All categories

2 years ago

What is the difference between being a pure observer of versus a full participant in social events?

Social Studies

1 answer:

Dominik [7]2 years ago

8 0

Here, is the difference between being a pure observer of versus a full participant in social events.

<h3>What is the difference?</h3>

Total Observer

The researcher is not visible to or acknowledged by participants in this type of observation. As participants are more likely to act naturally when they are unaware that they are being watched, it is one technique to reduce the Hawthorne Effect.

Observer as Participant

In this situation, the participants are aware of and familiar with the researcher, and they frequently are aware of the observer's objectives for the research.

Participant as Observer

The researcher is here actively interacting with the participants. She is not a disinterested third party, but more of a friend or co-worker. Participants are fully engaged, although they are still aware that the researcher is present.

Complete Participant

This researcher is completely covert, almost like a spy. Here, the observer actively participates in the actions of the participants.

To learn more about participation visit:

brainly.com/question/4377998

#SPJ4

You might be interested in

The neuroplasticity theory of depression is that depression results from a decrease of neuroplastic processes in various brain s

oksano4ka [1.4K]

Neuron loss leads to a decrease in the neuroplastic processes in various brain structures.

<h3>what is Neuron loss?</h3>

When these neurons die, people lose their capacity to remember and their ability to do everyday tasks.
Physical damage to the brain and other parts of the central nervous system can also kill or disable neurons.
People with brain atrophy, also called cerebral atrophy, lose brain cells (neurons), and connections between their brain cells and brain volume often decrease.
This loss can lead to problems with thinking, memory, and performing everyday tasks. The greater the loss, the more impairment someone has.

To learn more about neuron loss, refer

to brainly.com/question/25534066

#SPJ4

8 0

2 years ago

This form of government is run like a military state

viva [34]

Answer:

C. Democracy is the answer

6 0

3 years ago

Justine's older sister has told her that "getting her period will be a real drag – painful and annoying." according to research,

ANTONII [103]

As a discomfort. It will not be great.

7 0

4 years ago

What justification did Lincoln have for suspending habeas corpus during the Civil War?

mylen [45]

Explanation: Well, Lincoln did not respond directly to Taney's edict, but he did address the issue in his message to Congress that July. He justified the suspension through Article I, Section 9, of the Constitution, which specifies a suspension of the writ “when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.” So of course the answer is B). Lincoln suspended these rules because he felt it was necessary in order to put down the rebellion within the southern states. ❤️hope this helps❤️

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

two scientists failed to report unusual findings when they shared from a recent science expriment. Why is this not scientificall

Sedbober [7]

Whenever a research is done, you must reject or accept a null hypothesis (the one you consider is not correct) or your work hypothesis (the theory you think is must probably accurate or close to the truth) usually, when performing a research, you will not always obtain positive or statistically significant results, that validate your hypothesis. Is actually, not unusual that extremes (or extraordinary results) come out (unexpected for several reasons: incorrect size of the sample, improper selection of the subjects- a bias- lack of correct determination of the variable measured or failure to determine the type of the variable-numerical, categorical, ratio,etc-)

Positive or negative results are yet, results whether they prove or reject your hypothesis. Failing to establish a scientific hypothesis does not necessarily mean that they did something wrong, it just says that the hypothesis tested does not approach correctly to the epistemological truth (ultimately, any research is only a mere approximation to reality). Therefore, when two scientists deny sharing<em> unusual results</em>, they are acting unethically, hiding results that can mean something from a different point of view.

reference

Nicholson, R. S. (1989). On being a scientist. Science, 246(4928), 305-306.

3 0

4 years ago