This term refers to a methodological approach to conducting an observational study where the subject(s) of interest are made fully aware that they are being observed. Participants are also usually informed about the reasons behind these studies, such as why it is being conducted and how it aims to contribute to a larger objective. In this context, the term "obtrusive" also implies that the presence of an observer (such as a researcher) has the potential to influence the phenomena of interest (the behavior of the people being examined). In contrast, unobtrusive studies are ones where participants are not aware they are being observed.

Obtrusive study methods have been used in the Library and Information Science field to evaluate the efficacy of reference service by Weech & Goldhor (1982). An obtrusive approach is valuable in the sense that it can invite participant reaction simply because the observer or recording device is knowingly placed within a given situation. When juxtaposed with non-obtrusive techniques, obtrusive methods help shed light on how study participants could be reacting to the actual process of being observed. For example, if a librarian is approached with a question from a student they know is evaluating them for a study (this is obtrusive) and is later approached by someone pretending to ask the same question (an unobtrusive study), a comparison of the librarian’s responses can reveal if his or her awareness of being evaluated influenced how he or she handled answering the same question. Obtrusive methods have also been utilized in the field of sociology (Brown, 1979), education (Pool & Evans, 1991) and extensively in the behavioral sciences (Jacob et al., 1994).

Washington University Information School Professor Matthew Saxton recalled that obtrusive studies “came about in the late 1970’s, when the term unobtrusive was receiving a lot of attention in the behavioral sciences. Obtrusive means that the subject has a level of awareness of his participation (personal communication, November 13, 2006)”. In this sense the term is a retronym and gained significance following the popularity of the term "unobtrusive."

UCLA Professor Clara Chu, who teaches Social Science Research Methodology, also defines the term as a study technique that specifically lets “people know you are studying them. They know you are participating when you use an obtrusive approach (personal communication, November 14th, 2006).”

Obtrusive studies can also be referred to as "observer salience (Jacob et al.,1994, p. 355)." For further reading on the complexities of obtrusive observation as a research method, see Lynda M. Baker's article "Observation: A Complex Research Method," which was published in 2006.

Benefits of the methodology:

• An obtrusive observation approach reduces the costs of a study. Obtrusive techniques are generally more affordable to use because a study will not have to incur expenses pertaining to concealment (i.e. training study proxies to act a part that serves the study). Surveys, interviews and observations can be conducted without the need for maintaining secrecy.

• An obtrusive study creates awareness. This study approach informs participants about how they are being observed, which affords participants an opportunity to reflect on their relationship to the observer(s). This can encourage reaction that might never have been occurred otherwise.

• Obtrusive approaches permit researchers to "probe into the opinions and attitudes of librarians and users (Saxton & Richardson, 2002, p. 46)," because the disclosure of the observation permits the researcher to ask questions.

Drawbacks to the methodology:

• There is an ethical question “of evaluating an individual (participant) without his or her knowledge (Weech a& Golhor, 1982, p. 306)," which can raise issues about liability and an individual's right to privacy.

• The awareness of being observed can cause a subject to become responsive to his or her feelings about being watched or queried. This is known as "reactivity (Kirby, Fowler & Baer, 1991)." Changes in behavior of this sort can skew study results in directions that will affect overall outcomes (i.e. librarians may perform differently when they know they are being examined, or people may talk differently when they know they are being recorded).

Sources

Baker, L. (2006, Summer). Observation: A complex research method. Library Trends, 55(1). Retrieved November 18, 2006, from Muse database.

Brown, B. W. (1979). Parents public discipline of children in public places. The Family Coordinator, 28(1), 67-71.

Jacob, T., Tennenbaum, D., Seilhamer, R. A., Bargiel, K. & Sharon, T., (1994). Reactivity effect during naturalistic observation of distressed and nondistressed families. Journal of Family Psychology, 8(3), 354-363.

Kirby, K. C., Fowler, S. A. & Baer, D. M. (1991). Reactivity in self-recording: Obtrusiveness of recording procedure and peer comments. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 24(3), 487-498.

Pool, H. & Evans, R. D. (1991). A case for obtrusive observation. Contemporary Education, 62 (4),283-286.

Saxton, M. L. & Richardson, Jr., J. V. (2002). Understanding reference transactions: Transforming an art into a science. San Diego: Academic Press.

Weech, T. L. & Goldhor, H. (1982). Obtrusive versus unobtrusive evaluation of reference service in five Illinois public libraries: A pilot study. Library Quarterly, 52, 305-324.

Matthew Wittmer

November of 2006