he population of my sample was a small one (around 15+ to 25 people) and had quite an even balance of female and male. However it had an age bias as many of the people were of an age of 18-25. Furthermore we only recorded behaviour in one area and one room of the public house so the area in which I recorded behaviour in was a small area. The coding system I used was event sampling (measuring the amount of times behaviour occurs) the observation schedule I used was . . . I recorded the information in a tally chart so it was easy to analysis and the data would be quantitive making the data quick to record and it would also be quite discreet.
Procedure: Before observing I and another observer mingled with the participants as we wanted to be participant observers and also to make a covert observation. We were both positioned next to each other in the area as to insure we didn’t miss anything but still saw things from the same perspective we didn’t move apart as area was a small one and didn’t require us to. We had a piece of paper each and began to record which behaviour happened (ticking every time that behaviour occurred). We observed for around 10 minuets.
Within that time me and the observer often joined in with conversations that were going on keeping us participant and covert in the observation. The time was around 8. 30 as this was prime time for people to be settled in the environment. The weather was a frosty night and was bitterly cold however it was very warm inside the public house. The location was busy for a mid-week night, as many people in a large friendship group often go out toward the end of the week. In all aggression was recorded 20 times in 10 minuets which were substantially larger then any other behaviour recorded.
The least common form of general behaviour was people going to the toilet together as this happened once in the 10 minuets however this may have occurred more if the observation time was longer. The most popular activity that took place was smoking for the males they were recorded smoking 8 times did in the 10 minuets, however it was only recorded 3 times for the females smoked in the 10 minuets which so a large gap between the sexes showing the females who were there were non-smokers or didn’t smoke as frequently as the males.
The most popular activity for the females was playing on their phone as girls were recorded playing on them 6 times, similarly so did the boys they were also recorded playing on there phone 6times. Closely followed by going to the toilet, in which they were recorded doing this 5 times. The least popular activity for males was going on the fruit machine and juke box as not one male was recorded doing any of these activities, although the girls were recorded doing these activities twice each. This shows there was little interest in solitary activities or background activities.
The least popular activities for females was Poole as only once was a female recorded playing Poole, this was closely followed by the bar as the females were only twice recorded visiting the bar. Conclusion: Through my observation I have found out that generally the behaviour in the public house was aggressive and people participated in activities more that involved a group of people around them. Finally I found that in certain instance there was a gap between the sexes however on some circumstance they were matched quite closely, stopping me from generalising. Ethical issues:
At the observation the people were made aware that they were observed by us and shown what we observed and asked if any one wished to with draw, which no one did. However if they did we would of had to get rid of all our findings as we couldn’t be sure on what things they were recorded. Finally as names were not recorded and the activities in which we looked to record were everyday things we did not invade people’s privacy. Validity: The way in which we recorded is data was a simple, easy and understandable method of recording the data; we used a simple list and tally chart marking.
The problems with the categories used were ultimately distinguishing what general behaviour it occurred in although we only had 3 options. It was hard to see if a over use of a laugh was a flirting or friendly behaviour. The problem with using a telly chart and a listing system was that the actions had to be clear cut to be recorded otherwise the information could be miss perceived by one of the observers. Finally the actions we wee looking for were either very simple or covered a wide range of behaviour that could relate to them, meaning there wasn’t much variation or choice for the general behaviour.
Alternative measures: We could of measured the aim differently by recording the types of behaviour differently we could of describe each persons behaviour separately or could of given more options of behaviour. We could of used time sampling as this could help to improve the outcome of our results as we could of seen how certain behaviour develops as time gets on. Reliability: I feel my observation would be easy to repeat as it is straight forward and easy to partake in.
as it requires little resources, little time and effort to do. If someone else tried to repeat the study around the same age group I feel the results will be about the same as the behaviours recorded were often expected as they have already been generalised happen. He results will also remain the same as there were no abnormalities regarding the behaviour what took place. In my observation I also had another observer with me we had inter-rate reliability increasing validity of the study as we were unlikely to miss anything.