The participant observer is a regular participant in activities being observed, and his or her dual role is generally not known to other participants. A non- participant observer, on the other hand, does not participate in group activities and does not pretend to be a member Observation is preferred when one wants to study in detail the behavior that occurs in some particular setting or institution. Observation can provide a picture of overall space by all persons present at a given time rather than the more fragmented and isolated information by provided by a survey respondent. One frequent use of observation is for studying private behavior that individuals might not admit to on surveys, such as homosexual activity in public restrooms. The maturation of the observational method led in the late 1980s and early 1990s to a series of "how to" books and also a substantial degree of specialization.
ADVANTAGES OF OBSERVATION
1. Nonverbal behavior- The observer can make field notes
that record the salient features of the behavior, or may even record behavior
in its totality videotape. Since the observer often lives with the
subjects for an extended period of time, the relationship between them is
often more intimate and much more inform than in a survey in which the
interviewer sees the respondent for only a few minutes and on a very formal
basis. The relationship between observer and subjects this is often
primarily rather than secondary, as in the survey.
2. Natural Environment - A major advantage of observation
is that behavior takes place in its natural environment. Some proponents of
observational technique feel that observation is less reactive than the other
major data-collection techniques. Observation is neither as restrictive not as
artificial as either the survey or the experiment and reduces biases.
3. Longitudinal Analysis - the observer is able to conduct
his or her study over a much longer time period than with either the survey or
experiment without interfering with the respondents lives. there observer is
able to study the subject line enough to observe trends, and to be able to tell
the differences between chance occurrences and accustomed happenings.
DISADVANTAGES OF OBSERVATION
1. Lack of Control - in a natural environment the researcher often has
little control over extraneous variables that may affect the data.
2. Difficulties of Quantification -The observer can make field notes
that record the salient features of the behavior, or may even record
behavior in its totality videotape. Since the observer often lives with
the subjects for an extended period of time, the relationship between them
is often more intimate and much more inform than in a survey in which the
interviewer sees the respondent for only a few minutes and on a very formal
basis. The relationship between observer and subjects this is often
primarily rather than secondary, as in the survey.
3.
Small Sample Size -Observational
studies tend to use a smaller sample rather than survey studies but a larger
sample than experiments. in theory, observational
studies could use a million subjects. However, since
observational studies are generally conducted in depth, with data that are
often subjective and difficult to quantify, the data gathered buy 2 or
more observers may not be readily comparable, and there are no easy checks
on reliability in unstructured observation. in
addition, the in-depth nature of observational studies generally requires
that they be conducted over a much longer period of time than a survey or
experiment each of which is often an hour or so in duration
4. Gaining entry- Many observational studies are field studies
conducted in the natural environment. Such studies might be conducted in a
secret society, a government agency, a factory assembly line, or a county
welfare organization. Many times the observer has difficulty receiving approval
for the study. Some studies can be conducted by clandestine participant
observers without the knowledge of anyone in the organization, including the
top administrator. The observer must not be seen taking notes during the course
of daily activities, as to do so will arouse suspicion. Thus he or she must
either trust his or her memory and write field notes at night, or use some
secret recording device such as a hidden tape recorder.
5. Lack of anonymity/studying sensitive issues. - Although there seem to
be a dearth of studies systematically investigating the reliability of
observation for studying sensitive issues, it seems safe to say that the
interview is less reliable than the survey because it is difficult to maintain
a respondent's anonymity in an observational study. As recently as 30 years ago
questions on topics such as sexual practices, abortion, and contraception were
considered taboo for survey researchers, now they routinely gather data on such
activities.
TYPES OF OBSERVATION
In
contrast to experimentation, which is most likely to be conducted in the
laboratory, most observation (but by no means all) is conducted in a natural
setting.
Thus
there are two types of structure by which we may classify types of observation.
The first is the degree of structure of the environment, which can be
dichotomized as a natural setting or an artificial or laboratory setting the
other is the degree of structure imposed upon the observational environment by
the researcher, which can be dichotomized as structured. such as counting the
frequency with which certain behaviors occur or certain things are said. and
unstructured, in which the researcher does not look for any particular
behaviors but merely observes the records whatever occurs.
While
the distinction between artificial laboratory settings and natural settings may
be clear, the line between structured and unstructured observation may be less
apparent. structured studies generally necessitate the use of some sort of
checklist to record frequencies of behavior. Unlike a less structured study, in
which the observer can attempt to remember what occurs during the day while
posing as a participant observer and then record these general impressions in
privacy at night, structured observation requires counting frequencies.
