Observational Methods (General)

Introduction

Observational methods applied to natural or habitual contexts are scientific procedures that reveal the occurrence of perceptible behaviours, allowing them to be formally recorded and quantified. They also allow the analysis of the relations between these behaviours, such as sequentiality, association, and covariation. In many situations, observational methods are the best strategy, or even the only strategy possible (Fernandez-Ballesteros, 1993): examples are the assessment of low level intervention programmes, interactions between peers, between children and adults, between the deaf and hearing, etc., social interactions at different ages, disputes between [Page 633]couples or in the workplace, the behavioural repertoire of the baby, poor body posture for specific tasks, kinetic non-verbal communication (of teachers, sportsmen and women, actors and actresses, etc.), analysis of movement in multiple activities, occupation of a particular space, and the analysis of norms of socialization and desocialization.

Assessment in natural contexts through observation is unquestionably complex (Anguera, Blanco, Losada & Sánchez-Algarra, 1999). In all settings we find a range of behaviours which form a pyramid structure (Fernández del Valle & Fernández-Ballesteros, 1999). Starting from the top of the pyramid, we can break down daily life in a natural context into different levels such as family, health, school, leisure, sports, etc., revealing a tree structure with a hierarchical subdivision of situations in which behaviours that tend towards molarity interact with their natural contexts. Towards the base of the pyramid, the perceptible behaviours are increasingly molecular.

Basic Decisions

Assessment in natural contexts needs a clear definition of the scope of our activity, in particular in two areas: content, and procedure or methodology.

As regards content, we must set the thematic limits of the specific everyday behaviour in question. There are three restrictions on the object of assessment:

• (a)
  Its perceptibility: total or partial. Much has been written on perceptibility, and the positions taken have tended to depend on the psychological schools taken as a reference point. Our position is clear, in that we consider manifest behaviours-behaviours which involve total perceptibility, and which can be more reliably delimited.
• (b)
  The fact that it is a part of everyday life and of the natural environment of the individual. Assessment generally focuses on habitual aspects or sectors of the life of a human being. The thousands of days and millions of hours that make up the everyday activity of an individual constitute a frame of reference that is easily wide enough for study.
• (c)
  Interaction with the environment. Any behaviour needs a reference point inside its environment. For us the reference point is the molar set of the places defined in the area in which the human activities that characterize the individual's behaviour occur. Certain environments offer ideal conditions for the detection of needs: family, school, playgroups, leisure groups, etc.
• (d)
  Possibility of monitoring over time, as opposed to an appraisal of sporadic, chance occurrence of specific behaviours. A dynamic approach to the study and diagnosis of human behaviour is required, imposing time limits on the interactive flow, and allowing diachronous study of certain episodes of behaviour.

From the procedural or methodological point of view, we should analyse why observational methods are well suited to assessment within natural contexts (Nell & Westmeyer, 1996). Methodologically, assessment in natural contexts is particularly suited to the implementation of unobtrusive procedures to appraise the behaviour of an individual (Anguera, 1993). Observational methodology has both advantages and disadvantages. Amongst its advantages are its flexibility, its ability to adapt to very different behaviours and situations, its rigour in the application of the various procedural operations, and the non-restrictive and unobtrusive nature of its appraisal of real situations. Its main disadvantages are the time required, the difficulty of reducing or eliminating the reactivity bias, the complexity of the process of observer training and the restrictions imposed by ethical considerations.

...