While looking after my little son, I constantly see him making new discoveries by observing the world and conducting small experiments. Now he himself does not know what these concepts mean and how they differ. But when he's a little older, this is what I'll tell him.

My observations and experiences

It's best to explain with an example.

I have always loved observing the objects of the world around me. So, it is very interesting to watch how ants behave depending on the weather and time of day.

But what I love even more is conducting experiments.

Once in my childhood I had an amazing experience. From the children's encyclopedia, I learned that the abdomen of ants is transparent. This assumption became my hypothesis, which needed to be confirmed or refuted. I prepared sweet syrups of different colors and placed small drops near the anthill. It's funny, but when the ants drank, their tummies turned the color of a drop of syrup. This confirmed my hypothesis.

Have you guessed how my simple observations of the life of an anthill differed from the experiment I conducted?

In the first case, I simply watched (observed) the behavior of insects. While conducting the experiment, I myself needed to interact with the subjects by placing colored drops near the anthill.
While conducting the experiment, I had a hypothesis (from the children's encyclopedia) and an action plan.
The observations did not require any equipment (although this is not always true; for example, to observe space objects, you will need a telescope). For the experiment, I needed sugar, water, dyes and other means for making syrup.

Cat watching

Watch your pet. You will be able to notice a lot interesting features. For example, that cats are capable of making many sounds that are different from each other.

Experience "Lava"

This interesting experience you can test the hypothesis that oil is lighter than water, but salt is heavier than oil.

Take a glass. Fill it with water and vegetable oil (2:1). The oil will remain floating on top.
Add food coloring.
Add a spoonful of salt.

"Lava" in a jar

Enjoy the “lava” in a glass.

Scientific progress cannot be stopped, and methods of studying the environment have always improved and become more complex. Observations and experiments have been known for centuries; they are not only compared, but also identified. At the same time, there is a colossal difference between these concepts, which reflects the dynamics of the development of scientific thought.

Observations- these are studies in which the scientist maintains visual control of an object, allowing events to develop naturally and noting any changes. The result of the work is recorded on a storage medium for subsequent analysis. Observations can be carried out without equipment, as well as with the use of special means.

Experiments– these are studies in which objects are placed in an artificially created or natural environment, and the scientist enters into active interaction with the subject being studied. In the process of experiments, a hypothesis built on the basis of available theoretical data is confirmed or refuted.

Thus, observations do not involve active interaction with the object. The researcher distances himself from them, recording the data obtained. This is the main goal - collecting information, which will then be analyzed. During the experiment, the scientist enters into active interaction with the object. The purpose of this action is to test the hypothesis by confirming it an unlimited number of times.

Experience always has a plan; observation does not. To conduct an experiment, the researcher needs to recreate certain conditions. The observation is carried out in a natural environment, because intervention in the life of the objects being studied will mean the beginning of the experiment. Both the first and second research methods are extremely useful for science; they do not contradict, but complement each other.

Influence on the object. Observations do not involve active interaction with the object being studied, while experiments are based on such intervention.
Use of special equipment. Research can be conducted naked eye, experiments always require instruments and other scientific and technical means.
Having a plan. Observation is carried out in the same way, experience is carried out according to a pre-developed scenario.
Wednesday. Observation takes place in a natural environment, experience - in an artificial one.
Target. Observations are carried out to collect information for subsequent analysis, experiments are carried out to confirm the hypothesis.

Definition of the concept of “experimental method” in a broad and narrow sense.

Experimental method in the broad sense of the word, on TV. Kornilova, is a change in any conditions when studying patterns in a particular area of empirical reality.

Experimental method in the narrow sense of the word, on TV. Kornilova, is a test of scientific hypotheses of a causal nature based on the application of the standards of the experimental method.

The material in subsequent lectures will be devoted to answering the questions:

How do causal, or cause-and-effect, hypotheses differ from other types of scientific hypotheses?

What characterizes an experiment as a system of standards for testing hypotheses?

1. The first method that students are usually introduced to is observation. In a number of sciences this is the only empirical method. The classic observational science is astronomy. All her achievements are related to the improvement of observation techniques. Observation is no less important in the behavioral sciences. The main results in ethology (the science of animal behavior) are obtained by observing the activity of animals in natural conditions. Observation is of great importance in physics, chemistry, and biology. Associated with observation is the so-called idiographic approach to the study of reality. Followers of this approach consider it the only possible one in sciences that study unique objects, their behavior and history.

The idiographic approach requires observation and recording of individual phenomena and events. It is widely used in historical disciplines. It is also important in psychology. Suffice it to recall studies such as the work of A.R. Luria's "Little Book of Great Memory" or S. Freud's monograph "Leonardo da Vinci".

The idiographic approach is opposed nomothetic approach- research that reveals general laws development, existence and interaction of objects.

Observation is a method on the basis of which one can implement either a nomothetic or idiographic approach to the knowledge of reality.

Observation is called a purposeful, organized and fixed in a certain way perception of the object under study. The results of recording observation data are called a description of the object’s behavior.

Observation can be carried out directly or using technical means and methods of data recording (photo, audio and video equipment, surveillance maps, etc.). However, with the help of observation it is possible to detect only phenomena that occur under ordinary, “normal” conditions, and to understand the essential properties of an object it is necessary to create special conditions different from “normal” ones. In addition, observation does not allow the researcher to purposefully vary the observation conditions in accordance with the plan. The researcher cannot influence an object in order to understand its characteristics that are hidden from direct perception.

The experiment allows us to identify causal relationships and answer the question: “What caused the change in behavior?” Observation is used when it is either impossible or impermissible to interfere with the natural course of the process.

The main features of the observation method are:

Direct connection between the observer and the observed object;

Bias (emotional coloring) of observation;

Difficulty (sometimes impossibility) of repeated observation. In natural sciences, the observer, as a rule, does not influence the process (phenomenon) being studied. In psychology there is a problem of interaction between the observer and the observed. The presence of the researcher, if the subject knows that he is being observed, has an impact on his behavior.

The limitations of the observation method gave rise to other, more “advanced” methods empirical research: experiment and measurement. Experiments and measurements make it possible to objectify the process, because they are carried out using special equipment and methods for objectively recording results in quantitative form.

Unlike observation and measurement, an experiment allows one to reproduce the phenomena of reality in specially created conditions and thereby identify cause-and-effect relationships between the phenomenon and the characteristics of external conditions.

2. Measurement carried out both in natural and artificially created conditions. The difference between a measurement and an experiment is that the researcher does not strive to influence the object, but records its characteristics as they are." objectively", regardless of the researcher and measurement technique(the latter is impossible for a number of sciences).

Unlike observation, measurement is carried out during the device-mediated interaction of the object and the measuring instrument: the natural “behavior” of the object is not modified, but is controlled and recorded by the device. When measuring, it is impossible to identify cause-and-effect relationships, but it is possible to establish connections between the levels of different parameters of objects. This turns the measurement into a correlational study.

Measurement is usually defined as some operation by which numbers are assigned to things. From a mathematical point of view, this "ascription" requires establishing a correspondence between the properties of numbers and the properties of things. From a methodological point of view, measurement is the registration of the state of an object (objects) using the states of another object (device). In this case, a function must be defined that connects the states of the object and the device. The operation of assigning numbers to an object is secondary: we consider the numerical values on the scale of the device not to be indicators of the device, but to be quantitative characteristics of the state of the object. Measurement theory specialists have always paid more attention to the second procedure - interpretation of indicators, and not the first - a description of the interaction between the device and the object. Ideally, the interpretation operation should accurately describe the process of interaction between the object and the device, namely, the influence of the characteristics of the object on its readings.

