A Practical Guide to Behavioral Research

Tools and Techniques

FOURTH EDITION

Barbara Sommer Robert Sommer

New York Oxford OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 1997

Oxford University Press'

Oxford Athens Auckland Bangkok Bogota Bombary Buenos Aires Calcutta Cape Town Dar es Salaam Delhi Florence Hong Kong Istanbul Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madras Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi Paris Singapore Taipei Tokyo Toronto and associated companies in Berlin Ibadan Published by Oxford University Press, Inc. 198 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016 Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Oxford University Press. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Sommer, Barbara Baker, 1938 A practical guide to behavioral research: tools and techniques / Barbara Sommer, Robert Sommer. - 4th ed. p. cm. Includes indexes. ISBN 0-19-510419-6 (paper). - ISBN 0-19-510418-8 1. Social sciences-Research. 2. Social sciences- Methodology. 3. Psychology -Research. 4. Social sciences-Research-Data processing. I. Sommer, Robert. II. Title. H62.S724734 1997 150'.72---dc20 CIP New York

Copyright 1980, 1986, 1991, 1997 by Oxford University Press, Inc.

96-35531

4 Observation
Casual Observation Box 4-1. A Visit to the Rialto Restaurant Systematic Observation How to Be a Good Observer Box 4-2. Basic Steps, Systematic Observation Reliability in Systematic Observation Box 4-3. Observing Non-human Species Box 4-4. Pitfalls to be Avoided in Systematic Observation Qualitative Approaches Participant Observation Ethnography Doing Qualitative Observation Stresses on the Observer Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research Limitations Summary

There is a popular belief that people in groups drink and eat faster than people alone, as the slow members of the group try to keep up with the fast ones. This belief has been proven false in a succession of observational studies in bars, restaurants, and coffeehouses in Canada, New Zealand, and the United States. People in groups do drink and eat more, but not because they drink or eat faster, but rather, because they tend to stay longer than do lone individuals, and length of stay is strongly related to food and beverage consumption (Graves, Graves, Semu, & Sam, 1982; Sommer & Sommer, 1989). For those who enjoy people-watching, observation is the ideal research method. Observation is useful not only as a method in its own right but as an accompaniment to other procedures. Before beginning an interview study, it will be necessary to observe the situation first. You will want to know where to find people, how long they are going to be available, and possible distractions. Before beginning an experiment, you will want to know about the behavior in its natural state. Otherwise you run the risk of creating conditions in the laboratory that do not exist in the real world. An advantage of observation is that it does not require conversation. You can observe pedestrians crossing a busy street or people who do not speak your language. Observation is the ideal method for studying commonplace nonverbal behaviors, such as gestures, postures, or seating arrangements, in which people may not be consciously aware of how they are acting. 45

46

A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH

Unobtrusive observation is commonly used in transportation research as the procedure does not interfere with the behavior being studied. In the case of bicyclists, the recording can be done by a researcher without the use of fancy equipment, i.e., just recording how bicyclists ride in traffic or whether they stop at lights or stop signs. In observing automobiles, traffic researchers are likely to use radar for measuring vehicle speed. This method was used by Icelandic researchers to study the effects of posting safety signs along the road. The observations which were undertaken on twenty consecutive weekdays, revealed that the signs significantly reduced speed on the roadways (Ragnarsson & Bjorgvinsson, 1991). Researchers in the Netherlands used systematic observation to measure the success of a campaign to increase seat belt usage at military bases. Observations were made before and after an extensive publicity and incentive campaign. At a dozen military bases in the Netherlands, a trained observer stood next to the gate entrance and recorded shoulder belt usage of all drivers. Observations before and after the safety campaign revealed that the publicity had been effective, increasing seat belt usage both immediately after the campaign and three months later (Hagenzieker, 1991). Observation is economical in terms of money and equipment but expensive in terms of time. One invests long hours of waiting. This is well known to animal researchers, who spend weeks scouting the terrain and establishing observation posts before catching a glimpse of a rare bird or mammal. More than any other method, observation requires patience and luck. There is no certainty about who will appear and what will happen. It may rain or snow while you are there, be too hot or too cold, the setting too crowded or too empty. The time, discomfort, and required patience may severely test the observer's skills. On the other hand, it is intensely satisfying to notice things that other people overlook. Behavior is more variable in natural surroundings than it is in a laboratory where everything is arranged by the experimenter or in response to questionnaire items posed by the researcher. The results of natural observation can be unexpected and surprising, and include behaviors not previously reported in the setting. Generalization to the real world is easier when you have studied natural behavior. There are three types of observational procedures-usual observation, systematic observation, and participant observation.

