View/Open - ARAN - National University of Ireland, Galway

112
Chapter 3 Research Framework
observation that the observer may adopt: complete participant, participant-as-
observer, observer-as-participant and complete observer. The complete participant
role requires the researcher to keep their true identity and purpose from those whom
he/she observes. The observer interacts as much as possible and as naturally as
possible in the research field. This role has ethical implications, i.e. people being
observed without consent. Also, the observer may find it difficult to separate their
true self from the acting role and may end up “going native” whereby he/she
becomes too immersed in the field and thus the findings cannot be used. The
participant-as-observer role requires a participant within the research study to take
on the observer role. Formal and informal observation periods are used. This can be
a difficult role to maintain as the participant also has their job to do and needs to be
careful not to damage trust established with their informants who will most likely be
clients. The observer-as-participant role is used in studies involving one-visit
interviews (Gold, 1958). There is less of a chance of “going native” in this role but
the contact time with the informant is so short that it may be considered superficial.
The complete observer role entirely removes the researcher from social interaction
with informants. The people being observed may not need to know that they are
being informants. According to Gold (1958), this role is almost never a dominant
choice and may be most appropriate if used in combination with other methods.
Gold (1958) stated that the researcher selects and plays a role so that he/she, being
who he/she is, can best study those aspects of society in which he/she is interested.
Mays and Pope (1995) stated that the degree of observer participation varies
according to the nature of the setting and the research question.
Mays and Pope (1995) warn of the potential for the “Hawthorne effect” when
choosing to use complete observation, i.e. where participants/informants behave in a
certain way in order to look good for the observer – they may behave differently to
“normal”. However, Mays and Pope (1995) also stated that the advantage of
observation is that it can help to overcome the discrepancy between what people say
they do and what they actually do. It may also uncover behaviours or routines of
which participants were unaware, or that were so embedded into practice that only an
outsider or complete observer can see. The observation skills of watching, listening,
counting and identifying patterns of social interaction are processes we tend to take
for granted (Morse and Field, 1996). Mays and Pope (1995) stated that the