So, measurement can be defined as an empirical method of identifying the properties or states of an object by organizing the interaction of the object with a measuring device, changes in the states of which depend on changes in the state of the object . The device can be not only an object external to the researcher. For example, a ruler is a device for measuring length. The researcher himself can be a measuring instrument: “man is the measure of all things.” Indeed, the foot, finger, and forearm served as the primary measures of length (foot, inch, elbow, etc.). Same with "measurement" human behavior: the researcher can evaluate the behavior of another directly - then he turns into an expert. This type of measurement is similar to observation. But there is an instrumental measurement, when a psychologist uses some kind of measurement technique, for example, an intelligence test. The features of the measurement method in psychology will be discussed further. Here we only note that in psychology, measurement is understood as two completely different processes.

1. A psychological measurement is considered to be an assessment of the magnitude of certain parameters of reality or an assessment of the similarities and differences of objects of reality, which is made by the subject. Based on these assessments, the researcher “measures” the characteristics of the subject’s subjective reality. In this sense, the "psychological measurement" is a task given to the subject.

2. Psychological measurement in the second meaning, which we will talk about later, is carried out by the researcher to assess the characteristics of the subject’s behavior. This is the task of the psychologist, not the subject.

Observation can conventionally be classified as a “passive” research method. Indeed, when observing people's behavior or measuring the parameters of behavior, we are dealing with what nature provides us with “here-and-now”. We cannot re-observe at a time convenient for us and reproduce the process at will. When measuring, we record only “external” properties;

Often, in order to reveal “hidden” properties, it is necessary to “provoke” a change in the object or its behavior by constructing other external conditions.

3. To establish cause-and-effect relationships between phenomena and processes, experiment. The researcher tries to change external conditions so as to influence the object being studied. In this case, an external influence on an object is considered a cause, and a change in the state (behavior) of an object is considered a consequence.

An experiment is an “active” method of studying reality. The researcher not only asks nature questions, but also “forces” it to answer them. Observation and measurement answer the questions: “How? When? How?”, and experiment answers the question “Why?”.

An experiment is called conducting research in specially created, controlled conditions in order to test an experimental hypothesis about a cause-and-effect relationship. During the experiment, the researcher always observes the behavior of the object and measures its state. Observation and measurement procedures are part of the experimental process. In addition, the researcher influences the object in a planned and targeted manner in order to measure its condition. This operation is called experimental influence. Experiment - the main method modern natural science and natural science-oriented psychology. In the scientific literature, the term “experiment” is applied both to a holistic experimental study - a series of experimental tests carried out according to a single plan, and to a single experimental test - an experiment.

To summarize, we note that observation is a direct, “passive” method of research. Measurement is a passive but indirect method. An experiment is an active and indirect method of studying reality.

Experiment is one of the main methods of scientific research. In general scientific terms experiment is defined as a special research method aimed at testing scientific and applied hypotheses, requiring strict logic of proof and relying on reliable facts. In an experiment, some artificial (experimental) situation is always created, the causes of the phenomena being studied are identified, the consequences of the actions of these causes are strictly controlled and evaluated, and the connections between the phenomena being studied are clarified.

Experiment as a method psychological research corresponds to the above definition, but has some specifics. Many authors, as V.N. points out. Druzhinin, the “subjectivity of the object” of the study is identified as a key feature of a psychological experiment. A person, as an object of knowledge, has activity, consciousness, and thus can influence both the process of his study and its result. Therefore, special ethical requirements are imposed on the situation of an experiment in psychology, and the experiment itself can be considered as a process of communication between the experimenter and the subject.

The task of a psychological experiment is to make an internal mental phenomenon accessible to objective observation. In this case, the phenomenon under study must adequately and unambiguously manifest itself in external behavior, which is achieved through targeted control of the conditions of its occurrence and course. S.L. Rubinstein wrote:

“The main task of a psychological experiment is to make the essential features of the internal mental process accessible to objective external observation. To do this, it is necessary, by varying the conditions for the flow of external activity, to find a situation in which the external flow of the act would adequately reflect its internal mental content. The task of experimentally varying conditions in a psychological experiment is, first of all, to reveal the correctness of one single psychological interpretation of an action or deed, excluding the possibility of all others.”

V.V. Nikandrov points out that achieving the main goal of the experiment - the utmost possible unambiguity in understanding the connections between the phenomena of internal mental life and their external manifestations - is achieved thanks to the following main characteristics of the experiment:

1) the initiative of the experimenter in the manifestation of psychological facts of interest to him;

2) the possibility of varying the conditions for the emergence and development of mental phenomena;

3) strict control and recording of conditions and the process of their occurrence;

4) isolating some and emphasizing other factors that determine the phenomena being studied, which makes it possible to identify the patterns of their existence;

5) the possibility of repeating experimental conditions for multiple verification of the obtained scientific data and their accumulation;

6) varying the conditions for quantitative assessments of the identified patterns.

Thus, psychological experiment can be defined as a method in which the researcher himself causes the phenomena of interest to him and changes the conditions for their occurrence in order to establish the causes of the occurrence of these phenomena and the patterns of their development. In addition, the received scientific facts can be repeatedly reproduced due to controllability and strict control of conditions, which makes it possible to test them, as well as to accumulate quantitative data on the basis of which one can judge the typicality or randomness of the phenomena being studied.

A characteristic feature of experiment as a special empirical research method is that it provides the opportunity for active practical influence on the phenomena and processes being studied. The researcher here is not limited to passive observation of phenomena, but consciously intervenes in the natural course of their occurrence. He can do this either by isolating the phenomena under study from some external factors, or by changing the limiting conditions in which they occur. In both cases, test results are accurately recorded and monitored.

Thus, the addition of simple observation with an active influence on the process being studied turns the experiment into a very effective method empirical research. This is facilitated primarily by a closer connection between experiment and theory. “Experimentation,” write I. Prigogine and I. Stengers, “means not only reliable observation of genuine facts, not only the search for empirical dependencies between phenomena, but also implies a systematic interaction between theoretical concepts and observation” 1.

The idea of an experiment, its design, and the interpretation of the results depend much more on theory than the search for and interpretation of observational data.

Currently, the experimental method is used not only in those experimental sciences that are traditionally classified as exact natural sciences (mechanics, physics, chemistry, etc.), but also in the sciences that study living nature, especially in those that use modern physical sciences. and chemical research methods (genetics, molecular biology, physiology, etc.).

In modern science, the experimental method was first systematically applied, as we already know, by Galileo, although individual attempts to use it can be found back in antiquity and especially in the Middle Ages.

Galileo began his research by studying the simplest natural phenomena - the mechanical movement of bodies in space over time (falling bodies, movement of bodies along inclined plane and cannonball trajectories). Despite the apparent simplicity of these phenomena, he encountered a number of difficulties of both a scientific and ideological nature. The latter were associated mainly with the tradition of a purely natural-philosophical, speculative approach to the study of natural phenomena, dating back to antiquity. Thus, in Aristotelian physics it was recognized that movement occurs only when force is applied to a body. This position was considered generally accepted in medieval science. Galileo was the first to question it and suggested that the body would be at rest or in a uniform and straight motion until they act on him external forces. Since Newton's time, this statement has been formulated as the first law of mechanics.

