Observational Research

Methods without Intervention

• Naturalistic Observation: the study of on-going behavior in the natural environment

• No intervention by the observer

• Uninterrupted stream of behavior

• The observer is “unobtrusive”

• Eliminates “reactive behavior”

• Reactive behavior is behavior that is different than normal because of an awareness of being watched

• “natural environment” is the environment in which the behavior normally occurs

• This could be a city sidewalk or a preschool or a desert

• To be unobtrusive, the observer (O) must “blend in” with the environment.

• In a forest you might build a blind of tree branches. In a city you might sit on a bench with a newspaper with holes cut out so you can watch people

Ethologists (ethology)

• a European branch of biology/psychology devoted to the study of the behavior of organisms in relation to their natural environment

• the “quest for the roots of intelligence”

• comparative study of species looking for the evolutionary path (phylogeny) of behavior

Example: Ethology Study

• Example: Crossing behavior of people in mixed-gender groups. Done in a city environment

From the field to the lab

• Observational study is often a first step in studying a new topic before you begin lab research

• Example: Tinbergen, herring gull chicks feeding behavior

Famous observational researchers

• Jane Goodall: Chimpanzees

• Dian Fossey: Mountain Gorillas (Gorillas in

the Mist)

• Were they truly using a method of naturalistic observation?

Methods with Intervention

• Participant observation- the researcher both observes and participates in the action

• Two types: Undisguised and Disguised

Undisguised

• the subject of the observation is aware that they are being observed

• Often a method used by anthropologists• Ed Tronick, Gilda Morelli both from UMASS• Studied child rearing practices in rural African

villages• Lived in the village while collecting data for

months at a time• Reactive behavior can be a problem

Disguised Participant Observation

• researcher both observes & participates but is disguised so that the subject is not aware of the observation

• This eliminates the problem of reactive behavior…provided the disguise works

• Rosenhan (1973) On Being Sane in Insane Places

Example #1: Rosenhan (1973) On Being Sane in Insane Places

• 3 women, 5 men, false names, tried for admission to different psychiatric hospitals

• Symptom: voice saying “empty, hollow, thud” same sex, unfamiliar

• All were admitted as suffering from schizophrenia

• Once admitted, acted as normally as possible• Never recognized as “normal”, released

between 7-52 days

Example #2: Festinger, Reiken, and Schacter (1956)

• Even though you eliminate reactive behavior, by participating in the action, you may change the behavior you observe

• Infiltrated a group in Texas who claimed to be in communication with beings from outer space

• Predicted a disastrous flood on a particular date

• Welcomed to group and one in particular was seen as a space being binging a message

• Festinger et al felt they had changed the behavior they observed by their stories (inadvertently reinforced the group’s beliefs) and felt their observations were invalid as a result

Structured Observation

• observe behavior in a structured environment but do not interfere and observe unobtrusively

• Often used when studying family relationships in family therapy situations

• One-way mirror, “living room” environment (structured), Mom, Dad, children

• Observe thru mirror, watch interactions

Second Example: Calhoun (1962) Population Density and Social Pathology

• Set up a living space for rats (Structured environment)

• Adequate food, H2O, and nesting materials

• Four separate rooms with ramps

• Two rooms have only one ramp, two have two ramps

• Put a set of rats in and then observed without intervening (except to supply food/water/nesting materials)

• Rats quickly over-populated (to about 80 rats)

• many pathological behaviors developed, especially in the rooms with two entrances (Behavioral Sink)

Field studies

• a cross-over to quasi-experiments

• there is a true IV, at least two levels

• uses method of observation

• done in a non-lab, natural environment

• often social psychology studies

Zimbardo (1973) on vandalism

• Vandalism is hard to study in a lab environment

• Looked at the effects of anonymity on vandalism

• darkness & crowded environments would increase feelings of anonymity & foster more vandalism

• Hypothesized that vandals would be more likely to be young people, not adults

• Used concealed observers

• Took two used cars in good condition, abandoned, no license plates, hood up

• Left one car one block from NYU (very urban)

• Left one car one block from Stanford University (rural/suburban)

New York City Vehicle (NYU)

• first vandals within 10 minutes in broad daylight

• adult man and woman, one child, stripped car

• As many adult vandals as youths

• As much vandalism during day as at night

• 23 vandals in 3 days, nothing left after a week

California Vehicle (Stanford)

• never touched at all after one week

• some neighbors reported the car to police

• one person lowered hood when it started to rain

• Moral: don’t park your car 1 block from NYU. Park at Stanford and take a plane

Recording behavior in Observational Research

Narrative Record• record ALL behavior

• Use video tape, audio tape, or written records

• used by ethologists, ethograms, long lists of all behaviors for a species

• More often you record “units” of behavior, specific types of behavior of interest

Recording units of behavior

• Frequency of behavior (how often it occurs)

• Duration of behavior (total amount of time behavior occurs)

• Rate (frequency per time unit, number of times per minute, for example)

• Most often several observers gathering data for any one piece of research

• In order to combine the information from multiple observers, you must establish “inter-observer reliability”

• Inter-observer reliability: the percentage of agreement amongst observers

Inter-Observer Reliability*Must multiple by 100 to get

“percent agreement”*

Example: Aggression in a pre-school environment

• Must first have an “operational definition” of “aggression”

• Observers discuss and agree on a definition• All observers observe the same classroom

(events) and record separately any acts of aggression

• Measure inter-observer reliability (Percent agreement)

• Two observers stationed at a one-way mirror into a preschool classroom space

• Watch children for 50 minutes

• At the end of each 5 minute period, put a check mark if an act of aggression has occurred

5-min sections O1 O2 Agree??

1 X

2

3 X X

4

5 X

6 X

7

8

9 X X

10

5-min sections O1 O2 Agree?

1 X

2 Agree

3 X X Agree

4 Agree

5 X

6 X

7 Agree

8 Agree

9 X X Agree

10 Agree

• Seven “agrees” out 10 observations

• 7/10 = .7• .7 (100) = 70% agreement

• Need 85% or above before you can combine data

• Would discuss the “operational definition” of aggression and try again for inter-observer reliability until the observer’s reach at least 85% agreement

Advantages of Observational Research

• Increased external validity

• Allows you to see behavior as complex, the result of many antecedents

• Some behaviors can only be observed in a natural setting (such as vandalism)

Disadvantages of Observational Research

• Because you are in the “real world” you lose control over many variables

• noise, weather, lighting etc

• for example, in the Zimbardo study, was the weather the same in NY as in California? This could have caused a “threat to internal validity”