Observational methods

• Naturalistic observation


  Observation of behaviours/events where ppts are in their natural environment
• Naturalistic observation pros:

  • High ecological validity
  • High generalisability
  • Spontaneous/unexpected behaviours may occur = new lines of enquiry + investigation
  • Researchers can see what ppts are actually doing rather than what they say they would do in self-report techniques
• Naturalistic observation cons:

  • No control over extraneous variables
  • Can't manipulate IV = causal relationship difficult to establish
  • No ppt awareness = ethical issues (lack of informed consent, privacy)
• Controlled observation

  Researcher studies behaviour in environment allowing them to manipulate + regulate variables (often a lab) to watch/record effects on ppts' actions
• Controlled observation pros:

  • High control = desired variables can be manipulated + extraneous variables eliminated -> causal relationship easy to establish
  • Spontaneous/unexpected behaviours may occur = new lines of enquiry + investigation
  • Researchers can see what ppts are actually doing rather than what they say they would do in self-report techniques
  • Usually overt + non-ppt observations = avoids ethical issues
• Controlled observation cons

  • Artificial environment/control + manipulation of variables could affect ppts' behaviour = not representative of how they would truly act/react -> low ecological validity
  • Usually overt = ppts know their behaviour is being recorded + may adjust it as a result (Hawthorne effect)
• Participant observation

  Behaviour is studied by the researcher becoming part of the group being investigated; ppts' actions are watched/recorded + interpreted from within the perspective of the group
• Participant observation pros:

  • Provides more insight into actions of people being observed = higher research validity
• Participant observation cons:

  • Becoming part of group = researcher more likely to form emotional connections with ppts + personal investment in ppts' perspectives
  • Reduced objectivity/impartiality -> increased likelihood of researcher bias = lower research validity
  • Ppt observations usually covert = ethical issues
• Non-participant observation


  Behaviour is studied from a distance + the researcher does not interact with the ppts in any way; ppts' actions are watched/recorded + interpreted from the perspective of an outside viewer
• Non-participant observation pros:

  • Researchers more able to remain impartial + objective = research less prone to researcher bias
  • Even if research is covert, no personal relationship with researcher = less likely for ppts to feel their privacy was invaded
• Non-participant observation cons:

  • Not becoming part of group/emotional distance from ppts = less insight into data collected (can see what they do but not why)
  • If covert -> ethical issues
• Covert observation

  Ppts unaware that their behaviours are being studied - this may be done through use of two-way mirrors or secret cameras (in covert ppt observations, the other ppts would be unaware that the researcher was watching/recording their behaviour)
• Covert observation pros:

  • Ppts unaware of observation = no ppt reactivity + behaviours likely to accurately reflect behaviour in real life -> high ecological validity = highly generalisable findings
• Covert observation cons:

  • Covert observations raise ethical issues (lack of informed consent, right to withdraw, privacy, emotional harm)
• Overt observation

  Ppts have been informed that their behaviour is being studied so they know that the researcher is watching/recording their actions
• Overt observation pros:

  • Ppts aware of observation = ethically sound (ppts briefed before study begins)
• Overt observation cons:

  • Ppts aware of observation = behaviour may change -> ppt reactivity in response to demand characteristics (Hawthorne effect/social desirability effect)