Casual Observation
Casual observation is done without prearranged categories or a scoring system. It refers to eyeball inspection of what is happening. It is most useful at an early stage of research or as an accompaniment to some other procedure. For example, before one approaches hospital patients for interviews, it is desirable to spend some time watching behavior in the setting. This will yield information that is indispensable for developing good questions. Casual observation is not a substitute for more systematic and detailed study, but occasionally it is the only method possible. For example, a city planner from France visiting a housing project in India may have only a limited time to look around. This may mean a single tour in the company

OBSERVATION

47

of a guide without the opportunity to talk to local residents. Keen powers of observation are required under these circumstances. The vivid impressions of a first visit are worth recording. After several sessions, it is easy to become accustomed and desensitized to what is happening. First impressions are most useful when they are written down immediately. There can be no substitute for field notes kept on a day-by-day basis. These notes need not be typed or written in perfect grammar. A final report is best written after a long period of reflection, data gathering, and several drafts, but first impressions are most valuable when written while they are still fresh. The notes in Box 4-1 were written by a student observer following an observation session in a self-serve restaurant. The visit was intended to be preliminary to detailed systematic observations of health and sanitation problems in different types of self-serve food outlets. Based on the initial observation, this particular

Casual observation is an ideal technique for people watchers. Observing the people in a zoo can be as interesting and rewarding as watching the animals.

48

A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO BEHAVIORAL REHEARCH

restaurant was deemed unsuitable for further study because the high partitions made it too difficult to observe unobtrusively.

Systematic Observation
Systematic observation employs a scoring system and prearranged categories that are applied consistently. This usually requires an observation checklist, on which information is recorded under the proper headings. Categories on the checklist should include those items of behavior that occur naturally in the situation and can be observed and recorded. Not everything that takes place is open to view. Casual observation is helpful for developing the categories to be used in systematic observation: In a study of alcohol consumption in fifteen bars in a New England city, two researchers found that they could record the following items on napkins without appearing conspicuous.

OBSERVATION

49

The items were limited to what could be seen directly. What the patrons said to one another, their marital status, and their political attitudes lay beyond the range of an observational study. In establishing the reliability of the observational categories, two researchers went to a selected bar, sat either at a table or at the bar with instructions to independently observe the next patron entering the premises who sat in clear view of both observers. The patron was then observed throughout his or her stay in the bar. Agreement was high between the two observers using this procedure (almost 100 percent) except in the case of the age estimates (Kessler & Gomberg, 1974). The observer must choose a location from which behavior can be seen and recorded. This will be easier in some settings than in others. In bars, observers can sit at tables to record activities. A city planning student studying behavior in a city park found a good view from a tall building overlooking the park. The choice of an observational post depends completely on local circumstances. The Rialto restaurant described in Box 4-1 had partitions surrounding the buffet table that made it difficult for the observer to watch people serve themselves. As a result, no further observations were conducted. There is no way to know in advance where the best vantage point will be. A videocamera can be useful in observational research. Interactions can be recorded at one time and transcribed later (see Chapter 15). Box 4-2 lists the steps for doing observational research.