It is noteworthy that to justify the principle of inertia, Galileo was the first to use mental an experiment that later found wide application as a heuristic means of research in various branches of modern natural science. Its essence lies in the analysis of the sequence of real observations and in the transition from them to some limiting situation in which the action of certain forces or factors is mentally excluded. For example, when observing mechanical movement you can gradually reduce the effect on the body of various forces - friction, air resistance, etc. - and make sure that the path traveled by the body will increase accordingly. In the limit, one can exclude all such forces and come to the conclusion that the body under such ideal conditions will move uniformly and rectilinearly indefinitely or remain at rest.

Galileo's greatest achievements, however, were associated with setting up real experiments and mathematical processing of their results. He achieved outstanding results with experimental study free fall tel. In his wonderful book “Conversations and Mathematical Proofs...” Galileo describes in detail how he came to his discovery of the law of constancy of acceleration of freely falling bodies. At first, he, like his predecessors - Leonardo da Vinci, Benedetti and others, believed that the speed of a body's fall is proportional to the distance traveled. However, Galileo subsequently abandoned this assumption, since it leads to consequences that are not confirmed by experiment 1. Therefore, he decided to test another hypothesis: the speed of a freely falling body is proportional to the time of fall. From it followed the corollary that the path traveled by the body is proportional to half the square of the falling time, which was confirmed in a specially constructed experiment. Since there were serious difficulties in measuring time at that time, Galileo decided to slow down the fall process. To do this, he rolled a bronze ball down an inclined chute with well-polished walls. By measuring the time it took the ball to travel along various sections of the path, he was able to verify the correctness of his assumption about the constancy of the acceleration of freely falling bodies.

Modern science owes its enormous achievements precisely to experiment, since with its help it was possible to organically connect thought and experience, theory and practice. In essence, the experiment is a question addressed to nature. Scientists are convinced that nature answers the questions they correctly pose. Therefore, since the time of Galileo, experiment has become the most important means a dialogue between man and nature, a way of penetrating its deep secrets and a means of discovering the laws that govern the phenomena observed in experiments.

Prigozhy I., Stengers I. Order out of chaos. - M., 1986. - P. 44.
Some famous historians of science, including P. Duhem, A. Crombie, D. Randell argue that the emergence of experimental science occurred back in the Middle Ages. To confirm their thesis, they refer to the fact that such experiments were carried out in the 13th-14th centuries. in Paris, and in the 16th century. in Padua.
Galileo G. Selected works: In 2 volumes. Volume 1. - M.: Nauka, 1964. - P. 241-242.
See: Lipson G. Great experiments in physics. - M., 1972. - P. 12.

Federal Agency for Education

Federal State Educational Institution

Higher professional education

St. Petersburg State University

Faculty of Journalism

Coursework on the topic

“The main differences between the observation method and experiment”

Discipline: Basics creative activity journalist

Completed: 2nd year student, 7th full-time group, specialty “Journalism” Tsuman A.P.

Scientific adviser: political candidate sciences

Baychik A.V.

Saint Petersburg

Introduction 4

Chapter 1. Characteristics of methods 6

1.1 Observation method 6

1.2 Experiment 11

Chapter 2. Analysis of publications 16

Conclusion 20

References 22

Applications 23

Introduction

In the most general sense, a method is a path or method of achieving a goal, a certain ordered activity. It is also a system of intangible means of cognition and transformation of reality; a way of cognition and practical activity, which is a sequence of certain operations. Method also means special system processing and analysis of the content of the phenomenon being studied. Today, method is understood as a way of knowing, studying natural phenomena and social life.

Some researchers believe that journalism does not have its own methods; it borrows them from other sciences of sociology, psychology, literary logic, and economics 1 . There is not yet a clear answer to the question of whether it is worth highlighting the specifics of journalism as a science and comparing its methods with other areas of scientific activity. However, in this work we will try not to touch upon such “pitfalls”.

A journalist in his creative work uses various ways of interpreting situations and phenomena that he witnesses, explains or comments on the facts that he encounters. He deals with various forms of knowledge - scientific, non-scientific, empirical, thus mastering reality and cognizing the world around him. Ideally, the main goal of a journalist’s knowledge is to find the truth and accurately convey this truth to the reader, so the question cannot help but arise about the reliability of the facts presented. In many ways, the objectivity and truth of what a journalist writes depends on the degree of mastery of the methods of mastering reality. Prominent representatives of such methods are observation and experiment. Both of these methods belong to the group of rational-cognitive methods, and more specifically, to the empirical level of knowledge 1, and their result appears in journalism as a stream of information publications 2.

So, finding the differences between observational method and experiment is of interest and relevant for research because:

Firstly, today there is a tendency towards complementarity and interpenetration of methods, which increases the level of culture of journalistic work.

Secondly, it is still important to understand the boundaries of the application of methods and techniques and not allow the possibility of their overlap.

Purpose The work is to analyze and find the main differences between two methods of journalism - observation and experiment.

The goal is revealed through the following tasks:

explore each method separately;

analyze examples of the use of these methods in journalistic creativity;

find the distinctive features of each method;

draw conclusions from the study.

Chapter 1. Characteristics of methods

1.1 Observation method

Observation is one of the methods for collecting sociological information, which allows you to study an object in a multifaceted way, therefore it is distinguished among traditional methods first of all. The use of this method is associated with obtaining preliminary material about a social object and for obtaining primary information on any problem. As G.V. Lazutina writes, the key link here is “a person’s ability to perceive the objective-sensory concreteness of the world in the process of audiovisual contacts with it” 1 . Journalistic observation can act as both a primary and an additional method and, unlike ordinary observation, always has a goal and a clearly defined character. “It is the intentionality of perception and awareness of tasks that allows you to look - and see” 2. It is no coincidence that this is one of the very first methods that is explained to students.

The subject of journalistic observation is the person himself, his appearance, character, how and what he says, his behavior, as well as his reaction to what is happening, including various aspects of the relationship and interaction of the individual and the team. The nature of communication, the level of culture of the individual, the means of communication (such as gestures, facial expressions, words, speech), and even the surrounding material environment are given attention. Therefore, the observation method is very often used in the work of a reporter, for which there are many other reasons: a journalist, being involved in a certain event, has the opportunity to trace its dynamics. The material creates an atmosphere of involvement in what is happening before the reporter’s eyes. A journalist can identify some of the most significant characteristics of an event and determine the factors under the influence of which the characteristics of the objects observed in the event change. Also, direct observation of people’s behavior allows us to see details that are inconspicuous at first glance, characteristic personality traits 1 .

There are several types of journalistic observation. They are classified based on various criteria, for example, methods of organization, subject, nature of the information of interest.

On the first basis, observation is divided into hidden And open. Distinctive feature open observation is that a journalist, having arrived to carry out a task, say, in some organization, declares his goal, editorial task, what kind of help he may need from the employees of this organization. So, the people with whom he will communicate know that among them there is a journalist collecting material for publication, they can imagine the nature of this speech (positive or negative) and behave accordingly.

