Types of Observation

In order of collecting data and studying participants, they often carry it out by using observation as a method.

Naturalistic Observation:

This type of observational study is where participants’ unconstrained behaviours is recorded in their own environment.  Interference is kept to a base and in this way such studies are said to have high ecological legitimacy.

In any case, as variables are not operated and tend to lack control, this absence of control makes replication hard to execute. There are additional dangers of observer biasness and ethical matters of intrusion of privacy.

STRENGTHS:

• By having the capacity to observe the stream of behaviour in its own particular setting considers having more ecological validity.
• Naturalistic observation is regularly used to create new thoughts. Since it gives the analyst the chance to study the situations overview and frequently proposes roads of enquiry not that was considered before.

LIMITATIONS:

• Frequently directed on a smaller scale and tend to lack a representative (one-sided in connection to age, gender, social class or ethnicity). This may bring about the discoveries without the capacity to be summed up to more extensive society.
• At times they tend to be less reliable as variables can't be controlled. This makes it tricky for another analyst to rehash the study in the very same way.
• A further drawback is that the analyst should be properly trained in order have the capacity to perceive parts of a situation, that are psychologically noteworthy and require further attention.
• Naturalistic observation don't have manipulations of variables (or control over ‘extraneous variables’) which can potentially cause and effect the relationships that can’t be established.

Controlled Observation:

This kind of observational study is controlled by the researcher, from the conditions to how they might act. Controlled observation may be completed under laboratory type circumstance and variables are manipulated majority of the time. The Dement and Kleitman study is a case of controlled observation. The shortcoming of the strategy is that it will be low in environmental legitimacy contrasted with naturalistic observation. This is because when the participants get the feeling that they are being filmed they tend to act differently; but this what everyone would do.   

STRENGTHS:

• It’s pretty quick to conduct meaning that numerous observations can happen inside a short measure of time. This implies a vast example can be achieved resulting in the discoveries being illustrative and being able to be summed up to a huge population.
• In order to get information from structured observations is easier and speedier to examine as it is quantitative (i.e. numerical) – making it less time consuming.
• It can be effortlessly repeated by various researchers by utilizing a similar observation plan. This implies that anything but difficulty to test for reliability.

LIMITATIONS:

• In some cases it can lack legitimacy/validity because of the Hawthorne effect/request characteristics. At the point when participants know they are being watched they may act in an unexpected way.

  
  

Participant Observation:

This observation is a kind of observational study where the researcher or in this case, ‘observer’ is also one of the participants. On the off chance that the analyst is unrevealed the study ought to be high in ecological validity and exceptionally in-depth so that information can be obtained. The Rosenhan study is a case of participation observation. Be that as it may, participant observations might be difficult to conduct, particularly when attempting to record behaviour without them noticing. The researcher’s company may change the participants’ performance and issues of biasness could occur, as the observer may turn out to be exceptionally close with the participants.

LIMITATIONS:

• It can be hard to save time/privacy for recording. For instance, with covert observations analysts can't take notes as this would ruin their disguise. Meaning that they need to hold up until they are separated from everyone else and answer on their memory. This is an issue as they may not remember the details properly and are probably not going to recollect direct quotations.

• In the event that the analyst turns out to be excessively included they may lose objectivity and potentially become bias. There is always that chance where we would “see” what we anticipate (or need) to see. This is an issue as they could specifically report data as opposed to taking note of all that they have observed. Therefore, decreasing the legitimacy of their information.

REFERENCE:

Holah.karoo.net. (2016). Observation. [online] Available at: http://www.holah.karoo.net/observation.htm [Accessed 17 Jan. 2016].

Simplypsychology.org. (2015). Observation Methods in Research | Simply Psychology. [online] Available at: http://www.simplypsychology.org/observation.html [Accessed 17 Jan. 2016].

naturalistic observation method. (2015). [video] Josh Knapp.

Structured Observation. (2009). [video] Maudsley Hospital: TheAnne55.

Participant Observations. (2015). [video] PowToon: Emily, Daniel and Lois.