How to Be a Good Observer

The first principle of good observation is to heed the Greek maxim "Know thyself." Careful attention to your own responses provides valuable insights into what

1. Choose topic. 2. Conduct casual observation. 3. Specify questions to be answered. 4. Design the measurement instruments (i.e., checklists, categories, coding systems, etc.). 5. Train observers. 6. Do a pilot test. a. Test the procedure. b. Check reliability using at least two independent observers. 7. Revise procedure and instruments as needed. If substantial changes are made, run another pilot test. 8. Develop a sampling plan for data collection (timing and locations). 9. Collect data. 10. Compile, analyze, and interpret results. 11. Write report.

50

A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH

is happening in the situation and in you. Make it a practice to acknowledge and name your feelings: "I am beginning to become tense . . . I feel uncomfortable . . . something seems odd here." Try practice observations with a friend and share your feelings aloud. See if you can identify the internal cues for these feelings. Notice whether you hold your breath or stand differently when you are tense. Practice plus feedback will increase your sensitivity to such feelings. Pay attention to nonverbal cues in the environment. These include people's postures, gestures, and privacy-seeking behaviors, such as turning away and gaze avoidance. When an anthropologist was observing a mental hospital ward, he found that patients acted disturbed when he sat out in the dayroom, and the nurses were bothered when he was inside the nurses' station. He gradually found himself forced back into a small area outside the nurses' station. Monitoring other people's reactions to his presence taught him which places were open and which were closed to him. During your observation, occasionally ask yourself about what you are not seeing. Did you expect something to happen that is not actually taking place? The non-event may be as important as what does occur. For example, an interesting finding in the self-serve restaurants was that customers hardly ever returned for second portions. Systematic observation in natural settings requires the researcher to take notes in an unobtrusive manner. The closer the recording procedure resembles normal activity in the setting, the better. One observer in a restaurant recorded observations on napkins; another in a classroom recorded participation in a notebook. Certain locations are more suitable than others for recording what is happening. Watching bicyclists at an intersection proved difficult when the observers stood on the street corner; cyclists became curious and altered their behavior. It was more effective to watch from inside a parked car. The researcher studying a playground might bring along a young child as a cover, to make the observer's presence more comprehensible. "Fitting in" is an art that develops through practice. The objective of the naturalist is to study nature while disturbing it as little as possible. Most of the time, it pays to have an observer who can blend into the setting. In laboratory research, it is often assumed that the physical appearance of the experimenter does not matter. Whether this assumption is true is an interesting question, but no one ever assumes it in a natural setting. Researchers who get their first introduction to observational procedures in a setting in which they do not fit will probably soon become discouraged. A white researcher who spent a year among streetcorner men in a black neighborhood in Washington, D.C. realizes that he would always be an outsider: This brute fact of color, as they understood it in their experience, and I understood it in mine, irrevocably and absolutely relegated me to the status of outsider . . . . I used to play with the idea that maybe I wasn't as much of an outsider as I thought. Other events, and later readings of the field materials, have disabused me of this particular touch of vanity. (Liebow, 1966, p. 248) A researcher, studying gorillas in their natural habitat, describes the gradual process of becoming a good observer in the jungle:

OBSERVATION

51

In civilization, one loses the aptitude for stillness, the habit of moving gently. It takes time to cease to be an outsider, ad intruder, and be accepted once again by the creatures of the forest. The return to the wilderness is a gradual process, unconscious for the most part. Once the senses have been relieved of the incessant noise and other irrelevant stimuli that are a part of our civilization . . . the sights, sounds, and smells of the environment become meaningful again. Slowly the courage and confidence of man, previously nurtured by his belief in the safety of his civilized surroundings, slips away. Finally he stands there, a rather weak and humble creature who has come not to disturb and subdue but to nod to the forest in fellowship and to claim kinship to the gorilla and the Sunbird. (Schaller, 1964, p. 107) Box 4-3 provides additional information on observing animal behavior. Those who observe behavior in natural settings can expect to endure physical discomfort and occasionally danger. It is not uncommon for zoologists studying animal behavior to stake out an area and spend weeks in fruitless waiting in a stuffy, hot, insect-ridden blind. Watching children play in the streets of Philadelphia during July and August may be no less uncomfortable and occasionally more dangerous. 's

