Participant observation is the most common form of observational study, but like all methods of research it has many advantages and disadvantages.
Because the researcher is placed in exactly the same situations as the group being studied, they fully experience what is happening as it happens. Put simply ‘seeing the world through the eyes of the members of that group’. This results in the researcher seeing social life from the same perspective as the group. A consequence of this could be, that the researcher may become too involved, detachment then becomes difficult.
If the researcher has taken a ‘covert role’ the participants are more likely to act naturally, this prevents the ‘Hawthorne effect’ taking place. Whilst the covert role helps increase the safety of the researcher and makes it easier to gain access to the group, it is ‘unethical’. If people are not aware they are being studied, they do not have the opportunity to give their consent. This means that the participants are being deceived. On the other hand, ‘overt participation is ethical. Participants are informed about the nature of the research. A disadvantage with this is that the presence of the researcher may make the group act less naturally. For example: ‘Whyte’states in ‘street corner society’ [1955] that Knowledge of his presence and intentions may have changed the behaviour of the gang. This Hawthorne effect could lead to problems with the validity of the research. Validity could decrease.
Another disadvantage of using participant observation is that it is not replicable. It depends entirely on the interpretations of the researcher. What one researcher might regard as significant or important may be missed or seen as unimportant by another. This decreases the reliability of the results.
To do large-scale studies is extremely difficult, so generally only small groups are studied, this means that you cannot compare different situations, therefore you cannot make generalisations.
Whilst researchers are in the group all observations have to be recorded. This is generally done by keeping a field diary. This is a detailed record of what happens. The researcher would have to write up his observations as often as possible. However the research diary can also be a real weakness of the research. It can be very difficult to write up in the diary on a daily basis. Delays in recording information could make remembering the exact details of the day’s activities difficult. This decreases the validity of the research.
In conclusion, participant observation is about engaging in a social scene, experiencing it and looking to understand and explain it. The researcher is the medium through which this takes place. By listening and experiencing, impressions are formed and theories considered, reflected upon, developed and modified. Participant observation is not an easy method to perform or to analyse but despite the disadvantages, it is a systematic and disciplined study, which, if done well, greatly assists in understanding human actions and brings with it new ways of seeing the social world