Observation
may be either covert, with subjects unaware that they are being observed, or
overt, with the observer visible to the subjects and the subjects aware that
they are being observed. The major problem with overt observation is that it
may be reactive. That is, it may make the subjects ill at case and cause them
to act differently than they would if they were not being observed.
Much
the opposite is true in an artificial environment: Since there is no natural
setting, in a sense none of the persons being studied are really participants
of long standing, and thus the may accept a nonparticipant observer more
easily. Also, in a laboratory setting it is much easier for a nonparticipant
observer to remain undetected. For example, it would be difficult for a
nonparticipant observer studying the everyday activities of a street gang in
its natural setting, to remain undetected by the gang. But many artificial
laboratory settings are equipped with one-way mirrors so that a nonparticipant
can observe the subjects from the next room without being detected. Such a
laboratory setting also enables a nonparticipant observer to use sophisticated
equipment such as videotape and tape recordings.
FIELD STUDIES
Those
studies generally labeled as field studies are among the least structured of
the four types of observational study. They take place in a natural setting,
use participant observation (in most cases), and have very little structure
imposed upon the setting by the observer. Instead, the observer attempts to
become a part of the subculture or culture he or she is studying. The term
"field study" is often used almost simultaneously with the term
"ethnographic study" or "ethnography." Ethnography is
defined by Spradley and McCurdy (1972, p. 3) as "The task of describing a
particular culture."
However,
the ethnographic method is also being used increasingly within complex
societies such as America to study subcultural groups.
Since
the purpose of the ethnographic method is simply to describe a particular
culture, the ethnographer generally has few hypotheses and no structured
questionnaire. Rather than proving any specific hypotheses, his or her goal is
a general one: to describe the culture or subculture in as much detail as
possible, including language, customs, values, religious ceremonies, and laws.
In
fact, the researcher's goal in many ethnographic studies is actually to
resocialize himself or herself into the culture that he or she is attempting to
describe.
GAINING ENTRY
Regarding
entering the field, there are several activities that must be addressed. These
include choosing a site, gaining permission, selecting key informants, and
familiarizing oneself with the setting or culture . In this process, one must
choose a site that will facilitate easy access to the data. The objective is to
collect data that will help answer the research questions.
To
assist in gaining permission from the community to conduct the study, the
researcher may bring letters of introduction or other information that will
ease entry, such as information about one's affiliation, funding sources, and
planned length of time in the field. One may need to meet with the community
leaders. For example, when one wishes to conduct research in a school,
permission must be granted by the school principal and, possibly, by the
district school superintendent. For research conducted in indigenous
communities, it may be necessary to gain permission from the tribal leader or
council.
The
researcher also should become familiar with the setting and social organization
of the culture. This may involve mapping out the setting or developing social
networks to help the researcher understand the situation. These activities also
are useful for enabling the researcher to know what to observe and from whom to
gather information.
GAINING RAPPORT
Rapport
is built over time and it involves establishing a trusting relationship with
the community, so that the cultural members feel secure in sharing sensitive
information with the researcher to the extent that they feel assured that the
information gathered and reported will be presented accurately and dependably.
Rapport-building involves active listening, showing respect and empathy, being
truthful, and showing a commitment to the well-being of the community or
individual. Rapport is also related to the issue of reciprocity, the giving
back of something in return for their sharing their lives with the researcher.
The cultural members are sharing information with the researcher, making him/her
welcome in the community, inviting him/her to participate in and report on
their activities. The researcher has the responsibility for giving something
back, whether it is monetary remuneration, gifts or material goods, physical
labor, time, or research results. Confidentiality is also a part of the
reciprocal trust established with the community under study. They must be
assured that they can share personal information without their identity being
exposed to others.
OBSERVING AND RECORDING
Two
elements required :
1
what seems important to those naturally in the field .
2
what seems important to the researcher himself or herself .
The
person being studied should be seen not as an isolated entity , but as a person
in active relations and exchanges with others .
An
unknown observer may be unable to take any notes at all, and msg have to rely
on hind or her memory . In such a situation the observer msg find mnemonics or
memory cues which are helpful .
For
the full field noted there are 5 suggestions for field work
1
Record the notes as quickly as possible after observation .
2
Discipline yourself to write notes quickly and reconcile yourself to the fact
that although it may seem ironic .
3
Dictating rather than writings
4
Typing field notes is vastly preferable to handwriting because it is faster and
easier .
5
Make at-least two copies of field notes .
