Evaluate participant, non-participant, naturalistic, overt and covert observations. “I’d rather see a sermon that to hear one any day” -Edgar Guest (Live your creed poem) What people say they believe and say that they do are often contradicted by their behavior. A large body of scientific literature documenting this disparity exists, and we can all likely summon examples from our own lives. Given the frequency of this very human inconsistency, observation can be a powerful check against what people report about themselves during interviews and focus groups. When to Use 1. Too much error in accounts/recounts. Need to study topic in natural setting. 2. Too much bias with researcher presence in doing interviews: 3. RQ has to do with behavior or a setting. How people act in public places or the informal rules of interaction. Examples are classroom settings and meetings. When to Use 4. You need to experience the phenomenon in order to understand it (examples traumatic stress symptoms in at-risk students) 5. Data not available via interviews: people not available. Participant Non-participant Overt Covert Naturalistic Participant observation refers to a form of research methodology in which the researcher takes on a role in the social situation under observation. The social researcher immerses his/herself in the social setting under study, getting to know members of a sub group in that location in a role which is either covert or overt, although in practice, the researcher will often move between these two roles. Participant observation is a qualitative method with roots in traditional ethnographic research, whose objective is to help researchers learn the perspectives held by study populations. Qualitative researchers presume that there will be multiple perspectives within any given community. Researchers are interested in knowing what those diverse perspectives are and in understanding the interplay among them. Participant observation always takes place in community settings, in locations believed to have some relevance to the research questions. The method is distinctive because the researcher approaches participants in their own environment rather than having the participants come to the researcher. Generally speaking, the researcher engaged in participant observation tries to learn what life is like for an “insider” while remaining, inevitably, an “outsider.” While in these community settings, researchers make careful, objective notes about what they see, recording all accounts and observations as field notes in a field notebook. Informal conversation and interaction with members of the study population are also important components of the method and should be recorded in the field notes, in as much detail as possible. Information and messages communicated through mass media such as radio or television may also be pertinent and thus desirable to document. Data obtained through participant observation serve as a check against participants’ subjective reporting of what they believe and do. Participant observation is also useful for gaining an understanding of the physical, social, cultural, and economic contexts in which study participants live; the relationships among and between people, contexts, ideas, norms, and events; and people’s behaviors and activities – what they do, how frequently, and with whom. Allows for insight into contexts, relationships, behavior. How so? Explain. Another strength is the richness of the description. . How so? The main disadvantage of participant observation is that it is time-consuming. In traditional cases, researchers spend at least one year in the field site collecting data through participant observation and other methods. This is not practical for most applied research studies, which necessarily require a shorter period of data collection. By entering the group, the observer by definition changes it to some extent. What are examples of this? Some researchers hold that participant observational research is always unethical. Why is this? Another disadvantage of participant observation is the difficulty of documenting the data – it is hard to write down everything that is important while you are in the act of participating and observing. As the researcher, you must therefore rely on your memory and on your own personal discipline to write down and expand your observations as soon and as completely as possible. It is easy to tell yourself that you will do this task later, but, because memory fades quickly, postponing the expansion of notes can lead to loss or inaccurate recording of data. The quality of the data therefore depends on the diligence of the researcher, rather than on technology such as tape recorders (although some researcher used video recorders to assist in their observations). A research technique whereby the researcher watches or records the subjects of his or her study, with their knowledge, but without taking an active role in the situation under scrutiny. This approach is sometimes criticized on the grounds that the very fact of their being observed may lead people to behave differently, thus invalidating the data obtained, i.e. the Hawthorne effect. An example would be someone sitting in Mr. Freeman’s classroom observing lectures or watching interactions between health care professionals and patients in a clinic.