Observation: directly watching or recording behavior of interestExample: Masters and Johnson- watched couples have sex and studied their reactions as well as watched people masturbate and study their reactionsPenile strain gauges: measure erectionPhotoplethysmographs: measure vaginal blood flowPros: more accurate- removes problems with distortion, estimates, and memoryCons:Increased problems with volunteer biasProblems generalizing to real worldExpensive, time consumingParticipant Observation:Special type of observation in which experimenter becomes part of observation- in the real world as opposed to the laboratoryExample: Moser and S/M partiesPros:Provides context of behaviorsGeneralizable because not being observed in a laboratoryGives access to “hidden” people/behaviors/communitiesCons:Presence of researcher may affect participantsParticipation by researcher may bias perceptionRaises ethical concerns because at times participants may not know that there is a researcher involved: undisguised vs. disguisedPSYCH 3260 1st Edition Lecture 3Outline of Last Lecture I. Samplesa. Volunteer biasII. Methods of Collecting Dataa. Self-reportb. Interviews Outline of Current Lecture I. ObservationII. Participant ObservationCurrent Lecture Observation: directly watching or recording behavior of interest- Example: Masters and Johnson- watched couples have sex and studied their reactions as well as watched people masturbate and study their reactions- Penile strain gauges: measure erection- Photoplethysmographs: measure vaginal blood flow- Pros: more accurate- removes problems with distortion, estimates, and memory - Cons:o Increased problems with volunteer biaso Problems generalizing to real worldo Expensive, time consuming These notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute. Participant Observation:- Special type of observation in which experimenter becomes part of observation- in the real world as opposed to the laboratoryo Example: Moser and S/M parties- Pros: o Provides context of behaviors o Generalizable because not being observed in a laboratoryo Gives access to “hidden” people/behaviors/communities- Cons:o Presence of researcher may affect participantso Participation by researcher may bias perception o Raises ethical concerns because at times participants may not know that there is a researcher involved: undisguised vs.
View Full Document
Unlocking...