Theoretical issues in participant observations: POSITIVISM
A summary of the positivism's view of participant observations.
- Created by: Sian
- Created on: 01-12-12 09:45
View mindmap
- Positivism: participant observations
- Representation
- Groups studied are usually very small
- 'sample' usually picked haphazardly
- For example through a chance informant encounter
- Thus causing samples to be un-representative of the wider population
- not suitable for making generalisations
- Reliablility
- unsystematic and lacking in reliability
- not a standardized scientific measuring equiptment
- Whyte recognized his methods were unique
- impossible for other researchers to check original studies
- Whyte recognized his methods were unique
- not a standardized scientific measuring equiptment
- success depends on personal skills
- Qualitative data hard to analyse
- cannot be confident on findings being true
- impossible for other researchers to check original studies
- unsystematic and lacking in reliability
- bias and lack of objectivity
- Risks of 'going native'
- Over identifying with the group
- Biased and over symathetic view will be shown
- Involvement leads to loyalty to the group
- trying to conceal sensitive information
- This is denying readers and objective account of the research
- trying to conceal sensitive information
- Usually studied from the 'underdogs' pont of view.
- Causing it to be subjective and biased.
- Risks of 'going native'
- Lack of validity
- The results are recorded from the observers point of view
- Findings are selected by the observer.
- This is decided upon by the observers own norms and values
- They collect masses of qualitative data, what is ommited is decided by the researcher.
- The hawthorne effect
- The observers presence may make the subjects act differently.
- defeats the central 'naturalistic' aim of the observation.
- Even in covert studies, the presence of an extra member might change the groups behavior.
- Representation
Comments
No comments have yet been made