(overt nonparticipation observation) Observation through one way mirrors may also fall into this category. The observer would not join in on the activities of the group, they would watch from a far. (covert non-participation observation) Researchers who study how people communicate often want to examine the details of how people talk and behave together. Non-participant observation involving the use of recording devices might be a good choice for this type of study. This data collection approach results in a detailed recording of the communication and provides the researcher with access to the contours of talk (e.g. intonation) as well as body behavior (e.g. facial expression, eye gaze). Even a great observer cannot record these aspects in detail. The Non-Participating observer concentrates fully on his or her role and as a researching observer, taking little or no part in the interactions/situations to be investigated. More precise records can be made by NonParticipatory Observations, as the observer can concentrate fully on his/her the interpretation of what he or she sees. (strength) Non-Participatory Observation is also accorded a high degree of objectivity since the observation is effectively external and disinterested. However, this very situation also contains the risk that the observer will remain distant from the natural environment of the people being investigated, thus transferring his/her own explanatory models over to the group or situation under observation. (limitation) . Participant and nonparticipant observations share several benefits and problems, both being useful fact-finding methods when in depth data is sought. This is especially true when the investigator wants to describe a cycle of events. Observers are able to focus on the dynamics of a particular group without personally influencing the group (from a participant perspectivealthough the presence of the researcher can still influence the group to some extent). The researcher establishes his/her role as observer, thus ethical considerations are made. Observers are only usually able to view the behavior from an etic standpoint. Explain to the reader. Observers are able to focus on the dynamics of a particular group without personally influencing the group (from a participant perspectivealthough the presence of the researcher can still influence the group to some extent). There are two main types of observation; covert and overt: In the case of Covert Observation, the people being observed do not know that they are observed. The observation is undertaken discreetly so that the behavior of the person being observed is not disrupted or altered. The person’s behavior is intended to continue as naturally as possible. Covert observation- Participant observation carried out without the explicit awareness and agreement of the social group being studied. This entails finding some self-explanatory role within the research setting in order to mask the researcher's true purpose. It may be used because research access to the social unit group would normally be denied, or to ensure that the researcher's presence does not affect the behavior of those being observed. Either they mix in with the subjects undetected (participant), or they observe from a distance(non-participant). The strengths of this approach are: (1) It does not rely on people’s willingness or ability to provide information. (2) The subjects’ behavior will not be contaminated by the presence of the researcher. The limitations of this approach are: (1) It is deemed unethical by many review boards because of the lack of informed consent. (2) Susceptible to researcher bias. Interpretation of observed behavior is subjective to the perspective of the researcher. (3) Does not increase your understanding of why people behave as they do. An overt observation in when a participant knows that they are being observed and the purpose behind the observation. This method of observation means that participants can be followed to different locations as fully informed consent can be given with no need for deception. (strengths) However as the participant knows that they are being followed, it is likely that there will be a high chance of demand characteristics as they will wish to please the observer.(limitations) According to Jerquer (2010) The strengths of this approach are: (1) It is ethically sound (unlike covert observation) (2) Gains in depth emic knowledge from sub groups. (unlike questionnaires) (3) Can increase your understanding of why people behave as they do. The limitations of this approach are: (1) Overt observations can be time consuming. Researchers must spend numerous hours observing and interpreting behavior. (2) Can cause the Hawthorne effect (because they know they're being observed) (3) Can be difficult to maintain confidentiality with some observed information. (4) Some more sensitive subjects ACTIVITY OVERT DISCLOSURE COVERT PARTICIPANT NONPARTICIPANT Waiting with other Standing aside commuters, from commuters, taking notes taking notes obviously obviously Waiting with other Hiding from commuters, commuters, taking notes taking notes secretly secretly Define purpose of research Decide on what kind of notes to be made Make necessary arrangements for observation Familiarize yourself with setting and people Decide on observational method (e.g. participant observation, more than one observer, post observational interviews) Possible researcher bias Possible Hawthorne effect Ecological validity Informed consent (only possible for overt observations) Observation might stress participants Use of deception (if covert participant observation) Debriefing (sometimes difficult) Invasion of privacy issue Qualitative: Use of inductive content analysis Quantitative: Use of coding schemes, frequencies and ratings Discuss considerations involved in setting up and carrying out an observation Much in depth qualitative research is observational in part. