METHODS - observation

Question 1

observational techniques

Answer 1

a way of seeing/listening to what people do without asking them. often used as a way of assessing DV

pos - can capture unexpected behaviour, act differently to how they say they will in self-report methods, insight into spontaneous behaviour

neg - risk of observer bias, interpretation of situation may be affected by expectations, can be reduced by using one or more observers

Question 2

naturalistic

Answer 2

takes place where the target behaviour would normally occur

Question 3

strength of naturalistic

Answer 3

high external validity - natural context so behaviour more likely to be spontaneous, more generalisable

Question 4

weakness of naturalistic

Answer 4

low control - may be uncontrolled EVs, more difficult to detect patterns

Question 5

controlled

Answer 5

some control/manipulation of variables including control of EVs

Question 6

strength of controlled

Answer 6

can be replicated - standardised procedures, findings can be checked to see if they occur again

Question 7

weakness of controlled

Answer 7

low external validity - behaviour may be contrived as a result of the setting, findings cannot be applied to everyday experience

Question 8

covert

Answer 8

ppts unaware they are being studied

Question 9

strength of covert

Answer 9

demand characteristics reduced - ppts do not know they are being watched so behaviour will be more natural, increases validity

Question 10

weakness of covert

Answer 10

ethically questionable - people may not want behaviour recorded, even in public, right to privacy might be affected

Question 11

overt

Answer 11

participants are aware of being studied

Question 12

strength of overt

Answer 12

more ethically acceptable - ppts have given consent to be studied, have the right to withdraw if they wish

Question 13

weakness of covert

Answer 13

demand characteristics - knowledge of being studied influences behaviour, redcues vailidy

Question 14

participant

Answer 14

the researcher becomes part of the group they are studying

Question 15

strength of participant

Answer 15

greater insight - experiences same situation as ppts do, enhances validity

Question 16

weakness of participant

Answer 16

loss of objectivity - researcher may identify too strongly with those they are studying, threatens objectivity and validity of findings

Question 17

non-participant

Answer 17

researcher remains separate from the group they are studying

Question 18

strength of non-participant

Answer 18

more objective - mainatins objective distance so less likely to be biased, increase validity

Question 19

weakness of non-participant

Answer 19

loss of insight - researcher may be too far romoved from those they are studying, reduce validity

Question 20

behavioural categories (oberservational design)

Answer 20

target behaviour to be observed should be broken up into a set of observable categories

Question 21

weaknesses of behavioural categories

Answer 21

hard to make clear and unambiguous - should be self-evident and not overlap, ‘smiling’ and ‘grinning’ would be poor categories
dustbin categories - all forms of behaviour should be in the list and not one ‘dustbin’, ‘dumped’ behaviours go unrecorded

Question 22

time sampling

Answer 22

observations are made at regular intervals

Question 23

strength of time sampling

Answer 23

reduces no. of observations - rather than recorded everything seen data is recorded at certain intervals, more structured and systematic

Question 24

weakness of time sampling

Answer 24

unrepresentative - may miss important details outside of the time frame, may not reflect whole behaviour

Question 25

event sampling

Answer 25

a target behaviour/event is recorded every time it occurs

Question 26

strength of event sampling

Answer 26

may record infrequent behaviour - still pick up behhaviours that don’t occur at reguar intervals, such behaviours could easily be missed using time sampling

Question 27

weakness of event sampling

Answer 27

complex behaviour oversimplified - if event is too complex important details may go unrecorded, may affect validity of findings