Observation

• Lindsey Gardner has defined observation as “selection, provocation, recording and encoding of that set of behaviours and settings concerning organisms ‘in situ’ (naturalistic settings or familiar surroundings) which are consistent with empirical aims”. In this definition,
  • Selection means that there is a focus in observation and also editing before, during and after the observations are made.
  • Provocation means that though observers do not destroy natural settings but they can make subtle changes in natural settings which increase clarity.
  • Recording means that the observed incidents/events are recorded for subsequent analysis. Encoding involves simplification of records.

Characteristics of Observation

• Scientific observation differs from other methods of data collection specifically in four ways:
  1. Observation is always direct while other methods could be direct or indirect;
  2. Field observation takes place in a natural setting;
  3. Observations tend to be less structured; and
  4. It makes only the qualitative (and not the quantitative) study which aims at discovering subjects’ experiences and how subjects make sense of them (phenomenology) or how subjects understand their life (interpretive).
• Loft land has said that this method is more appropriate for studying lifestyles or sub-cultures, practices, episodes, encounters, relationships, groups, organizations, settlements and roles, etc.

Purpose of Observation

• To capture human conduct as it actually happens. In other methods, we get a static comprehension of people’s activity.
• In actual situation, they sometimes modify their views, sometimes contradict themselves, and sometimes are so swayed away by the situation that they react differently altogether, e.g., clerks’ behaviour in office; tone of voice, facial expressions and content of slogans by the demonstrators.
• To provide more graphic description of social life than can be acquired in other ways. For example, how do women behave when they are physically assaulted by their husbands? How do young widows behave when they are humiliated, harassed and exploited by the in-laws? How are bounded labourers treated by their landlords?
• To explore important events and situations. There are many instances when little is known. about the topic/issue. By being on the scene, issues that might otherwise be overlooked are examined more carefully, e.g., visiting office soon after the office hours and finding that the married men and single women were working overtime and single men and married women had gone home.
• It can be used as a tool of collecting information in situations where methods other than observation cannot prove to be useful, e.g., workers’ behaviour during strike.

Types of Observation

Participant and non-participant observation:

• Participant observation
  • This is a method in which the investigator becomes a part of the situation he is studying. He involves himself in the setting and group life of the research subjects. He shares the activities of the community observing what is going on around him, supplementing this by conversations and interview.
  • In India, M.N. Srinivas had used this method in studying the process of ‘sanskritisation’ in Mysore while Andre Beteille had used it to study social inequality in rural areas (Tanjore village) on the basis of class, status and power.
    
  • The weaknesses in this type (participant) of observation are:
    • Since the observer participates in events, sometimes he becomes so involved that he loses objectivity in observation;
    • He influences the events;
    • He interprets events subjectively;
    • His presence so sensitizes the subjects that they do not act in a natural way;
    • He may record some information but may fail to record other information as well as to explain reasons why information was not recorded.
    • He fails to be precise about the procedures for data accumulation;
    • Since he fails to specify the procedures for gathering information, others cannot replicate his research findings for verification and validity;
    • There is less attention to precision; and
    • This method cannot be used for studies where people indulge in illegal activities.
• In non-participant observation,
  • The observer remains detached and does not participate or intervene in the activities of those who are being observed.
  • He merely observes their behaviour. Sometimes this places the persons being observed in an awkward position and their conduct becomes unnatural.
  • But some say that though initially the observer’s behaviour may affect the behaviour of the observed but after a little while, less and less attention is paid to his presence.
  • This type of observation is more useful as a tool of data collection because the observer can choose the situations to be observed and can record the data freely.

Systematic/unsystematic observation :

• Reiss (1971) has classified observation as systematic and unsystematic on the basis of the ability of the observational data to generate scientifically useful information.
  • The systematic observation is one in which explicit procedure is used in observation and recording by following certain rules, which permits the use of logic, and which makes replication possible.
  • The unsystematic observation does not follow any rules or logic which makes replication difficult.

Naive and scientific observation:

• Naïve observation is unstructured and unplanned observation.
• It becomes scientific when it is systematically planned and executed, when it is related to a certain goal, and when it is subjected to tests and controls.

