Observation: it’s one of the most important qualitative methods.

It’s the primary method of collecting

non-verbal information. Observation requires training, patience and curiosity. One can firstly look at the
environment (a public institution, a political party) – all elements have a certain environment. Secondly,
one can observe people and their relations. One can thirdly look into behavior and activities: see if a
member of a certain ethnic group can check into a hotel. One can look at both verbal and non-verbal
behavior. Psychological stances can also be observed (amusement, discontent, etc.). Family history can
be observed, as well. Last but not least, one can look into physical objects (the location of the desk,
plants, art, what kind of furniture, books, music). Every arrangement tells a story.

Advantages:

 Through observation we can look into non-verbal behavior

 It allows an in-depth analysis of the individual
 The natural environment: there is a low degree of reactivity, as the environment lacks
artificiality
 Through observation you can form longitudinal analysis: you can identify trends, you can make a
distinction between chance and occurrence, what is familiar or not, etc.
 It is appropriate for the study of small communities that we don’t know too much about
 It is highly useful

Disadvantages:

 Behavior might be altered due to the observation (reactive environment, guinea pig effect, the
awareness of being tested). Even the very act of measuring might bring along change)
 Data is not readily comparable (it’s an expensive method, not necessarily in terms of money, but
in terms of time)
 Quantification might be difficult
 Limited accessibility
 Lack of anonymity
 It’s difficult to use other methods at the same time (especially in unobtrusive observation)
 Ethical issue: undercover or not?

Criteria:

 Awareness of the subject

o Obtrusive observation (the person being studied is aware of this; it might rebound, the
researcher asks for permission to gather information and he is identified as such)
 As far as the validity is concerned, obtrusive observation presents the lack of
anonymity (face to face process), being conducted in a legal way.
 The researcher puts down on paper his reality
 Lack of structure
o Unobtrusive observation (it’s highly unlikely for the behavior to be transformed)
  The researcher is either hidden or he is visible but he’s not declaring his real
interest, he remains unknown to subjects.
o Participant observation (the researcher gets involved in the social context on the side of
those researched)
 It’s a very good formula for collecting additional information (next to interview
and document analysis)
 Useful in studying deviant communities (migrating ethnic communities, football
hooligans,
 Observation has to be done over an extended period of time
 Reactivity level is low, even non-existent
 Avoid the risk of going native

Three ideal types:

 Complete participant
o Joins the organization without revealing his identity
o Often times criticized by professional organizations (British Sociological Organization,
regulated by law in Canada and in certain US states)
o Legitimate when the public has to know about an organization
o It does take a lot of nerve, it’s suited for highly skilled and brave individuals
 Participant as observer
o He doesn’t make a secret his investigation, so there are no ethical problems
o There is the problem of reactivity
o It’s important to establish a rapport
o Blending in (researcher physically stays at the margin of the site of research, passive
manner, unthreatening presence; patience and perseverance are required; dress codes
should not be violated)
o Fitting in (the researcher projects an image as if he is part of the group, he has to
express values consistent with those of the group)
 Non-participant observer
o Contact is short, brief
o This is sometimes risky because the researcher cannot gain access
o The researcher might be placed in a dangerous zone
o He might be target of political, ideological, religious, etc. conflict
o Limited amount of information gathered

Structure of observation

 Structured observation
o We do have a protocol guide, which usually tells what, where to look for, the manner in
which results should be recorded (observation schedule – rules, information that should
be obtained; these are variables)
 o Focus is extremely important: we need to know who and how to observe (the
researcher should be highly aware of the research problem)
 Unstructured observation
o You have to pay attention to everything that is going on, hoping that at some point you
will discover patterns of behavior

Natural setting Artificial setting

Unobtrusive Obtrusive
Unstructured Completely unstructured Unstructured laboratory
field research analysis
Structured Structured field study Completely structured
laboratory analysis

Steps

1. Do reading, talk to others, make theoretical assumption

2. Decide upon the subject and the group of people to be studied
3. Gain entry to the group (usually the most challenging issue)
4. Gaining rapport with the subject under scrutiny
5. Conduct research with respect to the hour, place and duration
6. Deal with any crisis that might arise (confrontation with subject who consider you a spy or a
threat)
7. Exiting the observation
8. Analyze the gathered information
9. Compile a report that presents the main findings

 How often they initiate proposals

 How eager is the other part to accept the proposals
 How willing a side is to make concessions
 Look inside the negotiating teams and see if they are united or divided into factions
 Notes have to clearly define the targets of the research and they have to be as detailed as
possible (it’s advisable not to be observed by the subjects you take notes about)
 Make a distinction between actual behavior and interpretation
 Avoid imposing patterns and explanations when they are not there
o Field notes should try to combine what seems important to the subjects that are studied
and what seems important to the researcher

An observation schedule gives you info on what procedures to follow and where to look for information.
Most of the time, it contains detailed information of the behavior so you should know what to look for.
What you are looking for should be reliable and valid. One of the strategies is to appear humble and
powerless. On the contrary, you can be the authority. It’s a nominal type of measurement. You should
be ready to negotiate (access, presence, and exit). Remember to say thanks and give credit where it’s
due. Although it’s qualitative, observation may be sometimes used for sampling procedures. You should
try to observe a group that is as representative as possible.

Indirect observation: we are looking at the setting, at the medium. You look at the materials and their
various degree of usage. You do the same in libraries, in archives. Accretion measures (elements are laid
down naturally): look at soil levels, graffiti, stencils, monuments, public spaces in general. How they are
mapped gives us info on the importance of each element.