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.