In contrast to open, covert surveillance implies that the journalist, for a certain period of time, does not inform the people whose actions he is observing that he is a journalist and is collecting the information he needs, as well as what type of information interests him. Moreover, they may never know that a journalist was among them. Covert surveillance is most often used when studying any conflict situations in individual groups or when conducting a journalistic investigation. Before the investigation, the journalist has a fragment of the information picture, checks it, and reconstructs the picture again. Often a journalist conducting an investigation becomes a participant in an event, influencing its course and shaping the outcome.

Depending on the conditions of studying the subject to which the journalist’s attention is directed, observation can be classified as direct And indirect. In the first case, the author observes the object directly, in the second (due to its remoteness, hiddenness or other conditions) - using indirect data, that is, indirectly.

Observations are also divided according to time: short-term And long-term. If the publication needs to be prepared as quickly as possible, short-term observation is used. Long-term observation is used when it is necessary to study a subject thoroughly and in detail. Long-term observation is not necessarily one-time: a journalist can repeatedly return to the life of a group and observe the changes taking place for several years. This type of observation is widely used when working in analytical genres.

IN structured observation a journalist records events according to a clearly defined plan, or, more precisely, a procedure, and in unstructured – conducts observation in a free search, focusing only on general ideas about the situation. But still, the journalist should adhere to an indicative plan for conducting observation. Such a plan helps to correctly determine the aspect of observation, its order and conditions.

Field observation involves working in natural conditions, and laboratory– in certain situations constructed by the journalist.

Systematic observation presupposes the journalist’s attention to a particular situation at certain periods of time, and unsystematic– spontaneity in the choice of the observed phenomenon. 1

The features of journalistic observation can be predetermined by such factors as the degree of participation of the journalist in the event that he is observing. On this basis, observations can be divided into included And not included. How did A.A. characterize this division? Tertychny, “in the first case, the journalist becomes, for example, a member of the crew of a fishing trawler and works on board together with other fishermen. Non-participant observation is the study of some activity from the outside, when preparing, for example, a report on a volcanic eruption, sports competition, etc.” 1 Indeed, in the second case, the correspondent tries not to interfere with what is happening, quite consciously taking a neutral position. He, as a rule, is outside the situation and has no contact with the participants in the event. This type of observation is most often used to better describe the social atmosphere, for example, around elections, public events, reforms. Included observation presupposes the participation of the journalist in the situation itself. He does this consciously, changing, for example, his profession or introducing himself into a certain social group to recognize the object from the inside. A “change of profession” is possible in cases where the reporter is confident that his unprofessional or unskilled actions will not cause physical or moral harm to people. For example, media employees are prohibited from introducing themselves as doctors, lawyers, judges, or government employees. Prohibitions of this kind are provided for both by the relevant norms of journalistic ethics and by certain articles of legislation. The famous journalist N. Nikitin gives specific practical advice to novice journalists: “... the basic principle is to be who you say you are” 2 . Thus, the journalist seeks to identify and show the reader some situations that are characteristic of the implementation environment. He sets himself a reporter's task - to participate in the action along with his heroes or experience some difficulties. A report made using the participant observation method can be a winning form of presenting material. However, this should not be a simple act of pretending, a game of “dressing up.” It is important that a journalist has a professional goal - to positively influence a situation or find ways to solve a problem.

Speaking about participant observation, it is important to pay attention to some difficulties associated both with this type and with the entire observation method in general. Firstly, it is important to understand that most often we are dealing with some private and unique situations that cannot always be “played out” again. The main problem is the irreversibility of certain phenomena of social life. A journalist has to deal with human emotions, sometimes complex and even conflictual interpersonal relationships. Secondly, the quality of primary information can also be affected by people’s subjective assessments, their value orientations, established ideas, stereotypes and interests. “People’s reaction to the presence of an observer is not always clear. But in most cases, people react negatively to the presence of strangers (especially journalists) who are closely watching them. People may change their behavior if they feel they are being watched." 1

That is why the information and impressions received by a journalist are in dire need of mandatory double-checking in order to once again be convinced not so much of their reliability as of their objectivity. Sociologist V. A. Yadov suggests the following rules that should be followed to increase the degree of validity and stability of data:

Classify as detailed as possible the elements of events to be monitored, using clear indicators;

If the main observation is carried out by several persons, they compare their impressions and agree on assessments and interpretation of events, using a single recording technique, thereby increasing the stability of observation data;

The same object should be observed in different situations (normal and stressful, standard and conflict), which allows you to see it from different sides;

It is necessary to clearly distinguish and record the content, forms of manifestation of observed events and their quantitative characteristics (intensity, regularity, periodicity, frequency);

It is important to ensure that the description of events is not confused with their interpretation, therefore the protocol should have special columns for recording factual data and for their interpretation;

When participant or non-participant observation is carried out by one of the researchers, it is especially important to monitor the validity of the interpretation of the data, seeking to cross-check one's impressions with the help of various possible interpretations 1 .

So, based on these features of observation, we can say that as an independent method, observation is best used in studies that do not require representative data, as well as in cases where information cannot be obtained by any other methods.

1.2 Experiment

In its general meaning, an experiment is a set of actions performed to test the truth or falsity of a hypothesis or the scientific study of cause-and-effect relationships between phenomena. The researcher tries to change external conditions so as to influence the object being studied. In this case, an external influence on an object is considered a cause, and a change in the state or behavior of an object is considered a consequence.

Translated from Latin, the word “experiment” means “test” or “experience”. In general, an experiment is a complex method that combines various methods of collecting material. 1 With its help, the reaction of the object being studied to the experimental factor is established, under the influence of which this or that activity of the object being studied is manifested. The experiment is divided into the following stages:

Collection of information.

Observation of a phenomenon.

Developing a hypothesis to explain a phenomenon.

Developing a theory that explains a phenomenon based on assumptions more broadly. 2

The experimental factor can be introduced from the outside, or it can be contained in objects and become such under the control and control of the experimenter. The experiment itself can take place both in a natural environment and in an artificial one. The latter is called a “laboratory experiment”, and helps to achieve greater accuracy, controllability and preservation of its conditions. The regularity of the manifestation of certain events can be identified by comparing facts and systematizing them.

A journalistic experiment, the object of which is various human relationships, is characterized, as in other social sciences, by the abundance and complexity of factors that influence the state of the object. A journalistic experiment does not deal with an action that has already been committed and can be carried out for any reason. It often carries a certain intrigue. It arises because not all participants in the experiment know that they are participating in it.

The experimental method in journalism is often identified with the participant observation method, and there are reasons for this:

As in participant observation, the experimental journalist maintains a direct relationship with the object of study.

An experiment, like an observation, can be carried out secretly.

The experiment refers to visual means of studying social reality.

However, despite the fact that the main features are common, the experiment has its own special features and characteristics. “An experiment is understood as a research method based on controlling the behavior of an object with the help of a number of factors influencing it, control over the action of which is in the hands of the researcher” 1. I would also like to point out that experiment is an “active” method of studying reality. That is, if observation allows you to answer the questions “How?”, “When?” and “How?”, the experiment answers one question “Why?”.