Reliability in Systematic Observation

In systematic observation it is desirable to employ at least two independent observers at an early stage of study. Independent observers are two or more indi

BOX 4-3. Observing Non-human Species

Observation is well suited for research on the behavior of animal species. For over forty years, Charles Darwin did occasional studies of earthworms, conducting both systematic observations and worm-related experiments. The famous population biologist Paul Ehrlich has spent every summer for the past thirty years watching butterflies in the meadows of western Colorado (McVay, 1993). An instructor teaching a comparative psychology course in our department asked his students to conduct observational studies of animal behavior. The studies covered the feeding behavior of thoroughbred horses, territories of domestic cats, food searching behavior of blue jays, social grooming by mallard ducks, and how chimpanzees spent their day. When observing animals it is important to avoid anthropomorphism, the tendency to ascribe human characteristics to other species. For example, a lowered head may not have the same significance for another species as it does for humans, where it sometimes means sadness. In New York's Central Park, some animal lovers felt that the horses were being mistreated because their heads appeared droopy. In contrast, a stable owner declared "That means she's a calm horse. A high head means high strung. We look for what we call a cold-blooded horse, with the head down" (Talk of the Town, 1993, p. 36). Observation is also suited for studying human-animal interaction. Instead of looking exclusively at animal behavior, the focus becomes the two-way relationship between people and animals. This approach is being used in the new field of companion animal therapy for ' elderly, shut-ins, and autistic children. Observation is used to document the benefits of interacting with animals for people with reduced opportunities for human contact.

52

A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH

viduals who take notes separately and compare them afterward. Such comparisons may reveal ambiguities and overlaps in scoring categories. These comparisons should be made before the main body of observations is collected (e.g., during the pilot study). After you have finished making all your observations, if you learn then that some of the categories are not reliable, the value of the data will be diminished. When such problems can be identified beforehand, the scoring system may be improved to eliminate them, and then reliability checked a second time so that the observations can begin with confidence that the scoring system is reliable. Box 4-4 lists some of the potential problems in systematic observation.

Qualitative Approaches
The two observational methods described so far, casual and systematic observation, involve an outside observer coming in for short periods to watch and record what is happening, while remaining apart from the participants. Qualitative approaches put more emphasis on the observer spending long periods of time in a setting, becoming acquainted with the participants, and keeping detailed confidential records. Two types of qualitative observation are participant observation and ethnography.

BOX 4-4. Pitfalls to be Avoided in Systematic Observation

I. Reactive effects from being observed; a guinea pig effect in which awareness of being watched changes behavior. a. People becoming self-conscious and not behaving as they normally would. b. People attempting to accommodate the observer, doing what they believe the observer wants them to do. c. Influence of the observer's specific appearance or manner on people's actions. d. Changes in accommodation to the observer during the course of the study. 2. Investigator error a. Unclear and unreliable observational categories. b. Bias on the part of the observer. c. Changes in the observational procedures in the middle of the study. d. Not checking reliability before the study begins. Learning too late that the categories for observers are not reliable. 3. Selection bias a. People being observed are not representative of the groups to which the results will be generalized. b. Inadequate time periods selected for observation. c. Sources of bias due to weather, day, location, etc.

