The covert method is the best method to use along side participant observation as it allows the researcher to see the group’s natural behaviour due to the group being unaware of them being studied. The covert method can also help when the research group is a hard to reach group or a difficult subject to ask about such as teens who have turned to drugs and why they take drugs, as the researcher can be fully trusted and accepted into the group.
The overt method is the honest way of conducting a participant observation as the study group will be fully aware of them being studied and of the research aims; this allows the researcher to be honest to the group which will prevent ethical issues. A problem with the group being fully aware of them being studied is that real behaviour may not always be observed. Being away from the group as an outsider could become an advantage for the researcher as some members of the group may see him as someone who they could confined in away from the other members, but it can also be a disadvantage as many members may not trust him and could therefore not be as willing to give away certain information such as illegal activities.
Participant observation has advantages and disadvantage, like all sociology methods. The main advantage is the fact that conducting a participant observation allows us to fully understand why and how people behave but unlike other methods such as questionnaires that only look at the respondents behaviours and attitudes in that moment in time. A participant observation normally takes time over a long period of time, it’s a longitudinal study, and it allows us to see how these behaviours, attitudes and opinions change and is affected over time. This could also allow the researcher to extend their ideas of research and allow them to obtain new ideas for further research.
A second advantage of participant observation is that it gives the researcher an opportunity to create a close bond with the members of the research group, even if it’s just one member. This close bond will be to the researcher’s advantage as they can be seen as someone who the group can confine in certain issues or views that would either remain hidden or untold to other members of the group.
Participant observation may also the only way to really get the truth out from the respondents, unlike questionnaires or interviews, as the researcher actually gets to see the person in action and if the observation is done covertly then there should no reason why the participants should feel they should lie unless they are trying to make themselves look social desirable to the ‘new’ member of the group or to other members.
The main disadvantage of a participant observation is that it is not very reliable, meaning that there is no real proof on how the researcher obtained his results from the group and that everyone behaves different so it’s very unlikely that you would be able to repeat the study again and obtain the same results. Another problem with the not being able to obtain the same results again is that the findings from one social group, which is normally small, cannot be generalized to another social group or population.
Another important disadvantage is the problem with observer bias, which could happen in many ways. The observer could be entering the group with a closed mind and already have opinions and ideas as to what they are going to find and the reasons why the findings would happen. This could affect the findings by the researcher only seeing what they wish to see. Another way the researcher could become bias is by becoming to much of a member of the group and only seeing things they way the group does and not allowing outside insights to be taken into effect.
The researcher could also implicate the results by influencing the study group, this could be done through either covert or overt methods. If the group is aware of the researcher being their then they may act up and try to give him the results he wishes to obtain or the group could act differently to prove the research aims wrong. Even if the study group in unaware of there being a researcher present among them he could still influence their behaviour by commenting on their daily activities and could possibly talk the group out of committing an activity so that the researcher doesn’t have to take part in any morally wrong acts.