In an experiment, an object is a means to create an artificial situation. This is done so that the journalist can test his hypotheses in practice, “play out” certain everyday circumstances that would allow him to better understand the object being studied. In addition, any experiment involves not only the cognitive interest of the journalist-researcher, but also the managerial one. If in participant observation the correspondent is more of a recorder of events, then by participating in the experiment he has the right to intervene in the situation, influencing its participants, managing them and making some decisions.

According to V.P. Talovov, “The influence on the observed objects during his /experiment/ is not only permissible, but is precisely what is assumed. Correspondents who resort to experimentation do not wait for people, certain officials, or entire services to reveal themselves spontaneously, i.e. arbitrary, natural way. This disclosure is deliberately caused, purposefully “organized” by themselves... An experiment is an observation accompanied by the intervention of an observer in the processes and phenomena being studied; under certain conditions, an artificial challenge, a conscious “provocation” of these latter” 1 .

Thus, the experiment is associated with the creation of an artificial impulse designed to reveal certain aspects of the object being studied. A journalist has the opportunity to conduct an experiment on himself, infiltrating the social group he needs, that is, becoming something like a “figurehead.” At the same time, he not only influences the situation, but also strives to attract all those interested in him to the experiment.

Experiments can vary in degree of complexity. Often the journalist limits himself to the simplest task and accordingly applies a rudimentary form of experiment. However, when a journalist sets himself a much more complex task, then it is quite problematic to carry out an appropriate experimental verification of the initial assumption at the required level, therefore, when planning and conducting an experiment, it is necessary to take into account the following points:

Determine its goals and objectives even before the start of the experiment (study the situation well, collect preliminary information about potential participants, study available documents and other sources, and also outline the subject of study, what will be of particular interest in the object of research).

Determine the location of action (whether the experiment will be carried out in natural or laboratory conditions).

Prepare both yourself (the journalist) and other participants in the operation.

After the journalist has determined the conditions under which the action will take place, he should form working hypotheses and select an indicator of the impact on the experimental situation. And only after this it is decided what methods to record and control the research process. In the structure of the experimental situation, L. V. Kashinskaya identifies the following elements:

initial state of the object influencing factor final state of the object

“The journalist’s initial state of the object is usually recorded, that is, there is certain starting information. But this same information also contains those motivating motives that necessitate the creation of an experimental situation:

Insufficient information necessary for the journalist to verify or clarify his hypothesis.

It is impossible to obtain such information using conventional methods.

The need to obtain psychologically reliable arguments" 1.

I would also like to draw attention to the fact that conducting an experiment requires special qualifications and mastery of special tools, and this is often only possible with the participation of an experienced consultant.

When the description of the course of the experiment becomes the main content of the publication, the experimental method can act as the dominant genre-forming feature. Therefore, classifying the publication as an experiment, it should be emphasized that it is about an artificial, subject-practical situation specially organized by the journalist himself 2 .

IN Lately experiment is increasingly used in journalism, especially electronic journalism. The method of recreating an artificial situation into which unsuspecting people find themselves can be found in various television programs (for example, “Town” and “Prank”). These experiments are carried out in order to identify any behavioral reactions of people to unusual situations. Publications in the experimental genre are advantageous for a journalist in that they usually allow the creation of texts that have dynamic features and a “living” visual presentation of the material. They allow you to combine the principles of analytics and reporting. In other words, the author of the experiment not only analyzes some phenomenon, but also uses the detailed description of the created situation inherent in the report. But still, it is advisable to carry out an experiment in journalistic practice only in individual cases, when the task is to gain a deeper insight into life. In this case, it is necessary to control all stages of preparation for it as carefully as possible.

Chapter 2. Analysis of publications

So, to more clearly identify the differences between the observational method and the experiment, we will compare two publications: “How much does politeness cost? Or wrap me a kilogram of peaches in separate bags” (see Appendix 1), published on the website http://www.myjulia.ru and “Komi Voyagers”, published under the heading “Trends” in No. 43 (073) of the Russian magazine reporter" (see Appendix 2).

Speaking about the first publication, we can confidently note that it falls within the definition of an experiment. Firstly, the author deliberately inserts himself into a social group, acts as a “dummy figure,” namely, he appears in the image of an ordinary consumer. Secondly, the journalist himself determines the factor of influence on the object of research (sellers), deliberately provoking them, for example, offering to hang exactly 143 grams of kvass or one candy of each type. And the characters of trade workers are revealed in the most natural way: “Is that right for you? Maybe I can cut it smaller?” or “Girl, what are you doing? No! Nooo!!! My work will be like this. I won't weigh it. This all needs to be calculated on a calculator. No. Don't want".

The author clearly defined the purpose of his research - to show the attitude of sellers towards an ordinary buyer and understand the reasons for such an attitude. His task is to penetrate deeply into a seemingly ordinary situation (holiday shopping). Naturally, at the end of the study, the conclusion follows: “They were ready to cut, hang, wrap and do whatever they wanted with the products I bought, which was within the power of the sellers. Only those in whom laziness prevailed over other human qualities were refused. And I also realized that you shouldn’t be afraid to ask the seller to help you.”

The genre of this publication can be defined as a journalistic experiment, because the subject-practical situation here was created artificially and specially organized by the journalist himself, who most likely could not use any other methods and needed reliable psychological arguments. Thus, the creation of an experimental situation is fully motivated.

Now let’s look at the second publication called “Komi Voyagers”. Here the author shows us one of the most pressing problems of Russia and, especially of the Nenets Autonomous Okrug - the problem of transport communications. The journalist did not have enough indirect information to fully cover this problem, so he goes on a journey with truck drivers-“stalkers” along “the worst road in Russia.”

So we see the observation method in action. In our opinion, it serves as the main method here. The publication itself is written in the reporting genre (as mentioned earlier, observation is one of the key methods in the work of a reporter). A journalist pays a lot of attention to describing the characters of the people he encounters. He accurately notes the peculiarities of everyone’s speech, gives examples of “stalker jargon”: “nyasha”, “serpentine”, “washboard”, etc.

The author's speech as a whole is of a narrative and descriptive nature. Details of the road, such as an overturned truck and its drunken driver, pulling out a truck stuck in the mud, as well as an abundance of dialogues make the reader involved in this trip; the dynamics of the event are very well traced.

The journalist conveys to us only a subjective vision of the situation, and not even his own, but the heroes of the story. Whether they can be trusted or not, the reader does not know.

The nature of the observation is open (truck drivers most likely know that there is a journalist among them), structured (the journalist records events according to a clearly defined plan), carried out in the field and participatory (the author does not observe the situation from the outside, but he himself, together with the truck drivers, commits A 70-kilometer off-road raid, that is, his task is to experience all the difficulties for himself, and also shows the reader situations characteristic of the environment in which he is embedded: mutual assistance between drivers, the struggle for a place on the ferry).

Summarizing the analysis of publications, we can immediately identify the main difference between observation and experiment. In the first case, the journalist himself creates the situation in which he works, and his task is to confirm the hypothesis and the corresponding conclusion. In the case of observation, the situation is different - the author is involved in a natural event, which he cannot control in any way. The main goal here is to cover an event or issue, as well as accurately and accessiblely convey informative details to the reader.

