Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
different types of observations - Coggle Diagram
different types of observations
naturalistic
-observing participants in their natural environment. It’s often used where it would be unethical to manipulate variables.
strengths
Participants are in their
normal environment
so are more likely to show
valid behaviours
Participants less likely to be aware they are being observed -->
genuine behaviour
Useful for
obtaining observations
in situations
where intervention would be unethical,
e.g. investigating behaviours in domestic abuse, you may observe couples outside a night club on a Saturday night
weaknesses
Difficult to ensure reliability of data collection
, however, this can be overcome by recording behaviours via video tape/camera.
If observers are identified
validity is compromised
.
Extraneous variables
can rarely be controlled so
reduces validity
overt
-Participants know that they are being observed. e.g. a reality show
strengths
Reduces ethical issues
as the participants are aware that they are being observed.
If observed for long periods of time,
people tend to forget about observers and behave more naturally,
particularly when being filmed.
weaknesses
Increase of social desirability
as they are aware of being observed, they may
change their behaviour
in a way that they feel is favourable to others, which
decreases validity
Increase chance of
demand characteristics,
as the participant is
aware of the researcher
, they may
change their behaviour
in order to fit in with what they think the researcher wants to see.
unstructured
- Recording everything observed during the observation
strengths
Increases validity
as the researcher is taking into account
all behaviours
that are going on. This ensures that more valid conclusions are made of behaviour, as a
wide perspective is gathered, not a small focused one.
Applicable to a wide range of contexts
. This is a key strength as this method is extremely easy to use when collecting data on many different situations of behaviour.
weaknesses
Harder to record as the researcher
has to pat attention to everything around them, this may cause
behaviours to be missed and reduce validity
.
Harder to establish reliability
because there is
limited focus
, therefore if it were to be replicated, the
focus is likely to be different
in relation to the individual carrying out the observation.
Open to
observer bias
as the
researcher may only note down behaviours that support their own theories
, or behaviours that reflect what they hoped to find.
controlled
-a situation being slightly controlled by the researcher, but with no IV. Usually conducted in a laboratory type setting
strengths
Extraneous variables can be
controlled
therefore
increasing validity.
Compared to experiments,
a much greater range of behaviours can be explored
giving a useful insight into human behaviour
Data recording
is likely to be
reliable
because there is a
specific focus
that allows data to be collected in a consistent manner.
weaknesses
Participants are in an
unfamiliar environment
so may not react naturally -
demand characteristics
Participants will be aware that they are in an
artificial situation so they may not react naturally
Difficult to completely
represent the reality of a complex social setting
so lacks
ecological validity.
covert
-Participants do not know they are being observed
strengths
Increases validity
as participants aren’t aware of being observed, they are
more likely to act naturally
- reduces
demand characteristics
Less demand characteristics
as the participant isn’t aware of the researcher, there would be
less chance of them changing their behaviour
to fit in with the researchers expectations.
weaknesses
It creates
ethical issues
as the participant has not consented to being observed. This makes it
difficult to follow other ethics such as right to withdraw, debrief
etc.
If the participant becomes
aware
of the researchers presence, they
may change their behaviour, thus decreasing validity.
structured
-Using predefined coding categories for behaviour
strengths
Easier to record as there is a specific focus
on certain behaviours. This
increases the validity,
as the researcher is
not distracted
by other behaviours, or behaviours that may be irrelevant to the research aim.
Easier to establish inter-rater reliability.
Due to the
clear, planned focus on behaviour
, the research could be easily used and understood in a
consistent way, also improving replicability.
weaknesses
Can
reduce validity
as there is a clear focus,
important behaviours may be missed
due to it not being part of the planned behaviours.
Open to
observer bias
as the researcher may interpret behaviours in a way that fits into the planned behavioural categories, therefore
reducing validity
as it may not reflect what actually happened.
participant observations
-The researcher is involved with the people they are observing
strengths
Only way to observe some behaviours
i.e. cults/gangs
Greater accuracy and detail as the participant is involved in the behaviour.
This allows the researcher to make more
valid conclusions
about behaviour as they have a greater insight and
perspective
weaknesses
Harder to remain objective
as the researcher may get lost in the moment and
begin to interpret behaviour at a personal level
(building of relationships) which may be more
opinionated rather than what is actually happening.
The
presence of the researcher can influence behaviour
, reducing validity.
non-participant observations
-The researcher remains separate from the person they are observing
strengths
Easier to remain objective
as the participant is away from distractions and can
remain focused – increasing validity.
The researcher has
less influence on behaviour
therefore chances of
researcher effect = reduced
. The participant is less likely to be influenced by the researcher.
weaknesses
If participants are unaware that they are being observed as part of a non-participant observation, it can raise
ethical issues such as consent and the right to withdraw.
Less detail and accuracy
as the researcher is at a
distance
from the participants, therefore, some behaviours maybe interpreted or recorded
inaccurately
–
reducing validity.