Participatory observation is often said to vary over a range from being a participant to being an observer. In this case, you are clearly more like an observer.

You might also look into the qualitative research method known as "shadowing" to see if that matches what you doing.

Thanks David, I will check upp "Shadowing".

Hello,

Participant observation when you are not only observing, but you also participate. For example, if you are not only observing how the nurse is taking care of a patient, but you are working at the hospital as a doctor, so that you may participate in observation, like help her, ask her questions while she's doing her job. In your case, if you are just a researcher, and you observe from the side, you do not work at this place, I think you are non-participant observant. I had a participant observation case with the group of immigrants, but when I observed a group, I also participated in their meetings, and was helping them with marketing materials, and interviewing them.

Thanks Valeria, I understood non-participation observation as not being in the field at all. For instance watching a video tape and observing the interaction without being in the field or listening to a recorder. Many people say you are particpant since you are THERE even if you are not providing any care. What matters is your present. I'm confused, some says it is about the action/care you provide others says it is about being present there does matter since you have impact on the situation known as "Hawthorne effect".

I would agree with Valeria that the label "non-participant" observer is appropriate. By being in the setting, you may have some effect on what happens (but I would not be as specific as labeling this a "Hawthorne effect").

Hi Rasol,

Clear distinction made by both David and Valeria. To add, we do not and in some Context cannot participate in all the settings.

Participant observation means the presence of the researcher in the field interacting with people and local events (this interaction can have multiple zoom levels. Non participant observation means the investigador posture present, but  totally external in the observed contexto and without Interact in it.

Thanks Maria and Kapi for your input. I appreciate that.

there are of course varying degrees of 'participation' in those social events which we, as ethnographers can become embedded. from the classical anthropological methods requiring years of preparation, living with/among, and then essentially debriefing, to what some refer today as 'short-term' ethnography. the point of the 'participation' was to get as close to the subject as possible to get a 'participant'/insider view. of course that view (bias) then had to be taken into account in the process of analysing the data obtained by the process. from what you describe the most i can tell as 'participation' is as being a part of the situation observed and being involved (having effect) only to the degree that the other participants were aware of your presence and changing their behaviors.actions as a consequence. obviously one can accidentally become a participant but i hope you include some reflective statement as to these issues so that readers are aware of both potential insights as well as accidental biases/errors.

The basic idea is to see the world as the "native' --the "subject," the "informant"-- does, as part of the concept of cultural relativity.  Unfortunately, some cultural relativists have gone too far, while many others are too relative with it..., applying it selectively, i.e., sort of cherry picking.  Anthropology is no longer what it was meant to be, or what it used to be.   Anthropology is supposed to be a descriptive learned discipline, but many anthropologists act as "prescriptives..."

The participant-observer typically has an influence on the the path or outcome of what he/she is observing, and P-Os needs to carefully assess their role before their  task is initiated and also monitor their role and outcomes through the task process. Of course, the observed group needs to clearly understand this P-O role prior to task initiation.

Regarding Ronald Alum's definiton of "anthropology", as with most of our social research fields, conditions, needs and wants change, and there is a legitimate role for prescription in anthropology, as long as this role is clearly understood and explained. Perhaps we saw this first clearly with the applied anthropologists' health care work in central America in the 1940s.

The non-participant observer researcher is usually a 'stranger' - they do not normally belong to the scene. They have no recognisable normal role/ part to play, are purely observers and do not participate in the scene or events. They are likely to stand out or be obvious. Their presence may affect how those they are observing 'feel' about being observed and this could alter the way they behave and distort the data. Their task is to establish a non-threatening presence and blend in as unobtrusively as possible so their presence is accepted and largely ignored. In contrast, the participant observer researcher has a natural legitimate presence in the area. They participate in activities and are engaged in the setting. In the case of a nurse or other health professional, they are recognised as having a role in the area and belong to the scene. They may already have a relationship with those they are observing and can build on this. Their interactions and presence are part of the normal routine and they are accepted by the 'locals'. To this extent the participant observer becomes or is naturally embedded in the scene and their presence attracts little, if any, attention by those being observed. The value of participant observation is that the presence of the researcher is not expected to cause the people being observed to change their behavior and that the researcher can interact to probe and clarify understanding. Though traditionally associated with ethnography and cultural immersion, this form of observation can raise ethical questions if seen to be 'covert' research. Normally, the participant researcher does not conceal the research and in being open can come and go from the scene without distorting the data being collected. 

Yes, David is spot on. I would say this is a perfect example of Shadowing and not Participant Observation.  If you were somehow involved in either the consultation or the process then it would be participation. 

Thanks Merylin, Laurence and Anita for your input. Appreciated very much!

Thanks Jerry and Roland for your input and explaining the distinctions.

Many thanks,

Could there be an observant participant?

Hello

I good and structured answer may be found on http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/social-research/data-collection/participant-observation-and-non-participant-observation/64510