Structured and unstructured observation:

• Structured observation is organized and planned which employs formal procedure, has a set of well-defined observation categories, and is subjected to high levels of control and differentiation.
• Unstructured observation is loosely organized and the process is largely left to the observer to define.

Natural and laboratory observation:

• Natural observation is one in which observation is made in natural settings.
• Laboratory observation is one in which observation is made in a laboratory.

Direct and indirect observation:

• Direct observation, the observer plays a passive role, i.e., there is no attempt to control or manipulate the situation. The observer merely records what occurs.
• Indirect observation is one in which direct observation of the subject(s) is not possible because either the subject is dead or refuses to take part in the study. The researcher observes the physical traces which the phenomena under study have left behind and make conclusions about the subject, e.g., observing the site of bomb explosion where the dead and the injured people and vehicles destroyed is lying.

Convert and overt observation:

• In convert observation, subjects are unaware that they are being observed. Generally, the researcher in this type of observation is himself a participant in all the activities; otherwise it becomes difficult for him to explain his presence. These observations are mostly unstructured.
• In overt observation, subjects are aware that they are being observed. Sometimes this causes them to act differently than they do normally. For example, if a policeman in a police station knows that his behaviour is being watched by a researcher, he will never think of using third-degree methods in dealing with the accused person; rather he would show that he is polite and sympathetic.

Process of Observation

• One of the most striking aspects of observational field research is the absence of standardised operating procedures.
• As all cultures have their own distinctive characteristics, different demands are placed on researchers. Since observation involves sensitive human interaction, it cannot be reduced to a simple set of techniques.
• Yet some scholars have tried to point out the path that the observer in the fieldwork has to follow. Sarantakos has pointed out the following six steps in observation:
  • Selection of the topic: This refers to determining the issue to be studied through observations, e.g., marital conflict, riot, caste Panchayat meeting in a village, child labourers in a glass factory, and so on.
  • Formulation of the topic: This involves fixing up categories to be observed and pointing out situations in which cases are to be observed.
  • Research design: This determines identification of subjects to be observed, preparing observation schedule, if any, and arranging entry in situations to be observed.
  • Collection of data: This involves familiarization with the setting, observation and recording.
  • Analysis of data: In this stage, the researcher analyses the data, prepares tables, and interprets the facts.
  • Report writing: This involves writing of the report for submission to the sponsoring agency or for publication.

Factors Affecting Choice of Observation

• Observers are influenced by a number of factors in the process of observation. Black and Champion have identified three such factors:
  • Relating to the problem:
    • Certain types of situations are not easy to be observed, e.g., mafia group’s functioning, daily lifestyle of professional criminals, prisoners in jails, patients in hospitals and so on.
    • Some theoretical orientations like ethnomethodology (the study of the methods used in everyday routine social activity), phenomenology (approach that observes the phenomena as perceived by the acting individual, emphasizing perception and consciousness), and symbolic interactionism (approach that stresses linguistic and gestural communication in the formation of mind, self and society) are orientations in which observation holds a central place as a method.
  • Relating to skill and characteristics of the investigator:
    • All social scientists do not feel comfortable in observing a situation for a long time.
    • They feel more at ease in asking questions for an hour or so. Only a few scholars adjust themselves in an observable situation.
    • Thus, persons with certain characteristics and skills can prove to be good observers.
  • Relating to the characteristics of the observed:
    • In getting information from the investigated people, their characteristics play an important role.
    • The status of the interviewee vis- à-vis the interviewer is a major factor in determining whether observation will be feasible as a method of data collection.
    • Many people who are to be observed give such importance to their privacy because of their occupational position, economic status, sub-cultural values and social norms that they do not permit the observer to observe them in all situations.
    • It is easy to observe those who are in economically disadvantaged position relative to the well-to-do; easy to observe teachers, clerks, etc., than doctors and lawyers who have to maintain sanctity and confidentiality of their relations with their clients.

