Obse Mtions
Observations are one of the main methods used in psychological research
today. In this two-part article, David Putwain explores the main features
of this method. Part 2 will appear in issue 2'
,::r:::ir::ri:: ince psychology emerged as a distinct
:1, : discipline in the early 19OOs, observa-
a valuable research
':i.:,ll:,tiont have been
,;;,,,:l.:ri: rpethod in many different areas of
psychology and some of the most impor-
tant and surprising findings have been
discovered using this method. Despite the
rather obvious name 'observations', there is
more to this method than simply watching
what goes on with various participants. To
start with, the observational method
flexible and can be used in both the quan-
titative and qualitative research traditions'
Where observations are used in quantita-
tive research, they are referred to as struc-
tured observations, and in qualitative
research they are called unstructured
observations. My aim is to describe how
observations are used in these different
ways, giving examples, and to consider
some of the design decisions involved in
conducting observations.
Structured observations
The first step in conducting structured
a
observation is to develop an observation
schedule or coding scheme' These contain
predetermined categories for recording
what is observed. Simple coding schemes
include checklists to record whether a
particular behaviour has occurred or not
and tally charts to record how often, or
frequently, a behaviour has occurred in a
particular time trame. The exacr categories
ls
used in acoding scheme will
varY
depending on the questions posed by
particular research study' However, Robson
(2002) suggests that usually they come
from the following:
,', non-verbal behaviour: bodily move-
ments not associated with language
,' spatial behaviour: movement towards
or away from others
linguistic behaviour: content of what
said
. extra-linguistic behaviour: aspects of
verbal behaviour other than what is said,
such as speed of speech, loudness and
tendency to interruPt
For example, if we wanted to investisate
whether young boys are more aggressive in
their play than young girls in a pre-school
playgroup setting, we might develop cate-
gories based on the different types of
aggressive play we expect' These could
include non-verbal behaviours such as
snatching toys from other children, pulling
a hair, pushing other children, and linguistic
behaviours such as shoutlng and swearing
at other children. ln a study such as this' the
frequency of each rype of behaviour could
be counted in a tally chart and the different
young
rypes of behaviours compared for
boys and girls.
The second step is to provide a precise
is definition of how each category witl be
measured. This is important, as it enables
September 200s ff
 establish in a field sefiing like that of the moving to a different context such as the
observation room (complete with one-way
home or a playgroup. The downside of
using a laboratory setting is that the results
mirror) of a university psychology depart-
.uy not generalise to what happens in the ment. ln fact, the mere presence of an
observer in an ordinary classroom context
real world of the playgroup or home' ln
technical-speak, we would say that the may be sufficient to alter behaviour' but
ecological validiry is lower. One could spec-
this is another question.
By using a field setting, many factors
ulate about the degree to which behaviour
affect the behaviours of both
is changed by being in this unnatural which may
and the students remain
sefling. Perhaps the child would be too the
teacher
uncontrolled (some topics are more dull or
young to notice but its mother would not
than others, some students
te. rhe only way to tell if the study does interesting
it have gone on holiday and are missing and
I have low ecologlcal validiry is to replicate
The real life context of the
in a natural setting and see if there is a so foith).
difference in the results.
findings has come at the exPense of
Some structured observations have to be
control, so the researcher must decide
conducted in a field setling, as the real life
what is the most important for their study'
context is crucial to the behaviours and
actions of the participants' One example is
a study analysing teacher and pupil inter-
(197O)' ln an overt observation, the participants are
action in the classroom by Flanders
ten categories aware of the presence of the observer and
The coding scheme used
The behaviour of a baby interacting with
its
in a covert observation they are not This
such as 'teacher asl<s a question' and
mother and a stranger was observed through
'teacher uses student ideas'' ln this kind of issue is usually more relevant to a field
a one-waY mirror observation, as in a laboratory observation
example, the behaviour of both the teacher
the observer(s) tend to be another room'
the person or persons conducting the and the students would be altered by
observation to be consistent in the way
they make their observations' The question 3;; l. Th* ,tt";il:** slt**t!*t: rr*{*du}"c
of reliability will be examined in more Theprocedureconsistedoleightepisodespresentedin'standardorderforaIlparticipants.After
of the observation
non-threatening environment
detail later on. a brief introduction to the ,nt *itia but
The third step is to conduct a pilot study room, the baby was onr.ru.i *'ttt rts mother'
to see how far it would move away from its
mother to play with ,o*. tol,r. wr.'tii. lh. ou
uyt -other was present, a. stra nger entered the
to test the coding scheme' You might find
motherihen leftthe room, returningafter
that additional categories need to be added room and made a graduatapproact tothe baby.The
a few minutes, when the ,ti#g.r i.ft
th. ,.oori. 16. mother tried to interest her baby in the
to your coding scheme' or that certain cate-
tovsbeforeleavingituton.intfitroomagain The:lt?fgttreturnedtotheroomand
gori., u." hard to code and so need to be returned'
r;i#il;i; .;;:s; t;. iabv's attention'and finallv the mother
more carefully defined' When you are Differentgroupsof
satisfied that your coding scheme is Astheauthorsnoteintheirpreface,thisprocedurewasnotanexperiment
to those iifferent groups to measure the effect on a dependent
participants were not assrgned
workable, you are ready to begin collecting p,.o.ljr,. Jidlake place urider controlled experimental conditions' of
the
data. However, there is a range of variable. Although
',. t.a pt*ii. of the infant's behaviours The frequency
aim was to make detailed
important design decisions that need to be behaviours were
"Ut!rvations
coded il ror![ , on. way mirror in 15-second
time intervals for the following
made before you begin. An audio-visual 12 categories
recording can provide a permanent record Description
Category of behaviour
of events, the advantages of which are or door
Locomotion Walking/crawlingtowards mother, strangel toy
discussed later on' (reaching with arms/kicking feet)
Body movement Movement not involving locomotion
Design decisions in structured Body posture Sitting, kneeling
observations Hand movement Picking up toy, giving/taking toy to parent/
stranger
a; toy or door
Visual regard Whether child looks at mother, stranger'
ri.:,

