observations

naturalistic observations

• takes place in the ps natural environment.

• the researcher does not interfere in any way with what’s happening.

• different to natural experiment- in a natural experiment there is an IV, whereas in an observation there isn’t.

naturalistic observation- strength

provides a realistic picture of behaviour and therefore has high external validity. Although this may be less so if participants are aware of being observed.

naturalistic observation- weakness

• due to the lack of control there may be uncontrolled extraneous variables that may actually influence the behaviour observed.

• naturalistic observations tend to be one-off and makes replication of the investigation challenging- lacks reliability.

controlled observation

• takes place in a controlled environment provided by the researcher, e.g. the strange situation.

• the researcher can at least control some variables, but reduces ‘naturalness’ of the environment and behaviour being studied.

controlled observation- strength

the researcher can focus on particular aspects of behaviour and also being controlled means extraneous variables are less of a problem and replication becomes easier- high reliability.

controlled observation- weakness

making an environment more controlled can impact on the ps behaviour- less natural because of the environment.

overt observation

• in both naturalistic and controlled observations ps are aware of being observed.

• likely to have an effect on the ‘naturalness’ of the ps behaviour, so observers try to be as unobtrusive as possible.

• ps would have given their informed consent beforehand.

overt observation- strength

an ethical advantage to covert observations because ps are aware of what is going on and have given informed consent.

overt observation- weakness

having awareness could mean ps behave differently to normal and behaviour is not as natural (weakens internal validity).

covert observation

• ps are totally unaware they are the focus of a study and their behaviour is observed in secret, e.g. from across the room or from a balcony.

• ps are made aware after the study of what took place.

• can even take place through a 2 way mirror (ps cannot see the observer).

covert observation- strength

good internal validity because the participants are unaware of the observation, the behaviour will be natural, so less likely to suffer from demand characteristics.

covert observation- weakness

ethics are questionable, as people may not wish their behaviour to be studied without their initial consent.

participant observation

occurs if necessary for observer to become part of the group they’re studying to get a first-hand account.

participant observation- strength

allows real insight into ps being studied and this may not be gained in any other way- increases internal validity.

participant observation- weakness

the observer may identify too strongly with those they’re studying and as a result lose their objectivity.

non-participant observation

in most cases the observer is merely watching or listening to the behaviour of others and remains separate from ps in the study.

non-participant observation- strength

observers are more likely to remain objective because they aren’t part of the group being studied.

non-participant observation- weakness

may lose valuable insight into the ps because they are too removed from the people and behaviour- decreased validity.

event sampling

involves counting the times a particular behaviour or event occurs in an individual or target group.

time sampling

observer records behaviour within a particular time frame, e.g. noting what an individual is doing every 30 seconds.

structured vs unstructured design

• structured observations are designed to use behavioural categories that make the recording of behaviour easier. This data is likely to produce quantitative data which means analysing and comparing the behaviour observed is straightforward.

• unstructured observation design will tend to produce qualitative data, which may be harder to analyse. Also a higher risk of ‘observer bias’ in unstructured design as some behavioural categories aren’t used. Researchers may record behaviour that simply ‘catches their eye’ but could miss important behaviours.

behavioural categories

• having categories can make data collection easier- adds structure and is objective

• however categories need to be clear to avoid ‘waste basket’ category- loads of different behaviour is thrown in because it’s unclear where it should be categorised.

sampling

• event sampling is useful when the target behaviour or event happens infrequently and could be missed if time sampling was used however, if the event is too complex, the observer may overlook important details if using event sampling.

• time sampling is effective in reducing the number of observations that have to be made however in instances when behaviour is sampled might be unrepresentative of the observation as a whole.