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and limitations and of a study's generalizability. Bailey (1987) developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. This is what we will use to answer this objective There are various considerations available to an observation researcher in undertaking research. Many of these considerations pertain to the way the researcher is to observe the phenomena of interest and are contingent upon various factors, including the purpose of the research, the setting in which the research will take place, the resources available and the nature of the study. All observation research exercises tend to follow a common pattern of activities. This process has a number of distinct stages. The following is a ninestep approach in conducting an observational study. Step 1- Determine Observation Research Objectives. What the researcher wants to observe and the purpose of the observation is listed in the form of research objectives. The researcher must formulate what is to be achieved by conducting the observation research. In broad terms, the main objective of the study should be to understand and describe the phenomena of interest as completely as possible, although each observer may have more specific sub-objectives. Step 2-Selection of Research Subjects. The people to be observed must be decided. The research subjects selected must be done so as to achieve the research objectives. Why is this important? Step 3- Decide Field Role. Prior to entering the field, the observation researcher must decide which field role he/she is going to adopt. The options available are: overt participant, covert participant, observer-as-participant or overt non-participant, covert non-participant. The field role selected will be contingent upon the purpose of the research, time allocated for the research, organizational access and ethical approval. Step 4-Gain Entry to the Research Field. Observation researchers recognize the fundamental need to go where participants spend time. Most research fields (unless it is a public place) cannot be observed by anyone, at any time. Entry must be gained to the research field. In organizations, there are individuals who, by virtue of their office, have the authority to act as gatekeepers. They can grant or withhold formal permission to enter and participate in the life of the organization. Step 4-Gain Entry to the Research Field. Hence, researchers must negotiate permission for entry through such gatekeepers. The researcher must determine a strategy whereby, he/she will be granted entry to the field to be studied. Dealing with such gatekeepers is therefore an extremely important part of gaining entry to the research field, but at the same time several hurdles stand in the way Step 5- Build Rapport with the Subjects being Studied. Achieving rapport is an important prerequisite in participant observation research. Building rapport entails the development of reciprocal relationships and mutual trust between observer and subjects. Why is it important to build a rapport with participants? Step 5- Build Rapport with the Subjects being Studied. It is only when research subjects treat the observer as a friend and confidant, rather than a researcher that they will reveal their innermost feelings and make their most intimate and unbiased statements. It can be the most difficult and time-consuming task in observation research, but is impetrative if valid data is to be obtained. Step 6 - Observing and Recording. The researcher begins observing the phenomena of interest and recording findings. Methods of recording (diary, post-observational notes, recorders, etc.) must be determined in this step. More specifically, field notes recorded should have five components "a running description of events, previously forgotten happenings that are now recalled, analytical ideas and inferences, personal impressions and feelings, and notes for further information" (Source: pg 250.) Step 7 - Exit from the Observational Study. Once sufficient information is gathered, the researcher must exit from the field. In instances where the researchers role is overt, the subjects must be thanked for their participation and contribution. If on the other hand, the researchers role has been concealed throughout the observation process, the researcher must exit the field without drawing attention to oneself. Step 8 - Data Analysis. The chief task of data analysis in observation research consists of summarizing the field notes by means of taxonomies. Once the data has been summarized, it must be interpreted in the context of which the phenomena took place, to draw meaningful conclusions about behavior. In analyzing the data, the researcher must develop a framework of theory that will help him/her understand and explain to others, what is going on in the research setting under study. Step 8 - Data Analysis. There are no initial checklists for data analysis, simply observation of events, situations and behaviors, which are then written up and gradually, as more data accumulates, tentative guiding hypothesis, categorization, conceptual frameworks and some theoretical underpinning conjoin to give body, focus and direction to the data collected. Step 9 - Presentation of Findings. Once conclusions have been arrived at through analysis, the researcher must compile a report presenting the findings. This is done in a similar manner as interviews. The Skill Balancing Act Observation skills do not get sharpened up in real life the way most other skills do. Researchers need to train themselves to see, learn, and think when watching people. This takes tremendous amounts of practice and discipline. In order, to meet the challenges posed by observation research a researcher embarking on an observation research project must develop the following skill profile. How could training as an observer change a covert/overt observation? A participant/non-participant observation? Conflict Management. Observation researchers face the probability of encountering conflicts with research subjects, if their status as a researcher is revealed during a covert observation research project. Such conflicts if not handled appropriately, can be detrimental to the research project as it can de-motivate subjects and prevent them from extending their cooperation. When such conflicts arise, researchers must be equipped with appropriate