Author Question: Identify the problems associated with observer bias and observer drift. How can researchers identify ... (Read 36 times)

erika · **on:** Jul 13, 2018

Identify the problems associated with observer bias and observer drift. How can researchers identify and overcome these problems?

What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

Jacob, Tennenbaum, Seilhamer, Bargiel, and Sharon (1994) studied two types of families, distress and nondistressed. The researchers tape recorded interactions among family members.

One concern the researchers had involved subject reactivity, which did not seem to be a problem in this study. Why did the researchers suggest there was no subject reactivity?
What will be an ideal response?

abro1885 · **Reply #1 on:** Jul 13, 2018

Answer to Question 1

Observer bias involves the researcher bring his or her predispositions to the observations, inadvertently recording those behaviors that reinforce beliefs or expectations and ignoring behaviors counter to expectation. This problems can be overcome, in part, through the use of a behavior checklist with objective definitions of behaviors to be coded.
Observer drift involves changes in observational criteria by a researcher over the course of a study. As a result, the same behavior can lead to different responses at different points in the study. Researchers can minimize the effects of observer drift by (a) using objective criteria, (b) systematic training of observers, (c) retraining observers and changing pairs of observers so the same people don't always work together. Researchers can check on consistency of observations by looking at interobserver reliability.

Answer to Question 2

(a) families have routine ways of interaction that may be hard for them to change, so when they were being recorded, they may not have been able to reliably change those routines.
(b) the families were busy, so they may not have had the chance to figure out how to change behaviors even if they wanted to.
(c) there may have been little motivation for them to change their behaviors because they didn't have a close relationship with the researchers, so there was little reason to invest energy in changing behaviors for a set of strangers.