Basic Problems in Observation

• Festinger and Katz have specified six basic problems:
  • Under what conditions are observations to be made? How is the observation situation structured?
  • What behaviour is to be selected and recorded in order to obtain the information required.
  • How stable are the conditions in which observations can be made so that same results may be obtained under what appears to be same conditions. Are the measures reliable?
  • What is the validity of the process which has been observed or inferred?
  • What evidence is there that some process with functional unity is being observed?
  • Has an attempt been made to summarize what is observed in quantitative terms? Can a score be assigned?
• According to Lyn Lofland (1995: 63), the following activities need to be avoided by a researcher while using observation technique:
  • The observation purpose should not be kept secret from the subjects under observation.
  • Information should be collected from all people and not from a few people only.
  • Help should not be offered to people even if its severe need is felt.
  • There should be no commitment for anything.
  • The researcher should be strategic in relations.
  • In factionalized situations, taking sides should be avoided.
  • Paying cash or kind for getting information should be totally avoided.

Advantages of Observation

• Bailey has pointed out four advantages of observation:
  • Superior in data collection on non-verbal behaviour :
    • When a person’s opinion on a particular issue is to be assessed, survey method is definitely more useful, but when the nonverbal behaviour is to be discovered or where memory failure of the respondent is possible, observation will be more functional.
    • It allows not the restrictive study of the individuals but their in-depth study. The unstructured observational method, being very flexible, allows the observer to concentrate on any variables that prove to be important.
  • Intimate and informal relationship :
    • Since the observer often lives with the subjects for an extended period of time, the relationship between them is often more intimate and more informal than in a survey in which the interviewer meets the respondents for 30-40 minutes on a very formal basis.
    • The relationship sometimes becomes primary than secondary. Being close to the subject does not necessarily mean that observer will lose objectivity in recording facts.
    • This becomes possible only when the observer becomes emotionally attached to his subjects.
  • Natural environment :
    • The behaviour being observed in natural environment will not cause any bias.
    • Observation will neither be artificial nor restrictive.
  • Longitudinal analysis :
    • In observation, the researcher is able to conduct his study over a much longer period than in the survey.
• Sarantakos has mentioned the following advantages of observation:
  • It is less complicated and less time-consuming.
  • It offers data when respondents are unable or unwilling to cooperate for giving information.
  • It approaches reality in its natural structure and studies events as they evolve.
  • It allows collection of wide range of information.
  • It is relatively inexpensive. Besides these advantages, two other advantages in observation tool are:
  • Observer can assess the emotional reactions of subjects.
  • The observer is able to record the context which gives meaning to respondent’s expressions.

Disadvantages of Observation

• According to Bailey, the disadvantages in observation technique are:
  • Lack of Control :
    • In artificial setting, control over variables is possible but in natural environment, the researcher has little control over variables that affect the data.
  • Difficulties of quantification :
    • The data collected through observation cannot be quantified.
    • The recorded data will show how persons interacted with one another but it cannot be completed the number of times they interacted.
    • In communal riots, looting, arson, killing may be observed but it cannot be quantified what type of people indulged in what? It is difficult to categorise in-depth emotional and humanistic data.
  • Small sample size:
    • Observational studies use a smaller sample than survey studies.
    • Two or more observers can study a bigger sample but then their observations cannot be compared. Since observations are made for a longer period, employing many observers can become a costly affair.
  • Gaining entry:
    • Many times the observer has difficulty in receiving approval for the study.
    • It is not always easy to observe the functioning of an organization or institution without obtaining permission from the administrator.
    • In such cases, he may not record observations then and there but may write notes at night.
  • Lack of anonymity/studying sensitive issues:
    • In observational study, it is difficult to maintain the respondent’s anonymity.
    • In survey, it is easy for the husband to say that he has no quarrels and conflicts with his wife but in observation over a longer period of time, he cannot conceal them.
  • Limited study:
    • All aspects of the problem cannot be observed simultaneously.
    • The observation technique studies only limited issues. Similarly, internal attitudes and opinions cannot be studied.
• Williamson et. al. have discussed the following limitations of observation method
  • This method is not applicable to the investigation of large social settings.
  • There are few safeguards against biases of the researcher.
  • There is the related problem of selectivity in data collection.
  • The mere presence of the researcher in the setting may change the group/social system to some extent.
  • Since there is no set procedure of observation technique, the researcher may not be able to explain exactly how the work was done. It, therefore, becomes difficult to replicate the study.
  • It could thus be concluded that observation becomes an effective tool of scientific study when it is planned systematically, recorded systematically, is subjected to checks and control, and selected observers have skills and are trained.

The End of the Blog : Observation