Survey research involves a
secondary relationship between interviewer and interviewee because it
lasts only for a short period of time. It is secondary because there is always
a purpose behind the relation and it is something which is opposite to a
friendship relationship. Participant observation on the other side takes place
for a longer period of time and generally involves primary relationship between
the observer and the persons being observed. This relationship not only
involves emotions such as love and hate on the part of the persons being
observed, but also the emotions of the observer. One of the main advantages of
the observational method is that the observer’s emotional involvement can lead
him or her to understand the true feelings of the person observed, and allow
him or her to analyze and explain their behaviour.
However, it is important
that the observer keeps in mind his own emotions and how bias he is being in
the research process. Thus, the observer
should keep a record of his or her feelings and emotions at all times.
1. One reason why observer
must record his own feeling is that as a participant in the events, the
observer is not only a researcher but also his own research subject. Thus, his
own feelings and behaviour constitute data in their own right.
2. Another reason is to
enable the researcher to analyze his own emotions and reaction for possible
sources of any kind of biasness.
The fifth component of the
field notes consists notes on things that remain to be done, such as things to
look for, or may be other persons to be observed. Lofland pointed out
that the procedures after writing field notes often becomes a habit for them.
Many experienced researchers often become compulsive about writing down each
and every information. Lofland advice a neophyte observer (which means someone
who is new to a subject like a beginner) not to expect the field work to be
interesting or exciting all the time because field notes tend to be boring and
difficult to generalize from the data analysis (field notes). He also cautions
that sometimes the informant ends up revealing the most intimate and unbiased
statements to the researcher by considering him as a friend. So, one should be
aware of that as well.
DEALING
WITH CRISES: confrontation between the observer and those being observed are not
very unusual. Wax proposes three strategies for dealing or avoiding such
confrontations.
1. First, the observer must
appear humble and powerless so that the people who are being observed do not
perceive him as a threat.
2. Second technique is the
opposite of the first strategy. It is to appear so powerful and prestigious so
that the authorities and others are afraid to challenge the observer.
3. Third strategy is the fear
to enter the research setting and then align oneself with the most powerful
group operating within this setting.
DATA
ANALYSIS:
Vast majority of field researchers analyze their data by constructing sets of
nominal categories rather than by assigning numbers. Nominal measurement
consists of constructing mutually exclusive and exhaustive categories. These
categories are described by labels, names or descriptive terms rather than by
numbers. For example, colour can be nominally classified as black, white, red,
blue etc., gender can be divided into male and female. Such nominal categories
are generally applied to the person being studied in order to describe
meaningful social types. In many cases these labels or categories are
constructed by the persons being studies through which they used to describe
themselves. Also, the observer can invent his own terms to classify people in a
manner that is meaningful to him. He can also classify them by means of
standard sociological concepts.
The sets of categories
which are based on more than one dimension or variable are called “taxonomies”
or “typologies”. The chief job of data analysis in field studies
consists of summarizing the field notes by means of taxonomies or flowcharts.
When taxonomies are constructed by the persons who are being observed, the
observer’s job or duty becomes somewhat more difficult because then the
researcher must invent names for the various categories. This involves the task
of deciding what to include and what not to include.
Example of taxonomies include: listing out things which
are on sale in a jewelry store like rings, costume jewelry, watches which are
further divided into hippie junk and modern stuff.
COMPLETELY STRUCTURED OBSERVATION
The study stated earlier in this chapter is completely
unstructured as it has no pre constructed hypotheses and no structured
measurement instrument. It takes place in a natural setting and does not
quantify data. such a study is observational study. The polar opposite of it is
the completely structured study. completely structured studies take place in a
laboratory rather than in the natural environment. It is like the survey as it
attempts to test hypotheses which requires a standardized instrument. The
instrument is a checklist of items to be observed rather than a questionnaire.
However, in order for the different groups being observed at
different times to be comparable in terms of observational categories, it is
necessary that these groups be as identical as possible. This is done by
standardizing the laboratory so that laboratory conditions are identical at all
times. Also, the nature of the phenomenon being studied is assumed to be
unaffected by the artificial environment or by the various characteristics on
which persons being observed may differ such as age, sex, or skin colour. That
is, all uncontrolled variables are assumed to have no effect on the behaviour
being studied.
The most famous example of a completely structured study is Bales'
method for studying group interaction. On the basis of a large number of
preliminary observational studies, Bales assumed that groups involved in
decision making or problem solving would have common elements in their
interaction that are constant enough to be predictable. Bales not only knew
from experience what common elements to look for in terms of standard
categories to be made, but could also write hypotheses predicting certain behaviours
to occur, and have then tried to set up conditions in the laboratory in the
form of a certain type of task of personnel etc., which will produce actual
results like average.
