Another advantage of observation methods would be its flexibility. This allows for a quick exploitation of a research opportunity as observation methods do not require large amounts of pre-planning or structuring. This gives observation methods a clear advantage over other methods such as questionnaires which require time in order to allow for the preparation of materials- as it is quite possible that the opportunity for research may have passed during preparation time. Observation methods, and more specifically, overt participant observation, also allows the researcher to gain greater access to the group being studied, which may allow for better, detailed information to be gathered. One key example of this would be Whyte’s “Street Corner Society” study in 1955, in which he became the secretary of Italian Community Club, hence allowing him access to a wealth of information on the community as a whole- an opportunity almost impossible to obtain through other methods. Research methods could also cost significantly less that conducting mail or phone surveys, or sending out a team of interviewers, hence making the method more practical. Observation methods would also have greater environmental validity as they take place in the natural environment of the issue being studied.
On the other hand, Observation Methods also have some striking disadvantages. Overt, participant observation brings about serious problems with the validity of the research. The presence of the researcher, as well as the fact that the research subjects are aware of the research, may lead to results and data being distorted by the Hawthorne Effect, in which research subjects will change their behavior while being watched. This would lead to a reduction in the validity of the research in question as the behavior recorded by the researcher is not an accurate reflection of the group being studied. Self-presentation is also an issue when the observation method is used, as those being observed may try to give a different perception of themselves to the researcher. Observation methods are also plagued by the imposition dilemma- mainly because the researcher must decide what is to be researched and what to record. The researcher in this case would be affected by the Schema Model- and build upon his past experiences and assumptions while conducting the observations in question. This would result in selective observation, the filtering of data collected according to the researcher’s view of importance and the distortion of conclusions by pre-existing views. Positivists would point out the fact that observation methods are not repeatable or representative of society, and argue that the small sample size may lead to significant distortions. This reduces the reliability of observation methods. The fact that the qualitative data produced by observation is not quantifiable, coupled with the small sample sizes used means that it is difficult for sociologists to spot trends within society using observation, and furthermore causes significant difficulties in the recording of results.
Another disadvantage of observation methods would be the cost involved. This is especially true when following groups involved in dangerous activities e.g. street gangs- in which insurance costs would be prohibitively expensive. This reduces the practicality of conducting observation due to costs that may very well exceed those of using other methods. The amount of time used up also has a significant impact on the practicality of observation methods- observing people takes up significant amounts of time and the method in general does not produce fast results. Observation methods, with the issue of time in mind, may also be plagued by the issued of subject attrition, as illustrated in a study by Venkatesh of Chicago drug gangs in which the subjects being observed were routinely murdered or taken out of action through imprisonment. Observation methods also suffer from significant ethical problems. Covert observation, in which the research subject is unaware of the research, may result in the breech of privacy laws. Observation of groups such as criminal gangs may also result in the researcher being complicit in illegal acts, or failing to report them when they do happen. The deceitful manner in which some observation studies are carried out- in which the actual matter being researched is not revealed- also adds an element of dishonesty and yet another ethical problem.
Therefore, it can be said that there are both advantages and disadvantages to the use of observation methods in sociological research. The overall decision on whether this method is of use will depends squarely on the perspective and view taken by the sociologist conducting the research. Positivists would deride observation as narrow and difficult to quantify, while interpretivists would actively advocate the use of observation in order to derive high quality, detailed qualitative data. In conclusion, research methods are of use, but clearly with regards to the gathering of qualitative data, in which it holds a significant advantage over other methods.
