Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Observations (Evaluate participant, non-participant, naturalistic, overt…

- - - - Generates detailed, in-depth knowledge of a topic, that cannot be achieved through other research methods
      - Useful in exploring socially sensitive issues because the researcher can take different aspects into consideration (holistic approach)
      - Can avoid researcher bias since the researcher can understand the social process from the perspective of a participant
      - Extra details can be obtained from participants as the researcher establishes friendly, intimate relationship with them during the study
      - Combines emic dimension (subjective participant perspective) with an etic approach (objective researcher perspective)
    - - Data collection and analysis may be time consuming and costly, especially for longitudinal studies
      - Often observation groups are too small for generalisation
      - Highly sensitive and invasive - can influence participant's lives and environments
      - The researcher may lose objectivity since it difficult to maintain involvement (as a participant) and detachment (as a researcher). Reflexivity methods can be used to reflect on potential areas of biases
      - Highly demanding task for the researcher since participation means involvement in an unfamiliar environment with strangers, all while taking notes of whatever happens
  - - - Ethical, unobstructive method - researcher are not interfering participant's normal life
      - Easier to collect and transcribe data since the researcher does not interact with the participants
      - Useful way of observing behaviour of a small group or interaction between individuals
    - - Reactivity - presence of researcher influences data
      - Deception may be needed to avoid reactivity --> ethical concerns
      - Issues with artificiality, difficult to achieve when the observation is recorded, especially in a laboratory setting
      - Analysis can be time consuming and costly
  - - - Natural environment --> high ecological validity
      - Can be combined with controlled laboratory observations and data from other qualitative methods (triangulation to increase credibility)
      - Can be cross checked with other observers to establish credibility
      - Collect data that would be impossible or unethical to do otherwise, eg. research on people with Alzheimer's disease
    - - Ethical issues if naturalistic observation is covert
      - Analysis can be time consuming and costly, especially if the observation is unstructured
  - - - Observer can obtain rich data by become part of the group and by not restricting specific target behaviours to be observed
      - Data less affected by demand characteristics since participants have the opportunity to get comfortable with the researcher
      - Observation is more ethical than covert observations and involves minimal deception
      - Participants can be informed about the topic and give consent
    - - Researcher bias - risk of researcher 'going native' and losing their neutral perspective
      - The researcher's presence can lead to demand characteristics, leading to artificial participant behaviour and bias
      - Inability to make cause-effect conclusion
  - - - Can study a group that cannot be studied otherwise
      - Reduce reactivity - people altering their behaviour due to the awareness that they are being observed
      - Obtain rich data with little bias from participant expectation
    - - Participants are not aware of the research thus cannot give consent, ethical considerations around the level of deception
      - Can be dangerous if participants find out about the study