Do you think that observational research methods are too subjective? Why or why not? How can observer bias be controlled?
My classmate answered as below. After reading her post, do you have any comment on her information? If yes, please response.
Observational research methods are too subjective; the researcher must be significantly trained to alleviate the possibilities of the results being viewed as biased. Once the information appears to contain biased information, then the creditability of the results will come under question and the result will not be as important or believable to those presented with the outcome of the trials.
To avoid research being associated consisting observer biased results, the testing should be conducted in a manner that will eliminate the speculations of the results containing biased information from the researchers. In order to have a qualified and well received and documented testing done, you would have to get unsolicited responses to people that are using have used or would like to participate in the project and have had prior knowledge to the product being tested to promote a test and results that are useful to the public and will be respected as being offered with little to no bias reflected in the test results.
The test must show pro and cons of the subject being researched, when you add in the results of both sides, the best results would be to take both sides, do a qualitative research to best represent an unbiased outcome.
Please ask for me on future jobs as a Special Request and rate 5/5 for my effort.
I agree with your classmate and do think that observational research methods are too subjective. Although they offer powerful contexts for compiling results from authentic situations and can allow one to really narrate an "in the ...
The subjective nature of observational research methods is debated.