|
Post by og2707 on Oct 13, 2017 0:00:34 GMT
Self reports may be reliable, as the participant may answer the questions similarly each time they are tested. Tests which ask the participant about certain situations may prove that the participant is not reliable, as they may answer the questions differently each time. Self reports as a whole may not be valid, as the information which the participant gives may be false or skewed.
Reports from the participant’s family and friends may be valid as the information given is true, but may not be reliable as the participant may act differently when around friends opposed to being around family.
If the participant knows that they are being observed by a trained observer, then they may act differently to how they naturally act. Meaning that the observer is skewing the reliability of the observation. If the participant does not act differently when being observed and not being observed, then the reliability is not compromised. Validity is only compromised if the participant is not reliable.
I believe that the superior option would be for a professional to observe the behaviours of the participant. Preferably, the participant would not know that they are being observed, as knowing this information may skew the reliability of the experiment, thus making the experiment invalid. The professional will see first hand how the participant behaves, without deciding wether or not the self reports or reports of the friends and families are reliable.
|
|
Asees
Junior Member
Posts: 86
|
Post by Asees on Nov 6, 2017 12:49:54 GMT
I just wanted to highlight that observing an individual is not an experiment. Thus, be careful when you use that word. In an experiment you have a dependent variable, independent variable and you use random assignment.
|
|