conflict management skills to cope. Conflict Management. Observation researchers face the probability of encountering conflicts with research subjects, if their status as a researcher is revealed during a covert observation research project. Such conflicts if not handled appropriately, can be detrimental to the research project as it can de-motivate subjects and prevent them from extending their cooperation. When such conflicts arise, researchers must be equipped with appropriate conflict management skills to cope. Listening Skills. Since some observational research does not entail questioning and speaking to respondents, researchers can collect information only through watching and listening. Listening to the conversations of research subjects in their natural setting can yield useful information, which sometimes cannot be gathered through formal probing and questioning. Hence, active listening skills must be developed to listen to research subjects and absorb what they are saying. This entails developing the ability to stay focused. Critical Thinking. Researchers must develop the ability to be objective and refrain from taking information at face value. Developing critical thinking skills is imperative in conducting observation research to eliminate value judgments and assumptions about behavior. What issues can rise from misinterpreting what you observe? Skills must be developed to evaluate situations, which occur in the observation field from different perspectives, eliminating the probability of misperception. Discuss how researchers analyze data obtained in observational research The process of analysis and interpretation involve disciplined examination, creative insight, and careful attention to the purposes of the research study. Analysis and interpretation are conceptually separate processes. The analysis process begins with assembling the raw materials and getting an overview or total picture of the entire process. The researcher's role in analysis covers a continuum with assembly of raw data on one extreme and interpretative comments on the other. Analysis is the process of bringing order to the data, organizing what is there into patterns, categories, and basic descriptive units. The analysis process involves consideration of words, tone, context, non-verbals, internal consistency, frequency, extensiveness, intensity, specificity of responses and big ideas. Content analysis strategies are essential in the analysis (Krueger, 1994). Interpretation involves attaching meaning and significance to the analysis, explaining descriptive patterns, and looking for relationships and linkages among descriptive dimensions. Once these processes have been completed the researcher must report his or her interpretations and conclusions Reports based on observed data will include a great deal of pure description of the program and/or the experiences of people in the research environment. The purpose of this description is to let the reader know what happened in the environment under observation, what it was like from the participants' point of view to be in the setting, and what particular events or activities in the setting were like. The actual content and format of the observation report will depend on the information needs of primary stakeholders and the purpose of the research. Even a comprehensive report will have to omit a great deal of the data collected by the researcher. Why would it be necessary to omit observed data from your report? Focus is essential. Analysts who try to include everything risk losing their readers in the sheer volume of the presentation. This process has been referred to as "the agony of omitting". The agony of omitting on the part of the researcher is matched only by the readers' agony in having to read those things that were not omitted, but should have been. In considering what to omit, a decision has to be made about how much description to include. Detailed description and in-depth quotations are the essential qualities of observational accounts. Sufficient description and direct quotations should be included to allow readers to understand fully the research setting and the thoughts of the people represented in the narrative. Description should stop short, however, of becoming trivial and mundane. The reader does not have to know absolutely everything that was done or said. Again the problem of focus arises. Description is balanced by analysis and interpretation. Endless description becomes its own muddle. The purpose of analysis is to organize the description in a way that makes it manageable. Description is balanced by analysis and leads into interpretation. An interesting and readable final account provides sufficient description to allow the reader to understand the analysis and sufficient analysis to allow the reader to understand the interpretations and explanations presented. Analysis is usually based on researcher’s field notes, but these are often compared to data from other sources (interview transcripts, narratives, pictures). Why is this important? One way to analyze the data from observations is grounded theory analysis. It is a methodology that has been used to generate theory in areas where there is little already known (Goulding, 1998). Its usefulness is also recognized where there is an apparent lack of integrated theory in the literature (Goulding, 2002). Grounded theory “adapts well to capturing the complexities of the context in which the action unfolds…” (Locke, 2001:95) and emphasizes process. In so doing it assist the researcher in retaining the link between culture, language, social context and construct (Gales, 2003). Therefore, grounded theory generates theory that is of direct interest and relevance for practitioners in that it analyses a substantive topic and aims at discovering a basic social process (BSP) which has the potential to resolve some of the main