2. Introduction to Obervation

Observational Assessment

• Definition: Systematic study of phenomena.

• Key Components:

  • Where

  • What + Who

  • How

  • When

• Methods for Specific Observation:

  • Specific: Use numbers/units.

  • Detailed: Provide visuals (shape, colors, location).

  • Factual: Avoid subjective opinions; universally agreed upon.

Exercise for Students

• Task:

  • Observe one person for 10 minutes.

  • Document findings specifically, detailed, and factually.

  • Use "Where, What + Who, How, When" framework.

Challenges in Observational Assessment

• Current state of psychology:

  • Studies often in artificial environments (clinics, labs).

  • Researchers manipulate conditions (data producers) rather than interpreting natural interactions.

  • Questions on "natural" human behavior; technology influences.

Definitions

• Observation: Latin for "to watch, to attend to."

• Systematic Description: Systematic description of events, behaviors, and artifacts in a social setting (Marshall & Rossman, 1989).

• Observing: Specialized skill addressing potential deceits, impression management, and researcher marginality (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995).

Fundamental Fallacies in Observation

1. Researchers often lack social science observer training.

2. Researchers may be unprepared for observations at specific moments.

Training for Effective Observation

• Essential skills:

  • Focus on relevant details.

  • Practice descriptive writing.

  • Develop discipline for accurate field notes.

  • Distinguish crucial from trivial details.

  • Employ rigorous validation and triangulation.

  • Acknowledge and communicate personal biases and self-knowledge.

Dimensions of Observational Focus

Verbal Behavior

• Methods Developed by:

  • Bales (1950): Analyzed group interactions (positive/negative contributions, "task" and "socio-emotional" specialists).

  • Albert & Kessler (1978): Analyzed telephone greeting rituals (four-part structure).

Non-Verbal Behavior

• Studied Aspects by:

  • Argyle (1978): Identified non-verbal cues (speaking style, tone, body language, expressions).

  • Vrugt (1990): Observed Dutch Queen’s televised presentations (speech disturbances indicating policy discrepancies).

  • Argyle (1987): Postural mimicry (rapport); eye contact (conversational dynamics).

Total Behavior

• Minuchin (1974): Focused on family dynamics (up/down, near/far, in/out relationships).

• Carry (1978): Studied pedestrian social rules (eye contact and attention).

Unobtrusive Measures

• Defined as evidence left by individuals:

  • Webb et al. (1981): Investigated carpet wear, nose prints (art popularity), refuse contents (alcohol consumption).

Procedural Observations

• Two main methodologies:

  • Event Sampling: Focus on critical incidents.

  • Time Sampling: Collecting data across intervals.

Conducting the Observation

Observers' Roles:

• Solo vs Team: Solo researchers control fully; teams collaborate.

• Participatory and Collaborative: Researchers may engage participants as ‘co-researchers’ (if they help decide the questions, collect data from peers, and discuss the results, in this case they are participants). if just feedback, etc. then collaborators.

Timing of Observation

• Important considerations:

  • Immediate recording (prevents memory distortion).

  • Retrospective recording (limitations: condensation, forgetfulness).

Locations for Observation

Categories of Settings:

• Natural Setting/Field Observation: Example: Barker et al. (1978) ecological psychology studies.

• Contrived/Simulated Setting: Examples: In-basket tests, situational tests.

• Standardized Conditions: Example: Ainsworth et al. (1978) "The Strange Situation Test" (child-parent separation).

example:

• An in-basket observation: (sometimes called in-tray exercise) is a simulation method where a person is given a set of tasks, memos, emails, or documents — basically the kind of things they’d find in their “in-basket” at work.

  • The individual must prioritize, make decisions, delegate, and respond to those tasks within a limited time.

  • While they work, trained assessors observe and later evaluate how the person handles the situation.

    • The purpose:

      • Decision-making

      • Time management

      • Prioritization

      • Problem-solving

      • Leadership and delegation

      • Written communication

• Standardized = same across all people/situations.

• Systematic = done in an orderly, methodical way.

Methods of Observation

Types of Observers:

1. Participant: Engages intimately for insider perspectives.

2. Onlooker/Non-participant: Remains detached, observes from a distance.

3. Both Roles: Observers can transition.

Disclosure Level:

1. Overt Observation: Full disclosure of research intent.

2. Covert Observation: No disclosure to prevent behavior alteration.

Use of Technology in Observations:

• Audio-visual tools and digital transmitters.

• Ethical considerations (consent) are crucial.

Variations in Observation Strategies

1. Structure: Highly structured vs. diffuse, unstructured.

2. Focus: Narrow-specific vs. broad.

3. Knowledge of participants: Overt vs. covert.

4. Explanations: Full disclosure vs. no explanation.

5. Time scale: Single vs. extended.

6. Methods: Basic note-taking vs. advanced devices.

7. Feedback: Comprehensive sharing vs. no interaction.

Advantages of Observational Assessment

1. Provides concrete evidence and behavior context.

2. Effective for studying unaware or inaccessible behaviors.

3. Illuminates processes and causality.

4. Accounts for event chronologies.

5. Evaluates situations unreproducible in labs.

6. Integrates with multiple methods for reliable documentation.

Disadvantages of Observational Assessment

1. Applicable only to certain questions/contexts.

2. Reactivity issues: Behavior changes if observed.

3. Provides potentially subjective outsider perspectives.

4. Time-consuming and labor-intensive.

5. Behaviors may be inconsistent across situations/times.

Observational Bias Concepts

1. Halo Effect: Evaluator's overall impression influences specific ratings.

2. Hawthorne Effect: Subject's performance changes due to being observed.

3. Cognitive Load Bias: Attention/memory limitations

Relationship Between Observation and Interviews

• Nature: Observation focuses on present behaviors; interviews on past/future.

• Complementarity: Each supplements the other; observation reveals behaviors omitted in interviews.

• Observer Influence: Impressions and feelings contribute depth.

• Limitation: Interviews alone can yield incomplete data.

Techniques in Counseling

• Noticing subtle cues is essential.

• Misinterpretation of non-verbal cues leads to ineffective counseling.

• Lack of sensitivity misses client needs.

Observation in Psychological Testing

• Observational insights supplement test data, improving accuracy.

• Cautions regarding subjective experiences during assessment.

• Psychological testing guides focused diagnoses.

Requirements for Psychological Testing with Observation

• Following criteria (Henry and Spiro, 1953):

  1. Holistic personality measurement.

  2. Culturally unbiased test materials.

  3. Capability for large, quick subject sampling.

  4. Analysis independent of prior knowledge/biases.

Individual Assignment

• Tasks:

  1. Summarize journal contents.

  2. Explain observation objectives.

  3. Define observation phases.

  4. Identify challenges in observational practices.

  5. Explore alternative data collection techniques.

References

• Banister, et al. (2005). Qualitative Methods in Psychology: A Research Guide. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

• Barker, et al. (1994). Research Methods in Clinical and Counseling Psychology. England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

• Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods, 3rd Ed. California: Sage Publications.

• Sundberg, N.D. (1977). Assessment of Persons. USA: Prentice Hall.

• Mensh, I. N. & Henry, J. (1953). Direct observation and psychological testing in anthropological fieldwork. American Anthropologist, 55 (4), 461-480.