Location Position of child in room

Adult picks uPlPuts child down
ln a laboratory setting, the researcher can Adult contact
Does child cling or resist adult contact?
control events. ln the famous example of Baby contact
a laboratory observation, Ainsworth et
al' Unhappy noises through to screaming
Crying
situation' (see
(1978) a'strange
created Voca lisations Communicative noises that are not crying
its
Box 1). An infant was left in a room on Sucki nglchewi ng.
Oral
own with some toys and a stranger and its
Whether child smiles at mother or stranger
mother entered and left the room at
Smile
then used to determine interactive behaviours between
predetermined times. The reactions of the The frequency ofthese behaviours was
child were observed from another room the adult and the child.
through a one-way mirror' Such precise Source: Ainsworth et al (1978)

.ontrol would be much more difficult to

AC-A A) PsYchologY Review

 ability can be checked by asking two
and
Viewingbehaviourthroughaone-waythepublicdomainasitusuallyonlyoccurs that are obseivers to code the same behaviour
mirror. so laboratory obiervations
are in particular institutions (schools)
However' the then comparing their codings' A high
not open to public access'
two sets
usually covert. degree of similariry between the
lnafieldsetting,thebehaviourofthebehaviourofcouplesincoffeeshopsispart of Ioding would indicate high reliabiliry'
t;;; ii ihty u" of the public domain' ln this
context
participants may be lntra-Jbserver reliability can be checked
awareofthepresenceofanobserver.Acouplesareawa'rethattheyaregoingtobe by asking a single observer to rate
the same
of the
teacher may try and plan a more
inter- in a place with other members interact' behaviour twice at two different times and
they may
esting lesson using a uu'itiy of
learning public' with whom comparingthe codings' Once again'
a high
more oi one school of thought therefore suggests
degree of similariry between the two
be sets
methods and the stuoenis m'ay . people
that it is more acceptable to observe
less cooperatiu., a.p.Jinf'on-*t "rr-r"r
As
public context' as they would of lodingwould indicate high reliabiliry'
is good covertly in a
their relationship with tr," tlu.h.. ,u..
piece of behaviour needs
exactly rlh.
or not. The point is ttrat tLre Uehaviour rhat be 'ouierued' (in the non-psychological As with to be coded twice, it is only possible to
The sense) by other people'anyway
is recorded may not be natural' establish intra-observer reliability if
the
presenceoftheobserverispartiallyrespon.mostethicaldilemmas,thereisnorightor
and no substitute for behaviour has been recorded' "
sible for the behaviour they
are recording. wrong answer
discus*sing the issue with other
students'
the observe..un ,"n,lln"t]jj." ilir?t
rf References
use an teachers or colleagues' of
.uiin ,iruurions like a classroom) or Ainsworth, M' D' S' et al' (1978) Patterns
unobtrusive audio-visual recording device'
Attachment: A Psychological Study
of the
Reliability codingof
then behaviour mav ;;%;'"";;;;;': reliabitrty of a coding scheme depends
Strange Situatiln, Lawr ence Erlbaum Asso-
The
However, the use of .*""rf ourervations conducting ciates.
raises an importanr dilemma. lf on the skills of the person(s) in Flanders, N. (1970) Analyzing Teaching
"it,i.ut the observation - are they consistent
participants do not kn"* ikl.v ..e being reliability Behattiour,WtleY-
observed, then they ;;;;t provid! their coding? lntra-observer Robson, C. (2002) Real World Research
(2nd
orwithdrawfrom refers to whether the same observer is
consentto participate in edn), Blackwell.
Rosenhan, D' L' 'On being sane in
insane
thestudy,aSthiswouldalertthemtothecodingbehaviourconsistentlyinthesame
observer. one solution is to *uy.
irrt"t-observer reliability refers to 250-58'
Dresence ofthe places', Science,No' 179' PP'
data have been whether two or more observers are coding l<' (2004)
#J_;il*."rr'""". Siraj-Blantchford, l. and Sylva'
collectedthutth.yhuu"beenobse,vedandbehaviourconsistentlyinthesameway' 'Researching pedagogy in English pre-
can be taken to ensure relia-
data Three steps
then offer the* tt . ,igh;io'have their and monitoring' As schools', Briish Ertucation Research Journal'

destroyed. While this ptt'ty t"f"" tftt biliry: defining' traininS No.30, PP 713-30'
"'ttgtti
ethicaldilemma,itmaynotassistthementionedabove,categoriesonacoding
need to be clearly defined and
psychologists' schedule student
public image of Dave Putwain is a doctoral research
whether tested in a pilot study' Observers need to be
Another possibility is to judge at the lJniversity of Manchester and teaches

thecontextoftheobservationisconsideredtrainedinallproceduresusingthecoding psychotogy at Abbey College' Manchester' and

tobepartofthepublicdomainornor.Forscheduleonactualbehaviour,problems for the OPen lJniversitY'
instance,classroomu.r.uuiou.isnotpartofidentifiedandresolved.lnter-observerreli-
September 2005 ffi