Cheang (2002) studied a group of older adults at a fast food restaurant in Honolulu. Before he was able to
begin the study, he obtained permission from the manager under the conditions that he 1) appear to be a
paying customer, 2) not conduct any formal interviews or surveys on the premises, and 3) not interfere with the
flow of business.
The researcher spent the first two weeks simply observing the behaviour of the regular customers. He then
decided to focus on a specific group of about 26 adults, one of the larger groupings that came there frequently
and was diverse with regard to gender and age.
The researcher sat at a table and eventually began talking to one of the group members. He was eventually
introduced to other members of the group. They were friendly, but at first, viewed him as an outsider. He
showed up every Tuesday and Thursday, and sometimes Friday, and soon became part of the group.
He observed the group in the setting for 2 or 3 days a week for 9 months. His initial observations entered
discretely on index cards. To write longer notes, he went into a telephone booth or the restroom. The group
soon became accustomed to his jotting notes on cards and paid little or no attention to it, returning quickly to
the ongoing activities. His notes focused on the topics of discussion and the nature of the interaction among
this group of friends. By the fifth month, several themes of behaviour and experiences emerged: sociability,
play, and laughter. Findings suggest that: (a) older adults congregate at this fast-food restaurant to be with
their buddies “to play”; (b) the group is fun for members and there is a lot of laughter; and (c) group
membership in this restaurant provides structure, meaning, and opportunities for these older adults to engage
in personal expression.
In month 6 he shared his observations and the themes with group members and interviewed them with regard
to their perceptions of the themes that were generated from his field notes. They agreed with him that this
was, indeed, how they felt about their frequent visits and the time they spent together.
1a. Identify the method used and outline two characteristics of the method.
The research method used was a covert, participant naturalistic observation. This was covert as the
participants did not know they were being researched. This was a participant observation as the researcher
became part of the group as he showed up every Tuesday, Thursday, and sometimes Fridays. This happened
as he began talking to one of the group members and was introduced to the groups. However, this was not
the initial case as at first the researcher was viewed as an outsider. A characteristic of participant observations
is the researcher takes field notes to note down any observations or interactions during research. This is what
the researcher did, writing longer notes in telephone booths or restrooms. A naturalistic observation occurs in
a natural setting where participants act normally in the environment. In this case, it was in a fast food
restaurant in Honolulu.
1b. Describe the sampling method use in the study.
The sampling method used was purposive sampling. First the researcher observed the customers as a whole
but then decided to choose a group of 26 adults that was a large group and a mix in gender and age. The
researcher may have been looking for a specific criteria to do his research on, thus that's why the group was
chosen. However, at the same time this may have also been opportunity sampling as this group was the one
that was the most convenient to the researcher at the given time and location of research. These are just
assumptions as not sampling technique is stated in the text.
1c. Suggest an alternative or additional research method giving one reason for your choice.
An alternative research method is a focus group with the group of 26 adults. This allows for the participants to
be more open with their answers. Responses from other individuals will also help other participants explain
their thoughts on that theme, gaining a further perspective on the research. This allows for a group discussion
about a certain theme. However, this research method loses the natural interactions and behaviours of the
individuals.
begin the study, he obtained permission from the manager under the conditions that he 1) appear to be a
paying customer, 2) not conduct any formal interviews or surveys on the premises, and 3) not interfere with the
flow of business.
The researcher spent the first two weeks simply observing the behaviour of the regular customers. He then
decided to focus on a specific group of about 26 adults, one of the larger groupings that came there frequently
and was diverse with regard to gender and age.
The researcher sat at a table and eventually began talking to one of the group members. He was eventually
introduced to other members of the group. They were friendly, but at first, viewed him as an outsider. He
showed up every Tuesday and Thursday, and sometimes Friday, and soon became part of the group.
He observed the group in the setting for 2 or 3 days a week for 9 months. His initial observations entered
discretely on index cards. To write longer notes, he went into a telephone booth or the restroom. The group
soon became accustomed to his jotting notes on cards and paid little or no attention to it, returning quickly to
the ongoing activities. His notes focused on the topics of discussion and the nature of the interaction among
this group of friends. By the fifth month, several themes of behaviour and experiences emerged: sociability,
play, and laughter. Findings suggest that: (a) older adults congregate at this fast-food restaurant to be with
their buddies “to play”; (b) the group is fun for members and there is a lot of laughter; and (c) group
membership in this restaurant provides structure, meaning, and opportunities for these older adults to engage
in personal expression.
In month 6 he shared his observations and the themes with group members and interviewed them with regard
to their perceptions of the themes that were generated from his field notes. They agreed with him that this
was, indeed, how they felt about their frequent visits and the time they spent together.
1a. Identify the method used and outline two characteristics of the method.
The research method used was a covert, participant naturalistic observation. This was covert as the
participants did not know they were being researched. This was a participant observation as the researcher
became part of the group as he showed up every Tuesday, Thursday, and sometimes Fridays. This happened
as he began talking to one of the group members and was introduced to the groups. However, this was not
the initial case as at first the researcher was viewed as an outsider. A characteristic of participant observations
is the researcher takes field notes to note down any observations or interactions during research. This is what
the researcher did, writing longer notes in telephone booths or restrooms. A naturalistic observation occurs in
a natural setting where participants act normally in the environment. In this case, it was in a fast food
restaurant in Honolulu.
1b. Describe the sampling method use in the study.
The sampling method used was purposive sampling. First the researcher observed the customers as a whole
but then decided to choose a group of 26 adults that was a large group and a mix in gender and age. The
researcher may have been looking for a specific criteria to do his research on, thus that's why the group was
chosen. However, at the same time this may have also been opportunity sampling as this group was the one
that was the most convenient to the researcher at the given time and location of research. These are just
assumptions as not sampling technique is stated in the text.
1c. Suggest an alternative or additional research method giving one reason for your choice.
An alternative research method is a focus group with the group of 26 adults. This allows for the participants to
be more open with their answers. Responses from other individuals will also help other participants explain
their thoughts on that theme, gaining a further perspective on the research. This allows for a group discussion
about a certain theme. However, this research method loses the natural interactions and behaviours of the
individuals.
