Abstract

Social scientists often employ direct observation to study human behavior, but a health researcher who proposes it may face considerable skepticism from colleagues. Concerns about reactivity lead many to question the validity of observational data. Because few studies have measured reactivity, evidence to evaluate this concern is limited. The authors report results from their systematic measurement of reactivity during a Peruvian malaria prevention study. In sixty observations over nine months, observers recorded all behavior they perceived as potentially reactive. The authors then assessed reactivity using iterative coding and analysis. Although they documented 339 reactivity episodes, only two involved behaviors related to study objectives. These findings are consistent with prior research and provide additional evidence that reactivity, though common, need not bias study results. The authors suggest strategies for assessing reactivity that can help reassure skeptics and reinforce the validity of observational data.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.