All observational subjects involved in Bales' study are asked to imagine
themselves as staff members who have been requested by their boss to examine a
human relations case and advise him or her as to why the people in the case are
behaving the way they are. A summary of the case was given to each person to
read. The subjects are then placed in a special room to decide what they should
tell the fictitious Boss. The observers watched this from an adjacent room
through a one way mirror. After all interactions are recorded, percentages can
be computed as with closed ended survey questions.
Structured observation with an instrument such as the Bales
category checklist, is structurally very similar to survey research with closed
ended questions. Both use highly structured instruments that focus the data
gathered and prevent the accumulation of superfluous or unimportant data. It
also forces the data into an unnatural mould, that is, a choice of words in the
answers by respondents that he or she would not normally use, or think to
explain and rethink for answering.
They are also similar in that problems of coding data are
minimised thus quantification of data is facilitated. Completely unstructured
studies such as field studies and surveys using open ended questions are alike,
in that they are both less likely to force the data into artificial or natural
categories. However, they run the risk of promulgating so much data that
summarising them or presenting them for analysis becomes very difficult. Also
it is generally qualitative, may be subjective and may not be consistent enough
to facilitate quantification.
Studies such as Bales avoid most of the problems arising in field
studies simply by virtually eliminating communication or interaction of any
sort between observer and subjects.
The observer in such a
study has no problems of achieving confrontation since he or she is behind a
one way mirror and totally unperceived by the subjects. But still, it has the
concerns of the entry, involving finding persons willing to participate in such
a study. Thus, we can say that the problems are roughly the same as for survey
studies as in there, the observer must convince the potential subjects that he
or she is legitimate and his or her research is worthwhile to be a part of,
which can be done by having an affiliation with the university or other
Research Organisation, by possessing proper identification such as the formal
letter of identification and by preparing a statement of the purpose of the
study, while trying not to inform subjects of the exact goals of the study so
to not incite bias. After credibility, he or she can either use captive
audience subjects such as students, induce persons to cooperate by convincing
them of the scientific value of the study or pay them a nominal wage for
participating.
SEMISTRUCTURED STUDY
It has the advantages of both the structured (laboratory setting,
quantifiable) and unstructured (natural setting and qualitative) but also the
disadvantages of both. Adherents of completely structured observational method
argue that semistructured method can encounter problems of reactivity. That is,
the presence of the observer will bias the data since there is little
opportunity in a natural setting for the observer to be hidden from the
subjects, in contrast to the one way mirror used in the laboratory. Further,
with structured observation requiring on the spot recording and coding, it is
difficult for the observer to maintain secrecy if the researcher wishes to
operate in disguise. In addition the natural setting makes control of
extraneous variables more difficult and damages comparability from one study to
the next, since it is unlikely that any two natural settings will be exactly
the same. These disadvantages can be overcome partially. The reactivity
problems can be dealt with by selecting children as observational subjects. Another
way to decrease the disadvantages of the semistrucutred method is to use a
setting that while natural and definitely not an artificial laboratory, nevertheless
provides the observer with some ability to control extraneous variables and
some assurance that all persons being observed are subjected to approximately
the same environmental influences or stimuli, at least during the time they are
observed. Observe children in a classroom setting to improve the semistructured
method.
UNSTRUCTURED LABORATORY STUDY
One of the advantages of an observational study in which no structural set
of categories is used is that it allows the persons being observed to structure
the situation and allows the observer to learn to view the world through his or
her host. Such unstructured observation is useful in a natural setting, but generally
requires a relatively long period. If people are placed on a laboratory then
they would not be carrying on their day to day activities that would give a
clue to their culture.
INDIRECT OBSERVATION
In a direct observation the researcher is able to directly observe the
subjects. However, in certain cases where the person to be observed is dead, or
is a famous person who will not allow access to their privacy, indirect method
of observation is employed. Indirect observation consists of observing physical
traces or clues of past behaviour that cannot be observed directly. (eg. Police
investigation of a crime). Indirect observation as discussed consists of
observing physical traces or clues of past behaviour that cannot be observed
directly. Such indirect observation is familiar to all of us in the form of
police investigations of criminal activity in which the perpetrators obviously
work to avoid direct observation.
EROSION MEASURES
Erosion
measures the first two natural remnants of some individual or groups activity
that has selectively worn down certain objects.