OBSERVATION

53

Participant Observation

In participant observation the observer becomes part of the events being studied. The emotional learning on the part of the researcher can be as important as the documentation of external events. One participant observer described what he had learned over a 6-month period, "It wasn't a question of discovering new facts, since most of what I had found was already known, but of discovering what it meant to feel the facts." Frank Farley, a former president of the American Psychological Association, is a risk taker. He rides rapids and crosses the ocean in balloons. While participating in these activities, he observes the other participants in formal and informal settings, interviews them, and records his own experiences. His research led him to develop the concept of the Type T (thrill-seeking) personality. Type T people are independent-minded and less concerned than others with rules and regulations, but they are not crazy or suicidal. They spend considerable time preparing for their adventures, and they do not take undue personal risks if the risks can be avoided. They do not practice their skills to the degree required by Olympic athletes. "They are not perfectionists" and "they achieve a level of skill they are comfortable with, they have their own internal rules" (Farley, 1993, p. 5). In this case, participant observation has several advantages. There is the personal enjoyment that he achieves from his experiences, and he has converted his hobby into a research study. His involvement in these activities gives him direct access to other risk-takers that it would be difficult for a non-participant to achieve. He can observe his fellow balloonists at close range, while a non-participant would be limited to interviews following the ride. He understands the specialized vocabularies, the slang expressions whose meaning is clear only to the participants. He can also use his own experiences as a yardstick in gauging the responses of others. Another social scientist used participant observation to study housing projects. Participant observation allowed time to break down barriers of suspicion and mistrust. There were things that she learned living in a project that would go unnoticed by outsiders. When she found herself picking up litter in "her" courtyard while ignoring it on the other side of the building, she became aware of the importance of territorial divisions in stimulating caring attitudes toward one's surroundings. From her third floor balcony she became aware of extensive outdoor activities. Her experiences living in the building provided so many insights that she vowed never again to do a study of a housing project unless she could experience it first-hand (Marcus, 1990). A participant-observer has a defined and active role in what is happening, as distinct from being a spectator, bystander, or customer. This is not to imply that customers cannot make observations. The restaurant studies described at the start of this chapter were done by observers posing as customers. This seems more properly classified as systematic observation rather than participant observation. Had the observer been a waiter or bartender who took the job specifically to record eating patterns, then it would have been participant observation.

54

A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH

Researchers sometimes find themselves in a participant observation role through circumstance-for example, after an automobile accident or physical disability. Research through participant observation is a means of understanding the experience and also a way for them to use their professional training while in an unusual situation.

Ethnography
The in-depth description and study of specific peoples and places is known as ethnography. Through intensive field work, the ethnographer attempts to dig out multiple layers of meaning. At one time, ethnographers were concerned primarily with pre-industrial societies. More recently they have turned their attention to the study of contemporary peoples in spec]al settings, such as courtrooms, banks, and shopping malls. The observer looks, listens, asks questions, and records what is seen and heard. From all this emerges a picture of what is happening. This is not the picture of the artist who sketches a scene from a single perspective. It is more the approach of the detective who examines and puts together all sorts of evidence, including smudged fingerprints, bloodstains, torn clothing, and eyewitness accounts (Sanders, 1974). Although the terms ethnography and participant observation are often used interchangeably, ethnography, like other related terms used in the social sciences, such as qualitative sociology and field work, is more of an approach than a research method, because it combines several research techniques, including interviews, observations, and physical trace measures. The best ethnography remains true to the place and people studied; it does not distort or reduce them to arbitrary abstract categories. This is nicely stated by an ethnographer in Northern Ireland: (Research) is distorted and reality is mangled when disciplines harden into ideology, categories freeze into facts, and the sweet, terrible wholeness of life is dismembered for burial . . . [In good ethnography] the categories will slip and shift, and then melt away as we find the place where social science joins the humanities, where art and culture and history, time and space connect, where theoretical and empirical studies fuse. (Glassie, 1982, p. xiv) Studying the effect of tourism on the island of Ionia off the west coast of Scotland, a graduate student used observation and in-depth interviews to gather qualitative information. In addition, quantitative data were collected from the ferry service to the island. Hotel registers yielded information on tourists' home addresses. Housing records showed the number of houses on the island owned by outsiders, and historical documents were found in the archives of a local newspaper (Butts, 1995). Unlike the participant observer who has a defined Tole in the setting and is part of the action, the ethnographer typically is identified only as a researcher. An example is the use of ethnography to study spatial separation in a large corporate office building. The researcher identified himself from the outset as a social scientist whose goal was to learn how people felt about the building. He found that the