Conclusion

So, having analyzed the scientific works of many authors and thoroughly compared two recent publications in the media, we can say with confidence that the observation method and the experiment, despite their external similarity, have a number of quite significant differences, namely:

during observation, the journalist deals with events that often cannot be repeated or replayed; in an experiment, the journalist himself creates the situation that he needs to investigate;

the purpose of the experiment is to test the hypothesis posed by the journalist at the beginning of the study, and the purpose of observation is to describe and accurately convey the details of the situation under study;

during observation, a journalist cannot interfere with the course of research, being only a recorder of an event or phenomenon, but during an experiment, on the contrary, he uses a set of tools that provoke the object of study to certain actions, thus managing it and making decisions;

the result of an observation may be based on the journalist’s subjective view of the event and require additional verification, while the result of the experiment is actually objective and is a confirmation or refutation of the hypothesis proposed by the journalist;

works written using the observation method are informative and descriptive in nature, in contrast to works written using an experiment, which are representatives of analytical genres.

Summing up the research, it is still worth noting that both methods are important tools in the arsenal of a professional journalist, as well as the main ways of researching and understanding the reality around us. Their use in publications brings a sense of involvement, empathy for the situations described in them, and from some of them the reader can derive specific practical benefits for himself. But we must not forget that they require special training and the presence of a fixed, if not strict, plan of action. It is also necessary to be careful when working in the field of human relations, because one of the fundamental principles of a journalist’s work is “do no harm.”

Bibliography

Kashinskaya L.V. Experiment as a method of journalistic activity // Vestn. Moscow un-ta. Ser. 10. Journalism, 1986. No. 6.

Kim M.N . Technology for creating a journalistic work. St. Petersburg, 2001.

Lazutina G.V. Technology and methodology of journalistic creativity. M., 1988.

Melnik G.S., Kim M.N. Journalism methods. St. Petersburg: Publishing house of Mikhailov V.A., 2006.

Nikitin N. Option of work - unspoken // Journalist. 1997. No. 2.

Smirnov V.A. Levels and stages of the process of cognition//Problems of the logic of scientific knowledge. M., 1964.

Talovov V.P. The work of a journalist: Methods and techniques of journalistic communication. L., 1983.

Tertychny A.A. Genres of periodicals. M.: Aspect Press, 2000.

Yadov V.A. Sociological research: methodology, program, methods. Samara, 1995.

Applications

1 Melnik G.S., Kim M.N. Journalism methods. St. Petersburg: Publishing house of Mikhailov V.A., 2006.

Experiment is different from observations first...

Methods psychology (4)

Abstract >> Psychology

Has two methods obtaining facts subject to further analysis - methods observations And experiment, which, ... main purveyor of psychological knowledge and the basis for many theories. IN difference from observations psychological experiment ...

Theoretical and methodological aspect method observations in sociological research

Coursework >> Sociology

... experiments this method- one of the presenters. How self-sufficient method, observation...together basic Advantages and disadvantages method observations"(table... differ from natural if observation open (effect observations) Difficulty of application observations ...

Basic questions of philosophy and basic directions of philosophy

Cheat sheet >> Philosophy

What is given in sensory experience. Experiment And observation are main method knowledge. 2. All true knowledge is... laws for the world and its components. Basics difference O.P. from N.P. – scientific knowledge presupposes its result...

Basic tasks of psychology and pedagogy

Study guide >> Psychology

Constituting the personality structure, is different from some others her..., sociometric methods and social psychological experiment. In pedagogy there is a distinction basic and auxiliary methods. TO main include method observations And method experiment, To...

My observations and experiences

It's best to explain with an example.

I have always loved observing the objects of the world around me. So, it is very interesting to watch how ants behave depending on the weather and time of day.

But what I love even more is conducting experiments.

Have you guessed how my simple observations of the life of an anthill differed from the experiment I conducted?

In the first case, I simply watched (observed) the behavior of insects. While conducting the experiment, I myself needed to interact with the subjects by placing colored drops near the anthill.
While conducting the experiment, I had a hypothesis (from the children's encyclopedia) and an action plan.
The observations did not require any equipment (although this is not always true; for example, to observe space objects, you will need a telescope). For the experiment, I needed sugar, water, dyes and other means for making syrup.

Cat watching

Watch your pet. You will notice many interesting features. For example, that cats are capable of making many sounds that are different from each other.

Experience "Lava"

This interesting experiment can test the hypothesis that oil is lighter than water, but salt is heavier than oil.

Take a glass. Fill it with water and vegetable oil (2:1). The oil will remain floating on top.
Add food coloring.
Add a spoonful of salt.

"Lava" in a jar

Enjoy the “lava” in a glass.

What distinguishes an experiment from an observation? and got the best answer

Answer from Denis Odessa[active]
Differs from observation by active interaction with the object being studied. Typically, an experiment is carried out as part of a scientific research and serves to test a hypothesis and establish causal relationships between phenomena

Answer from Vasily Khaminov[guru]
when experimenting, you subject an object to some kind of tests)) And observations are you simply observing it in natural conditions))

Answer from Daria Shevchuk[active]
observation is a passive way of knowing, and experience is an active way.

Answer from Vinera Ovechkina[newbie]
Observation is the perception of natural objects, and experiment is observation under specially created and controlled conditions. That is, the difference is that Observation is all dependent on nature, while Experimentation is where you have to do everything yourself

Answer from Dima Kuznetsov[guru]
you can watch the experiment O_O

Answer from _BE`Z analoga_ I`[newbie]
Scientific observation (N.) is the perception of objects and phenomena of reality, carried out for the purpose of their knowledge. In N.’s act one can highlight:
1) object;
2) subject;
3) funds;
4) conditions;
5) a knowledge system, based on which the goal of research is set and its results are interpreted.
All these components should be taken into account when reporting N.’s results so that it can be repeated by any other observer. The most important requirement for scientific science is compliance with intersubjectivity. It implies that N. can be repeated by every observer with the same result. Only in this case will the result of N. be included in science. Therefore, for example , observations of UFOs or various psychic phenomena that do not satisfy the requirement of intersubjectivity still remain outside science.
N. are divided into direct and indirect. With direct observation, the scientist observes the chosen object itself. However, this is not always possible. Eg. , objects quantum mechanics or many astronomical objects cannot be observed directly. We can judge the properties of such objects only on the basis of their interaction with other objects. This kind of information is called indirect; it is based on the assumption of a certain natural connection between the properties of directly unobservable objects and the observable manifestations of these properties and contains a logical conclusion about the properties of an unobservable object based on the observed effect of its action. It should be noted that a sharp line cannot be drawn between direct and indirect N. IN modern science indirect N. are becoming more widespread as the number and sophistication of instruments used in N. increase and the scope of scientific research expands. The observed object affects the device, and the scientist directly observes only the result of the interaction of the object with the device.
An experiment (E.) is a direct material impact on a real object or its surrounding conditions, carried out for the purpose of understanding this object.
The following elements are usually distinguished in E.:
1) goal;
2) object of experimentation;
3) the conditions in which the object is located or placed;
4) E. means;
5) material impact on the object.
Each of these elements can be used as the basis for the classification of E.; they can be divided into physical, chemical, biological, etc., depending on the differences in the objects of experimentation. One of the simplest classifications is based on differences in the purposes of E.: for example. , establishment of k.-l. patterns or fact discovery. E. conducted for this purpose are called “search”. The result of search E. is new information about the area being studied. However, most often an experiment is conducted to test some hypothesis or theory. This kind of E. is called “testing”. It is clear that it is impossible to draw a sharp boundary between these two types of E. The same E. can be used to test a hypothesis and at the same time provide unexpected information about the objects being studied. In the same way, the result of search E. can force us to abandon the accepted hypothesis or, on the contrary, provide empirical justification for our theoretical reasoning. In modern science, the same element increasingly serves different purposes.
E. is always called upon to answer one question or another. But for a question to be meaningful and allow for a definite answer, it must be based on prior knowledge about the area being studied. This knowledge is provided by theory, and it is theory that poses the question for the sake of answering which E. is posed. Therefore E. cannot bring the correct result without theory. Initially, the question is formulated in the language of theory, that is, in theoretical terms denoting abstract, idealized objects. In order for E. to answer a theoretical question, this question must be reformulated in empirical terms, the meanings of which are sensory objects. It should, however, be emphasized that by carrying out N. and E., we go beyond the purely

Answer from Vladimir Sudin[guru]
Well, you know, HELLO!
An experiment is when you yourself participate, and observation - NOTHING depends on you....