For
example- it includes studying the wear of the floor around museum exhibits to
see which one is more popular, it also includes the study of wear on library
books to see which are most popular.
ACCRETION MEASURE
Accretion
Measure all measures of phenomena through indirect observation of the
accumulation of materials, covert observation. Observation in which the observers
presence of purpose is kept secret from those being observed.
For
example- the analysis of liquor bottles in trash cans in order to estimate
whisky consumption or liquor sales in a town in which no sales records are
available because there are no liquor stores.
VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY
Reliability
and Validity are concepts used to evaluate the quality of research. They
indicate how well a method, technique or test measures something. Reliability
is about the consistency of a measure, and validity is about accuracy of a
measure. If a researcher is interested in gathering data on human actions, as
opposed to beliefs, values, or opinions, direct observation of the act by the
researcher would seem to have superior face validity over data collections by
questionnaire and document study. Both of the latter methods provide only
secondary data processed through an intermediary who actually witnessed the
event and is relating it to the researcher. Events can change much in the
telling and retelling, particularly if the occurrence is illegal or sensitive,
or if the event occurred long ago and the respondent's memory has faded. Thus,
observation of an occurrence has greater face validity than a secondhand
account gathered either through interviewing or document study.
VALIDITY AND DIRECT OBSERVATION
1.
Lack of Anonymity- Anonymity
describes situations where the person's identity is unknown, non-identifiable,
unreachable. Mailed questionnaire are more valid than observation, since a
person assured of anonymity may admit to behavior that he or she would not
allow anyone to observe.
2.
Social Reality as Construct- Social
reality is partially a mental construct as well as a set of concrete phenomena.
What is observed is partially a picture of what is actually there and partially
a picture of the observer's expectations, which are based on past observations.
Thus, to a certain extent, each observer is not entirely impartial but is
biased towards seeing what he or she expects to see.
3.
Lack of structure in the Observational
Instrument- At the genesis of research an observer without any structured
Observational categories will see a little of everything but not much of
anything.
4.
Adequacy of Human Sense Organs:
Although the observer will generally prefer to see with his or her eyes rather
than recieve someone else's secondhand account, he or she must realize the
fallibility of his or her own sense organs.
MEASURED VALIDITY
Observation
seems to be the superior method for studying nonverbal behaviour. It also seems
a valid method, although it is impossible to generalize equality for all the
various types of observational method discussed.
(Table
as example)
VALIDITY OF INDIRECT OBSERVATIONAL METHODS
Validity
of indirect observation methods are erosion and accretion measures.
Two
major non biasing characters of indirect method stems from their non
reactivity, first, there is no observer present to bias the persons being
observed. second, there is no artificial observational structure to bias the
data.
The
differential survivor we'll ability of different materials can also cause bias
in erosion measures. For example, stairs to one business are worn more than the
stairs to another may not mean that the one with worn stairs has more business
but only that its stairs were made from soft wood or that the building is older
and has been exposed to wear for a longer period of time.
Accretion
measures are also generally non reactive but they have their potential buyers
as well. The differential survival ability of various materials is the problem
here also. For example an urban anthropologist taken upon such things as
consumption habit of reading materials by examining the contents of garbage
cans placed by the curb can get a good idea of the types and number of
magazines and newspaper read by examining those thrown away. However the same
research studies any ghost town she will find contents which are 50 years old.
So chicken still study the consumption habits but she will be filed in studying
reading habit with the failure of paper products to withstand the elements.
The
response advice noted following method may also be present in accretion
measures. For instance analysis of garbage of two neighbours. If A has comic
books and B has New York review of books one could conclude that B had
sophisticated than A. What does cal also mean that both the neighbours has the
free subscription to the comics respectively.
RELIABILITY
Factors
that can affect the accuracy of observational data are: first, the inability of
observer to ensure anonymity for persons being observed. second, the subjective
nature of social reality. third the fallibility of the sense organs.
In
the case of validity the extent to which the degree of reliability has been or
can be assessed depends on the type of observational method used. Field
research is generally an individual effort, thus there is a little way to make
the comparisons necessary to assess reliability.
The
assessment of reliability is much easier in study that uses a structured
observation format under in natural or laboratory setting. Assessment of
observable reliability is generally emphasized specially when a substantial
number of observers are utilised in a single study. What test reliability can
also be assessed.
Example:
study that assess both observer and test reliability by Sears.
The
conclusion made by this study were chat reliability increases over time and is
great for categories with more recorded instances. This is evidence that
experienced observers are more reliable than inexperienced ones
No comments:
Post a Comment