OBSERVATION

55

building was a social pyramid, with the executives at the top, the technical and administrative employees in the center, and the clerical employees and data processors on the lower floors and in the basement. There was infrequent travel between the different levels of the building, and when people visited another floor, they felt they were on unfamiliar terrain. The separation reduced communication and contact; lower level employees felt ignored and disrespected, and the top executives felt isolated and ignorant of what was happening in the rest of the b uilding (Mazumdar, 1994). Ethnography was a good choice for this type of project. The researcher did not have a specific role in the organization (he was not an employee), and he only needed to spend enough time on each floor to get to know the people, so that they would express their opinions to him. Ethnography is particularly useful in the early stages of research where little is known about a phenomenon, in situations where other methods are not feasible, and as part of an overall multimethod strategy. An anthropologist employed ethnography in studying the drug trade in New York City neighborhoods. In this type of situation formal survey techniques are not practicable. He commented on his anomalous position, Looking around me on the street comer I sensed that I was the only one not there to buy or sell drugs or needles, or to assist or "steer" a buyer for a "taste" of the bag, or to "tout a bag" or "look out for" or "rip off' a dealer, or to "set up" or arrest a buyer or seller. (Goldsmith, 1994, p. 3) In both participant observation and ethnography, impressions are written down in rough form and may be typed later. The final notes should be legible, indicating places, dates, and names (often these are written in a code known only to the researcher), and a clear distinction between events witnessed and the observer's impressions or feelings should be made. It is quite useful in field notes to describe one's own interpretations in brackets or otherwise distinguish them from actual events. These records are later summarized and discussed with colleagues or a research supervisor. Collecting field notes is often done by a single researcher, but the subsequent validation of observations and interpretations is a shared enterprise.

Doing Qualitative Observation

Flexibility is a required attribute for a participant observer or ethnographer. Methods will evolve during the course of the research, and procedures will be added, modified, or dropped. Unlike a laboratory study, new sources of information will appear during the course of the investigation, requiring new approaches or contacts. During field work, it will be impossible to keep track of everything happening at one time. Some selection among different variables or processes will be necessary, along with constant monitoring of how they interact and measure in importance. Kirk and Miller (1986) describe the four phases of field work as invention, discovery, interpretation, and explanation. Invention refers to preparation for the study and the development of the research plan. This includes reviewing previous work in the field and training in appropriate methods. Discovery refers to data collec-

56

A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH

tion, the production of information through a variety of methods. Interpretation is ongoing as the researcher reflects on what is happening and discusses it with colleagues, but it is also a separate phase following data collection in which there is formal analysis of what has been learned. Explanation refers to the packaging of findings for an outside audience. Typically this involves writing a report or article based on the study.
Stresses on the Observer

Of the techniques described in this book, participant observation and ethnography are among the most stressful for the investigator. A researcher studying psychiatric patients living in the community felt alone and isolated because there was no one with whom she could share the intimate facts of the daily observations and her own personal reactions. She couldn't express her occasional feelings of frustration, depression, or even elation about clients, staff, their interaction, or her own reactions to a roller coaster set of experiences (Estroff, 1981). The ethnographer studying the drug trade in New York City (mentioned earlier) saw himself being pulled into relationships, especially when faced with emergencies. "You have to decide how to respond," he wrote, "whether to take someone to an emergency room, drive people to visit a gunshot victim in a hospital . . give out bleach bottles to persons about to inject . . . ." (Goldsmith, 1994, p. 6). Culture shock was experienced by a researcher doing field work among business people in a city and becoming aware of possibly illegal activities. There were also dirty tricks played on her by the people she was studying. In one instance a handgun was placed in her briefcase, as one of many jokes to see if she was "a good sport." Fortunately her research skills helped her to maintain both distance and objectivity in an ethical mine field (Stumpf-Carome, 1995). As a participant observer, one is privy to backstage behaviors. It is virtually inevitable that one, will see illicit, unethical, and illegal acts. A participant observer working in a restaurant, for example, is likely to notice unsanitary conditions. One could put this more strongly and say that the observer will see, over a period of time, unsanitary conditions. There is probably ,no restaurant in the world where this would not occur at least occasionally. How the observer deals with the situation is likely to be a source of severe personal stress. Should he or she "rat" on the other employees or keep quiet and risk exposing the public to a health risk? Ethical dilemmas are inevitable in participant observation. There is also legal ambiguity about the status of field notes written by researchers. The courts have not determined that such field notes are protected against subpoena. They might become part of the public record in court proceedings.

Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research

The field notes of a single participant observer or ethnographer necessarily lack reliability. An observer may have blind spots for certain things that occur and ex-

OBSERVATION

57

aggerate the importance of other events. Sometimes a participant observer gets so deeply into a role that perspective is lost, a process known as "going native." The observer's presence may affect the behavior of the people in the setting. These effects are difficult to specify in advance and interpret. There are also problems in generalizability with this method-how much can be learned from the study of a single health clinic or police department? Although it is difficult to eliminate these problems completely, it is possible to minimize their occurrence and effect on the research and to specify when they have occurred. Most of the remedies involve triangulation or the use of more than one method, observer, and site to provide additional checks on a single observer's account (Hunt, 1985). Triangulation allows the researcher to pinpoint aspects of a phenomenon more accurately by approaching it from different vantage points using different methods (Brewer & Hunter, 1989). Successful triangulation requires careful analysis of the type of information provided by each method, including the strengths and weaknesses. The likelihood of a researcher going native can be reduced by having a team of researchers in the field who interact with one another and thereby prevent total immersion in the local culture. Frequent contact b etween the researcher and the supervisor can also provide opportunities for reflection on what is taking place. Observer effects can be dealt with through a multimethod approach that uses independent sources of information, such as public or private records, previous research studies, and so on. When an observer's account contrasts markedly with what is known about the setting and the occupants, as when a participant observer finds no illegal gambling at a social club that has been raided by police on previous occasions and numerous convictions obtained on gambling charges, the researcher will have to seriously reflect on his or her impact upon the setting. Reliability can be improved by the use of more than one observer. This does not have to be done routinely. Only a few visits by a second observer may be sufficient to determine whether the first observer is picking up the important things that are happening and reporting them correctly. Generalizability can be improved by increasing the number of settings observed. Instead of focusing all of the attention on a single setting, several representative locations can be observed. If the same behaviors are seen in all the settings, then the observer can have more confidence in the findings. Again this does not require a detailed observational study in all locations. The additional sites can be observed briefly if the observer is not interested in everything that occurs, but only in specific items.

Limitations
Observation, whether casual, systematic, or qualitative, deals with behavior, not with attitudes or beliefs. Attitudes can be deduced from behavior only with caution. If you want to find out what people do, you should observe them. If you want to find out what they think, you should ask them directly. There are exceptions to

58

A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH

both of these rules, but observation is generally a good method for studying natural behavior, while interviews and questionnaires are more appropriate for opinions and beliefs. Reliability is always a problem in observation. In casual and systematic observation, the use of two independent observers is recommended during the early stages of the study. No matter how simple and straightforward the behavior being studied, it is still wise to check on reliability. If two independent observers cannot agree on what they see, then the conclusions of the study are in doubt. In qualitative observation, solutions to reliability problems involve triangulation, or the use of more than one method, observer, and site to provide additional checks on a single observer's account. The immersion of the observer into the situation for extended periods can be stressful. There are also potential ethical problems when the researcher becomes part of ongoing events.

