, the observations are quantifiable, and the researcher frequently has developed prior hypotheses about the behaviors. We will focus on systematic observation in naturalistic settings; these techniques may also be applied in laboratory settings.
coding system
A set of rules used to categorize observations
several methodological issues in systematic observation.
The first concerns equipment. You can directly observe behavior and code it at the same
time; for example, you could use paper-and-pencil measures to directly observe and record the behavior of children in a classroom or couples interacting on campus. However, it is becoming more common to use video and audio recording equipment to make such observations because they provide a permanent record of the behavior observed that can be coded later.
An interesting method for audio recording is called the Electronically Activated Recorder
which was used to compare sociability behaviors of Americans and Mexicans. The EAR is a small audio recorder that a subject wears throughout the day.
It is set to turn on periodically to record sounds in the subject’s environment. The study examined frequency
of sociable behaviors. Previous research had found the Americans score higher than Mexicans on self-report measures of sociability, contradicting stereotypes that Mexicans are generally more sociable. Coders applied the Social Environment of Sound Inventory to code the sounds as alone, talking with others in a public environment, or on the phone. When sociability was measured this way, the Mexican subjects were in fact more sociable than the Americans.
several methodological issues in systematic observation 2
A second issue is reactivity—the possibility that the presence of the observer will affect people’s behaviors. Reactivity can be reduced by concealed observation. Using small cameras and microphones can make the observation unobtrusive, even in situations in which the participant has been informed of the recording. Also, reactivity can be reduced by allowing time for people to become accustomed to the observer and equipment.
reactivity
A problem of measurement in which the measure changes the behavior being observed.
several methodological issues in systematic observation 3
When conducting systematic observation, two or more raters are usually used to code behavior. Reliability is indicated by a high agreement among the raters. Very high levels of agreement (generally 80% agreement or higher) are reported in virtually all published research using systematic observation. For some large-scale research programs in which many observers will be employed over a period of years, observers are first trained using videotapes, and their observations during training are checked for agreement with results from previous observers.
several methodological issues in systematic observation 4
For many research questions, samples of behavior taken over an extended period provide more accurate and useful data than single, short observations.
case study
A descriptive account of the behavior, past history, and other relevant factors concerning a specific individual. This individual is usually a person, but it may also be a setting such as a business, school, or neighborhood. Case studies are valuable in informing us of conditions that are rare or unusual and thus providing unique
data about some psychological phenomenon, such as memory, language, or social exchange. Insights gained
through a case study may also lead to the development of hypotheses that can be tested using other methods.
A naturalistic observation study is sometimes called a case study, and in fact the naturalistic observation and case study approaches sometimes overlap. But
case studies do not necessarily involve naturalistic observation. Instead, the case study may be a description of a patient by a clinical psychologist or a historical account of an event such as a model school that failed
psychobiography
A type of case study in which the life of an individual is analyzed using psychological theory.
case studies may use such techniques as library research and telephone interviews with persons familiar with the case but
no direct observation at all
our ability to engage in social exchange relationships is grounded in
the development of a biological mechanism that differs from general cognitive abilities.
Archival research
The use of existing sources of information for research. Sources include statistical records, survey archives, and written records.
In an archival research project, the researcher does not actually collect the original data. Instead, he or she
analyzes existing data such as statistics that are part of publicly accessible records (e.g., the number of texting-related traffic accidents; the number of children born in a given state or county), reports of anthropologists, the content of letters to the editor, or information contained in databases (e.g., tweets, Facebook or Instagram posts, or census data), or original data made available from prior research studies (see the “Open Science” box).
three types of archival research data
statistical records, survey archives, and written records.
Statistical records are collected by many
public and private organizations. The U.S. Census Bureau maintains the most extensive set of statistical records available, but state and local agencies also maintain such records.
There are also numerous less-obvious sources of statistical records, including
public health statistics, test score records kept by testing organizations such as the Educational Testing Service, and even sports organizations. Major League Baseball is known for the extensive records that are kept on virtually every aspect of every game and every player.
Survey archives
consist of data from surveys that are stored digitally and available to researchers who wish to analyze them. Major polling organizations make many of their surveys available. Also, many universities are part of the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research which makes survey archive data available. One very useful data set is the General Social Survey, a series of surveys funded by the National Science Foundation.
Survey archives are extremely important because
most researchers do not have the financial resources
to conduct surveys of randomly selected national samples; the archives allow them to access such samples to test their ideas.
Written records are documents such as
diaries and letters that have been preserved by historical societies, ethnographies of other cultures written by anthropologists, and public documents as diverse as speeches by politicians or discussion board messages left by Internet users.
Mass communication records include
books, tweets, Instragram or Facebook posts, magazine articles, movies, television programs, newspapers, and blog posts.
content analysis
Systematic analysis of records.
Like systematic observation, content
analysis requires researchers to devise
coding systems that raters can use to quantify the information in the documents. Sometimes the coding is quite simple and straightforward. More often the
researcher must define categories in order to code the information.
There are at least two major problems with the use of archival data
First, the desired records may be difficult to obtain: they might have been placed in long-forgotten storage places, or they may have been destroyed. Second, we can never be completely sure of the accuracy of information collected by someone else.
Researchers conducted an in-depth study with certain 9/11 victims to understand the psychological impact of the attack on the World Trade Center in 2001.
case study
Researchers recorded the time it took drivers in parking lots to back out of a parking stall. They also
measured the age and gender of the drivers, and
whether another car was waiting for the space.
systematic observation
Contents of Craigslist personal ads in three major cities
were coded to examine individual differences in
self-descriptions.
archival research
The researcher spent over a year meeting with and
interviewing Aileen Wuornos, the infamous female serial killer who was the subject of the film Monster, to
construct a psychobiography.
case study
Researchers examined unemployment rates and the
incidence of domestic violence police calls in six cities.
archival research
A group of researchers studied recycling behavior at three local parks over a 6-month period. They concealed their presence and kept detailed field notes.
naturalistic observation