concerns of a particular group (Jones, 2002). The core of grounded theory analysis is based on three related processes: Description Coding and connecting themes Produce an account Description Description includes; the context of the action, the intentions of the participant, and the process in which the action is embedded. A detailed description provides rich data. Be able to provide examples supporting the importance of description. Coding and Connecting Themes This is the process of organizing notes into categories. The purpose is to provide tools for analysis Without categorization, it isn't possible to know what is analyzed and no way to compare the data. The coding is usually done through inductive content analysis. Coding and Connection Themes This is the process of organizing notes into categories. The purpose is to provide tools for analysis Without categorization, it isn't possible to know what is analyzed and no way to compare the data. The coding is usually done through inductive content analysis. The Classification Process Consists of reading, and rereading the field notes in an interactive way. The researches must be able to identify bits of data and create categories , by asking questions like; who? What? When? Where? Why? This approach can open different routes to examine the data and make it easier to see how the categories and subcategories may be related by themes. The researcher should write a summary of the analysis so that independent readers can follow how and why the connections are reached The notes about notes are called memos. When the data have been classified into themes, the researcher can look for higher-order themes (main themes) and subthemes. Interpretation of the data is based on comparison of the collected data, and sometimes the researcher will include evidence from other sources (interview data, or information on the social context). How can interpretation of observation be done using other sources/methods? It's important to think critically and not only look for data that support the interpretation. Explain how this can create bias? Producing an Account The end product is a written account based on all the elements of the analysis. The researcher produces a coherent explanation and an overall theoretical framework for understanding the phenomenon under investigation. The theoretical framework is “grounded” based on the categories identified during the observation. However, it may also be that researchers use theoretical triangulation - including alternative theories to explain the phenomenon. The researcher continuously consults the data to see if they support the interpretation. He or she may also consult the participants, to ask them whether they can support the interpretation. May also ask other researchers to take a critical look at the account and the data to see whether they can support them. The important thing is that the researcher makes it possible for the reader to track and verify how the conclusion is reached. Evaluate the use of case studies in research. Case study research excels at bringing us to an understanding of a complex issue or object and can extend experience or add strength to what is already known through previous research. Case studies emphasize detailed contextual analysis of a limited number of events or conditions and their relationships. Researchers have used the case study research method for many years across a variety of disciplines. Social scientists, in particular, have made wide use of this qualitative research method to examine contemporary real-life situations and provide the basis for the application of ideas and extension of methods. Researcher Robert K. Yin defines the case study research method as an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of evidence are used (Yin, 2009, p. 23). Types of case study: Intrinsic – those cases of interest purely for their own sake, where there is no need to generalize beyond the case research or to attempt to build theory based on the conclusion (Stake, 1994) Instrumental (extrinsic) – carried out in order to describe, explain or build theory around a phenomenon that occurs with some frequency – findings are expected to have relevance to other cases. Critics of the case study method believe that the study of a small number of cases can offer no grounds for establishing reliability or generality of findings. Others feel that the intense exposure to study of the case biases the findings. Some dismiss case study research as useful only as an exploratory tool. Yet researchers continue to use the case study research method with success in carefully planned and crafted studies of real-life situations, issues, and problems. Reports on case studies from many disciplines are widely available in the literature. Anchored in real-life situations, the case study results in a rich and holistic account of a phenomenon. It offers insights and illuminates meanings that expand its readers' experiences. These insights can be construed as tentative hypotheses that help structure future research; hence, case study plays an important role in advancing a field's knowledge base. Because of its strengths, case study is a particularly appealing design for applied fields of study such as education, social work, administration, health, and so on. Anchored in real-life situations, the case study results in a rich and holistic account of a phenomenon. It offers insights and illuminates meanings that expand its readers' experiences. These insights can be construed as tentative hypotheses that help structure future research; hence, case study plays an important role in advancing a field's knowledge base. Because of its strengths, case study is a particularly appealing design for applied fields of study such as education, social work, administration, health, and so on. Perhaps because a case study focuses on a single unit, a