Summary
Observation is useful in behavioral research as a method in its own right and as an accompaniment to other procedures. It can produce unexpected and surprising findings. It is economical in terms of money and equipment but expensive in terms of time. Casual observation does not use prearranged categories or a scoring system. It is most useful at the beginning stages of research. Systematic observation employs detailed categories and a scoring system. Possible sources of error in systematic observation are reactive effects from being observed (the guinea pig effect), investigator error, and biased sampling. Two qualitative approaches are participant observation and ethnography. In participant observation the observer becomes part of the events being studied. Ethnography is the in-depth study of specific peoples and places. Both techniques place considerable demands upon the observer. There may be problems of reliability and generalizability. Limitations: Since observation deals with behavior, it is difficult to deduce beliefs, attitudes, or opinions. In many settings, reliability is difficult to establish.

References
Brewer, J., & Hunter, A. (1989). Multimethod research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Butts, S. L. (1995). Tourism for whom? Practicing Anthropology, 17, 13-16. Estroff, S. E. (1981). Making it crazy: An ethnography of psychiatric clients in an American community. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Farley, F. (1993). Psychology thrills President Farley. APA Monitor, 24, 4-5. Glassie, H. H. (1982). Passing the once in Ballyncenone: Culture and history of an Ulster community. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Goldsmith, D. S. (1994, April). Confidentiality in ethnography: Drugs, sex, and AIDS in the lives of i nformants in New York City. Paper presented at the 53rd annual meeting of the Society for Applied Anthropology, Cancun, Mexico.

OBSERVATION

59

Graves, T. D., Graves, N. B., Semu, V. N., & Sam, I. A. (1982). Patterns of public drinking in a multiethnic society: A systematic observational study. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 43, 990-1009. Hagenzieker, M. P. (1991). Enforcement or incentives? Promoting safety belt use among military personnel in the Netherlands. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 23-30. Hunt, M. M. (1985). Profiles of social research: The scientific study of human interactions. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Kessler, M., & Gomberg, C. (1974). Observations of barroom drinking: Methodology and preliminary results. Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 35, 1392-1396. Kirk, J., & Miller, M. L. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Liebow, E. (1967). Tally's corner. Boston: Little, Brown. Marcus, C. C. (1990). From the pragmatic to the spiritual. In I. Altman & K. Christensen (Eds.), Environment and behavior studies: Emergence of intellectual traditions (pp. 111-140). New York: Plenum Press. Mazumdar, S. (1995). How birds of a feather flock together in organizations: The phenomena of socio-physical congregation and distancing. Journal of Architectural & Planning Research, 12, 1-18. McVay, S. (1993). Prelude: "A Siamese connexion with a plurality of other mortals." In S. R. Kellen & E. O. Wilson (Eds.), The Biophilia Hypothesis (pp. 3-19). Washington, DC: Island Press. Ragnarsson, R. S., & Bjorgvinsson, T. (1991). Effects of public posting on driving speed in Icelandic traffic. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 53-58. Sanders, W. B. (1974). The sociologist as detective: An introduction to research methods. New York: Praeger. Schaller, G. B. (1964). The year of the gorilla. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sommer, R., & Sommer, B. (1989). Social facilitation effects in coffeehouses. Environment and Behavior, 21, 651-666. Stumpf-Carome, J. M. (1995). On becoming one of the boys. Practicing Anthropology, 17, 17-20. Talk of the Town. (1993, April 5). Horse play. The New Yorker, 36-37.

Further Reading
Banister, P. (1994). Qualitative methods in psychology: A research guide. Philadelphia: Open University Press. Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. H. (1995). Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1995). Designing qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Shaffir, W., & Stebbins, R. A. (Eds.). (1991). Experiencing fieldwork: An inside view of qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Suen, H. K., & Ary, D. (1989). Analyzing quantitative behavioral observation data. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., Sechrest, L., & Grove, J. B. (1981). Nonreactive measures in the social sciences (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.