Answer from Hungry Ghost[guru]
experiment - they conduct experiments, observation - they simply observe, look (for example, how quickly a plant grows under the influence of some kind of fertilizer) ... experiment - practice, observation - theory

Review of methods in personality psychology. Methods of observation and experiment.

The main research methods in psychology, as in a number of other sciences, are empirical methods that make it possible to obtain specific data regarding the nature of mental phenomena, the main of which are observation and experiment.
Observation- this is a scientific method of research, not limited to simple registration of facts, but scientifically explaining the causes of a particular psychological phenomenon. It is divided into everyday observations, which are limited to the registration of facts that are random and unorganized in nature, and the scientific method of observation - the transition from describing a fact to explaining its internal essence.
Experiment- this is the active intervention of the researcher in the activities of the subject in order to create conditions in which a psychological fact is revealed. A laboratory experiment takes place under special conditions using special equipment. A natural experiment takes place under normal conditions and is used to study cognitive capabilities at different age stages. A formative experiment (teaching and educational) models some aspects of human activity.
Auxiliary methods of psychology include: analysis of activity products, biographical method, twin method, sociometry, modeling, questioning, predictive and diagnostic tests.

Even more new information is on the website psychoanalysis.rf

According to B.G. Ananyev identifies four groups of methods in psychology:
Group I - organizational methods. They include the comparative method (comparing different groups by age, activity, etc.); longitudinal method (multiple examinations of the same individuals over a long period of time); complex method (representatives of different sciences participate in the study; in this case, as a rule, one object is studied by different means. Research of this kind makes it possible to establish connections and dependencies between phenomena different types, for example, between physiological, psychological and social development of the individual).
Group II - empirical methods, including: observation and introspection; experimental methods, psychodiagnostic methods (tests, questionnaires, questionnaires, sociometry, interviews, conversations), analysis of activity products, biographical methods.
Group III - data processing methods, including: quantitative (statistical) and qualitative (differentiation of material into groups, analysis) methods.
Group IV - interpretive methods, including genetic (analysis of material in terms of development, highlighting individual phases, stages, critical moments, etc.) and structural (establishes structural connections between all personality characteristics) methods.
Let us take a closer look at the most significant methods of psychology.
Observation method- this is a purposeful process of perception of certain events and their registration. Observation in psychology comes in two main forms - as introspection, or introspection, and as external, or so-called objective observation.
Through introspection we discover the content of our mental processes. True awareness of one's own experience is accomplished through an act directed not directly at it, but at one or another task, which is carried out by the action emanating from it. By resolving it, the subject reveals himself in the appropriate action - external or internal. If by self-observation we mean observation of oneself, one’s own psyche, then it itself includes the unity and interconnection of internal and external observation, internal and external data. Self-observation can only be a phase, a moment, an aspect of research, which, when trying to verify its data, itself inevitably turns into objective observation.
Objective, i.e. External observation is the simplest and most common of all objective research methods; through it we learn the phenomena of objective reality, reflected in our mental processes. A description of phenomena based on observation is correct if the psychological understanding contained in it of the internal psychological side of an external act provides a logical explanation for its external occurrence in various conditions.
The main advantage of the objective observation method is that it makes it possible to study mental processes in natural conditions; in particular, the child can be observed in school settings. However, when studying phenomena in which the relationship between the external side of behavior and its internal psychological content is more or less complex, objective observation, while retaining its significance, for the most part must be supplemented by other research methods.
Using the method of observation through Gezzel glass (a translucent mirror behind which the researcher and equipment are located), Kurt Lewin, an American psychologist, derived the concept of field behavior. Alone with himself, a person carries out field behavior, which is determined by the multidirectional action of objects. After the appearance of another person, he begins to behave, obeying the norms of the social situation, behavior becomes volitional.

Experimental method is one of the main methods of psychology. The main task of a psychological experiment, like observation, is to make the essential features of the internal mental process accessible to objective external perception. But experiment differs from observation in a number of features.

The main features of the experiment that determine its strength are as follows. Firstly, in an experiment, the researcher himself causes the phenomenon he is studying, in contrast to observation, in which the observer cannot actively intervene in the situation. Secondly, the experimenter can vary, change the conditions for the occurrence and manifestation of the process being studied. Thirdly, in an experiment it is possible to alternately exclude individual conditions (variables) in order to establish natural connections that determine the process being studied. Fourthly, the experiment also allows you to vary the quantitative ratio of conditions and allows mathematical processing of the data obtained in the study.

A laboratory psychological experiment takes place in specially created and controlled conditions, usually using special equipment and devices. The initial object of a laboratory experiment in psychology was elementary mental processes: sensations, perceptions, reaction speed. A distinctive feature of the experiment in the laboratory is strict adherence to the research conditions and the accuracy of the data obtained. Cognitive psychology, which studies human cognitive processes, has achieved great perfection in the use of laboratory experiments. Cognitive processes constituted the main area laboratory research human psychology.

Scientific objectivity and the practical significance of the data obtained in a laboratory experiment reduces the artificiality of the created conditions. This is due both to the remoteness of the problems solved in the experiment from the real life conditions of the subject, and to the impossibility of recording the nature of the experimenter’s influence on the subject during the study. Therefore, the problem arises of transferring data obtained in the laboratory to real conditions of human life.

A natural psychological experiment, a unique version of an experiment, representing an intermediate form between observation and experiment, proposed by A.F. Lazursky, removes the noted limitations of the laboratory experiment. Its main difference lies in the combination of experimental research with the naturalness of the conditions. Subjects participating in a natural experiment are unaware that they are being tested.

An example of an experimental method is a study in which the same situations or events are evoked and two variables controlled by the experimenter are introduced - independent (x) - the circumstance that the researcher himself changes, and dependent (y) - the answers that the subject gives when changing circumstances, variables. The point of the experiment is to establish a connection between x and y in the form y=f(x). built on this Hick's method- study of reaction time to various situations. As the number of choice alternatives (n) increases, the reaction time (Tr) increases linearly - Tr=f(n), with n<=7, так как законы в психологии носят ограниченный характер.

Observation method. Observation stages

Observation is carried out by the researcher by inclusion in an experimental situation or by indirect analysis of the situation and recording the phenomena and facts of interest to the researcher.