single instance, the issue of generalizability looms larger here than with other types of qualitative research. However, much can be learned from a particular case. Readers can learn vicariously from an encounter with the case through the researcher's narrative description. (Stake, 2005). The colorful description in a case study can create an image: "a vivid portrait of excellent teaching, for example--can become a prototype that can be used in the education of teachers or for the appraisal of teaching" (Eisner, 1991, p. 199). Further, Erickson (1986) argues that since the general lies in the particular, what we learn in a particular case can be transferred to similar situations. The special features of case study research that provide the rationale for its selection also present certain limitations in it usage. Although rich, thick description and analysis of a phenomenon may be desired, a researcher may not have the time or money to devote to such an undertaking. And assuming time is available to produce a worthy case study, the product may be too lengthy, too detailed, or too involved for busy policy makers and practitioners to read and use. Qualitative case studies are limited, too, by the sensitivity and integrity of the investigator. The researcher is the primary instrument of data collection and analysis. This has its advantages. But training in observation and interviewing, though necessary, is not readily available to aspiring case study researchers. Nor are there guidelines in constructing the final report. The investigator is left to rely on his or her own instincts and abilities throughout most of this research effort. Explain how a case study could be used to investigate a problem in an organization or group One of the best ways to understand groups, in general, is to understand one group, in depth. The case-study approach has a long and respected tradition in all the sciences, with some of the greatest advances in thinking coming from case studies rather than from experiments or survey studies. The field of group dynamics, in particular, is checkered with case studies that have transformed the field: the case analyses conducted at the Hawthorne Plant of the Western Electric Company By examining a group during its actual activities, you gain understanding of such groups in general. Provide examples to support this statement. Detailed case studies on groups, in some cases, are higher in external validity, and they can also be the vessel for more advanced theoretical analysis. Indeed, extending David B. Miller's comments about naturalistic observation to case studies of groups (1977, American Psychologist, Vol. 32, pp. 211-220), we find that case studies are useful because: they allow us to study groups, for their own sake they serve as a "starting point for investigating certain behavioral phenomena and subsequently serve as a point of departure from which to develop a program of laboratory research" (Miller, p. 213); they can serve to validate findings obtained in quantitative data (such as questionnaires and closed-ended interviews); they provide us with a larger context for understanding groups as they form, develop, and disband in their natural settings; Case studies can deal with either single or multiple cases. There are two types of single case study that are helpful for investigating problems within a group: the intrinsic and the instrumental The intrinsic case study is done to learn about a unique phenomenon which the study focuses on. Specifically, intrinsic case studies can look at unique problems within a group. Examples should be used The researcher needs to be able to define the uniqueness of this phenomenon which distinguishes it from all others; possibly based on a collection of features or the sequence of events. Usually intrinsic cases are too specific to generalize. As with the case of feral children with studying language or attachment theories. Because of the rarity in which feral children cases occur, one cannot make a good generalization about general human behavior. One can however, make a specific generalization to feral children from a carefully designed case. The instrumental case study is done to provide a general understanding of a phenomenon/problem using a particular case. The case chosen can be a typical case although an unusual case may help illustrate matters overlooked in a typical case because they are subtler there. Thus a good instrumental case does not depend on the researcher being able to defend its typicality though the researcher needs to provide a rationale for using a particular case.. Well developed instrumental case studies use multiple cases, so there is more data triangulation. Data triangulation is when a piece of data, a finding, or a generalization is able to be verified with several different research methods. This helps add to your credibility and makes your findings stronger. For example, you are studying binge drinking on campus. You find national averages that indicate that 45% of college students binge drink nationwide. You conduct your own research at the Florida State campus. You find that 47% of the individuals you surveyed drink; you also interview a counselor on campus who reports that approximately 1/3 of the students who he sees suffer from a drinking problem. Thus, your results from an interview with an expert and your own survey support the national averages. Instrumental case studies, because of its triangulated approach, can be generalized to some extent. This is because, like research experiments, generalizations should not be made from a single case. Even if the case is well designed. Yin (2009) believed that theoretical generalizations-not population generalizationscan be made from multiple case studies; but very rarely from a single case. Explain how a case study could be used to investigate a problem in an organization or group