It was interesting to hear how researchers collect data and how participants can effect data by their perceptions of what the researcher is looking for. Prior to watching this video I was unaware of what the Hawthorne effect was. However, after watching this video I understand how the first researchers who conducted this study came to the conclusion that the changes that they made within the workplace increase productivity. Despite the incongruity within the first experiment researchers have obtained a great deal of knowledge that has lead them to gain a better understanding of effects on productivity as well as other reasons for skewed findings within data.
It is understood that subjects will do what they can to please the experimenters. People are curiously inclined in general and if they think that something is going on, then the research results will definitely be skewed (demand characteristic). I do agree with Jamie Bailey in that it is good that we can review research and scrutinize it for accuracy. Its how researchers become better and have positive effect on what it is they are studying, to perhaps make a difference in the lives of people, environments etc.
The research could've been more valid if the observers were not present by staying hidden and analyzing the quantitative output of the workers. The presence of the observers will produce faster/better work from the workers just as a police officer following a car will make the followed driver more law abiding.
I appreciate your elaboration on the subject. Neuman (2012) does explain the meaning of the term as well as the history, but only states that the Hawthorne Effect is subject to doubt.
thank you for sharing this. concepts of validity and reliability come to mind to ensure reliability of experiments. Additionally, the concept inter-researcher reliability comes to mind. Can the study and its results remain reliable and valid throughout different reserachers
If you believe that Hawthorne effect is a myth, that means you've never heard/know that there's such a thing as genuine sincere care about in order to properly conducting experiments (experiments that demand genuine result without any alterations from the subject themselves), you have to remember and should not always tell/give every informations to the subject. I know it sounds unethical or unconsenting but genuine experiments' result only emerged when there's little to no alterations from the subjects themselves.
This is a thorough explanation. It’s good that studies done by previous researchers can be scrutinized for accuracy and possible miscalculations.
It was interesting to hear how researchers collect data and how participants can effect data by their perceptions of what the researcher is looking for. Prior to watching this video I was unaware of what the Hawthorne effect was. However, after watching this video I understand how the first researchers who conducted this study came to the conclusion that the changes that they made within the workplace increase productivity. Despite the incongruity within the first experiment researchers have obtained a great deal of knowledge that has lead them to gain a better understanding of effects on productivity as well as other reasons for skewed findings within data.
It is understood that subjects will do what they can to please the experimenters. People are curiously inclined in general and if they think that something is going on, then the research results will definitely be skewed (demand characteristic). I do agree with Jamie Bailey in that it is good that we can review research and scrutinize it for accuracy. Its how researchers become better and have positive effect on what it is they are studying, to perhaps make a difference in the lives of people, environments etc.
The research could've been more valid if the observers were not present by staying hidden and analyzing the quantitative output of the workers. The presence of the observers will produce faster/better work from the workers just as a police officer following a car will make the followed driver more law abiding.
I appreciate your elaboration on the subject. Neuman (2012) does explain the meaning of the term as well as the history, but only states that the Hawthorne Effect is subject to doubt.
thank you for sharing this. concepts of validity and reliability come to mind to ensure reliability of experiments. Additionally, the concept inter-researcher reliability comes to mind. Can the study and its results remain reliable and valid throughout different reserachers
If you believe that Hawthorne effect is a myth, that means you've never heard/know that there's such a thing as genuine sincere care about in order to properly conducting experiments (experiments that demand genuine result without any alterations from the subject themselves), you have to remember and should not always tell/give every informations to the subject. I know it sounds unethical or unconsenting but genuine experiments' result only emerged when there's little to no alterations from the subjects themselves.
Thank you for this video!