Stages of observational research (according to K.D. Zarochentsev):

1) Definition of the subject of observation, object, situation.

2) Choosing a method for observing and recording data.

3) Creation of an observation plan.

4) Choosing a method for processing the results.

5) Actually observation.

6) Processing and interpretation of received information.

Similarities and differences between observation and experiment

Observation according to Meshcheryakov B.G. - “organized, purposeful, recorded perception of mental phenomena for the purpose of studying them under certain conditions.”

Experiment according to Meshcheryakov B.G. - “an experiment conducted under special conditions to obtain new scientific knowledge through the purposeful intervention of a researcher in the life activity of a subject.”

Analyzing the specifics of observation and experiment methods, we will determine their similarities and differences.

Common features in observation and experiment:

Both methods require preliminary preparation, planning and goal setting;

The results of research using observation and experiment require detailed processing;

The results of the study may be influenced by the personal characteristics of the researcher.

Differences in observational and experimental methods:

The ability to change the situation and influence it in an experiment and the inability to make changes in observation;

The purpose of observation is to state the situation, the purpose of the experiment is to change the situation, to monitor the degree of influence of certain means on the situation;

The experimental method requires clear knowledge about the object being studied; this knowledge is often acquired through observation.

Practical task

The topic of the survey was developed taking into account the characteristics of the target group with which we intended to work. Teenagers from high school were selected as such. According to Vygotsky L.S. The leading activity at this age is intimate and personal communication. Through communication with peers and adults, a teenager builds his personal attitude towards the world and forms his own unique image. In this regard, it is dangerous for a teenager not to be among his peers. It is extremely important to have friends and associates at this age.

That is why the following topic was chosen for the survey: “Me and my friends.”

The purpose of the survey: to determine the level of formation of friendships among modern teenagers of high school age.

To achieve the goal, a questionnaire was developed:

Questionnaire “Me and my friends”

Instructions:

Hello.

You are invited to take part in a scientific study.

Please read each question carefully and answer it as honestly as possible by circling the answer that seems correct to you, or by entering the answer you need in the special answer field. For multiple choice questions, you only need to choose one.

Personal data:

Last name, first name_______________________________________ Class_________________

1. Do you have a circle of friends?

a) yes; b) no.

2. What unites you?_____________________________________________

3. Which friend would you trust with your secret?______________

4. Which friend would you turn to for help in a difficult situation?_________________________________________________

5. What qualities do your friends value in you?___________________________

6. Remember the times when you helped one of your friends cope with any problem________________________________

7. How do you feel with your friends?

a) good, fun;

b) boring, sad;

c) first one thing, then another.

8. What kind of friends would you like to have?________________________

9. What character qualities are most valued among your friends?___________________________________________

10. What would you call the group where you spend your free time?

a) my friends;

b) my company;

c) party;

d) my yard;

e) my team;

f) your own version_________________________________________________________

11. Do you have adults with whom you communicate? Who is this?_______________________________________________________

12. Do you have conflicts? If so, how are they usually resolved?

b) a fight;

c) thanks to the intervention of the leader;

d) thanks to the intervention of an adult;

e) a compromise of some of the guys.

13. How do adults feel about your group?

a) kindly;

b) hostile;

c) neutral.

14. Mark which statements you agree with:

a) I am often consulted;

b) I can’t make an important decision without my friends;

c) no one truly understands me;

d) it’s easier for me to make a decision myself and tell others about it;

d) it’s easier for me to make a decision together with everyone.

15 How would you describe your mood when you are with your friends?_________________________________

The questionnaire contains quite informative instructions that help you understand the essence of the task. In total, the questionnaire contains 15 questions, both open and closed. The different types of questions are mixed, which helps the interviewee focus on each question. The most difficult questions that require the most honest answers are located in the middle of the questionnaire.

12 people took part in the survey - students in grades 9-10 of a secondary school. The gender and age composition of the target group is presented in the diagrams below.

Diagram 1-2. Sex and age composition of respondents

Let's move on to analyzing the data obtained and their interpretation.

Absolutely all teenagers answered the first question positively, saying that they have friends. Among the factors that unite respondents with their friends were: common interests, studies, spending time together, mutual acquaintances, and parent-friends.

Diagram 3. Factors that unite friends

In the answer column to the third question, the names of friends or the number of friends were often indicated. The number of friends to whom respondents could entrust personal secrets did not exceed 1-2.

The answers to the fourth question were similar. The respondents' circle of help consisted of the same people as their circle of trust.

Among the qualities valued by the respondents' friends in the respondents themselves were: humor, the ability to understand, the ability to trust, the ability to help, and sociability.

Diagram 4. Qualities valued by friends

To question 6, the most common answers were “I find it difficult to answer” or “I can’t remember.” It was also not uncommon for respondents to skip a question. Only 15% of the total number of respondents answered this question. Among the answers, there were cases from personal life that practically did not intersect with each other.

80% of respondents responded that they feel fun in the company of their friends. 20% of respondents have mixed feelings.

Among the qualities of ideal friends, respondents named honesty, sense of humor, responsibility, devotion, and respect.

Most of these qualities were also named among those considered basic among the respondent’s friends.

The answers to question 10 were distributed as follows:

Diagram 5. Name of circle of friends by respondents

Among the adults with whom teenagers communicate, the following stood out: parents, teachers, and coaches. Adults often have a neutral (55%) or negative (30%) attitude towards age groups.

Conflict situations do not arise often and are resolved by finding a compromise between the children.

The answers to the penultimate question were divided as follows:

a) people often consult me - 25%;

b) I can’t make an important decision without my friends - 20%;

c) no one truly understands me - 15%;

d) it’s easier for me to make a decision myself and tell others about it - 20%;

e) it’s easier for me to make a decision together with everyone - 20%.

85% characterize their mood among friends positively, 15% negatively.

Interpretation of the data obtained during the survey leads to the following conclusions:

1. Among schoolchildren and teenagers there is a great desire to form peer groups;

2. All teenagers believe that they have a large circle of friends. Meanwhile, they can only tell a secret or turn to a small number of people for help.

3. Most teenage groups are formed on the basis of common leisure, educational activities and interests.

4. Teen groups often change their composition and are unstable.

5. Teenage groups influence the opinions of the teenagers included in them, but often are not a resource for making serious decisions regarding the teenager’s personality.

6. Teenagers have rather vague ideas about friendship. They call a large number of people friends.

7. Adults are practically distant from the processes of forming and managing teenage groups.

8. Modern teenagers value reliability, honesty, mutual assistance, trust and the ability to help.

Difference between experiment and observation. The difference between experiment and observation. The difference between observation and experiment. What do observation and experiment have in common?

My observations and experiences

Cat watching

Experience "Lava"

Introduction

Chapter 1. Characteristics of methods

1.1 Observation method

1.2 Experiment

Chapter 2. Analysis of publications

Conclusion

Bibliography

Applications

Methods psychology (4)

Theoretical and methodological aspect method observations in sociological research

Basic questions of philosophy and basic directions of philosophy

Basic tasks of psychology and pedagogy

My observations and experiences

Cat watching

Experience "Lava"

Review of methods in personality psychology. Methods of observation and experiment.

Observation method. Observation stages

Similarities and differences between observation and experiment

Practical task

Collection of ideal social studies essays

Anti-Soviet rebellion in Hungary (1956)