Research Methods
Comparisons of Research Design
There are several research design methods that have been developed for the field of psychology. Instead of arguing over which is the best method, it is more appropriate to compare two of the favored designs. Each one has positive attributes along with negative factors that may influence results. It is more important to understand and decipher which is the most appropriate method to utilize based upon the theory you are working towards. The two designs that will be discussed in this paper are the naturalistic observation and survey research. Behavior is the fundamental factor that is measured in scientific psychology that include activities and other physiological indicators of thoughts and feelings (Elmes D., Kantowitz B., Roediger H., 2012). Therefore, a descriptive research method would be considered most useful because they yield descriptions of behavior (Danner, N. & Johnson, J., 2013). The naturalistic observation is a descriptive method that observes and records behavior in a natural setting without implementing any influence or control (Danner, N. & Johnson, J., 2013). This is not a common method just for researchers but much of the population has also participated in it as well; it is most commonly known as people watching. The main purpose of this method is to observe a behavior in the utmost natural form without any manipulation controlled by the investigator. One advantage of the naturalistic observation design is that it allows the behavior being watched exactly the way it occurs in the real world. For example, to study the reaction of someone during a natural disaster such as an earthquake or hurricane, there would be no other manner to study besides having one occur. Another advantage of naturalistic observation is that it helps to establish an external validity of the research findings. When you see a behavior occurring in real life,
There are several research design methods that have been developed for the field of psychology. Instead of arguing over which is the best method, it is more appropriate to compare two of the favored designs. Each one has positive attributes along with negative factors that may influence results. It is more important to understand and decipher which is the most appropriate method to utilize based upon the theory you are working towards. The two designs that will be discussed in this paper are the naturalistic observation and survey research. Behavior is the fundamental factor that is measured in scientific psychology that include activities and other physiological indicators of thoughts and feelings (Elmes D., Kantowitz B., Roediger H., 2012). Therefore, a descriptive research method would be considered most useful because they yield descriptions of behavior (Danner, N. & Johnson, J., 2013). The naturalistic observation is a descriptive method that observes and records behavior in a natural setting without implementing any influence or control (Danner, N. & Johnson, J., 2013). This is not a common method just for researchers but much of the population has also participated in it as well; it is most commonly known as people watching. The main purpose of this method is to observe a behavior in the utmost natural form without any manipulation controlled by the investigator. One advantage of the naturalistic observation design is that it allows the behavior being watched exactly the way it occurs in the real world. For example, to study the reaction of someone during a natural disaster such as an earthquake or hurricane, there would be no other manner to study besides having one occur. Another advantage of naturalistic observation is that it helps to establish an external validity of the research findings. When you see a behavior occurring in real life,
References: Danner, N. and Johnson, J. (Eds.) (2013) page 55-56. Psychology: ORG5001 Survey of Psychology I. Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing. Elmes D., Kantowitz B., Roediger H. (2012). Overview of Psychological Research. In Ganster, L., Matray T (Eds.), Research Methods In Psychology. (pp. 4-9). Belmont, CA:Wadsworth Publishing. Robling, M., Ingledew, D., Greene, G., Sayers, A., Shaw, C., Sander, L., Russell, I. (2010). Applying An Extended Theoretical Framework For Data Collection Mode To Health Services Research. BMC Health Services Research, 10, 89-101. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-180