Whether like me you have been involved in ageing research for a very long time or are just starting out, perhaps as a Masters or doctoral student, the occasional series of which Making Observations is a part provides absorbing insights into what it is really like to do hands-on empirical research with older people. This slim text, focusing on various observation methods, follows five previous volumes which have dealt with biographical interviews; the participation of older people in research; the ways in which literature can provide insights into later life; ways of recording everyday life; and issues concerned with sampling and recruiting older people in qualitative work. Another three volumes consider the language used by and about older people; research on experiences of discrimination; and oral history and ageing. Together these comprise ‘The representation of older people in ageing research’ series and are both published by, and have their genesis in, joint seminars organised by the Centre for Ageing and Biographical Studies (CABS) at the Open University and the Centre for Policy on Ageing in London. The aim of the seminars and the subsequent publications has been to provide a space in which colleagues working at the forefront of ageing research can present, discuss and debate traditional methodological approaches as well as more recent and innovative methods.
In Making Observations we are treated to discussions of both, with contributions ranging from revisiting and reflecting on highly structured observational research done in residential homes in the early 1980s (Johnson, Chapter 3), and to current methods used to highlight and address design problems in the context of how older people navigate outdoors (Southwell, Chapter 4). A mixed-method study of cemeteries combining both observation and dialogue (Kellaher, Chapter 5), and the use of video to record the communication of older people with dementia in care settings (Cook and Hubbard, Chapter 2), provide two contrasting but illuminating accounts of the value of observational methods. Whilst the emphasis in all these chapters is on the methods used, they each provide tantalising glimpses into some of the findings of the wider studies of which these techniques are an integral part. Readers may well be familiar with the studies themselves but, if not, you will probably want to seek them out after reading these chapters.
More particularly, the methodological discussions will undoubtedly stimulate readers to think more closely about how and why they choose particular methods in research with older people. Whatever their origins and disciplinary backgrounds, the authors highlight some common and enduring concerns. Ethical issues are perhaps the most obvious concern, with authors raising key questions about whether consent is necessary and how to achieve it; as well as the thorny issue of the preservation of anonymity. Johnson notes that during the early 1980s consent procedures were far less stringent than today – for her study she was granted access to bedrooms and bathrooms as well as to communal areas in the homes. Unfortunately, we are not told how this access was secured and whether individual residents and staff gave consent to being observed in these ‘private’ spaces. Observing in public outdoor spaces, by contrast, presents other ethical challenges and researchers have adopted different strategies to overcome both issues of consent and anonymity. These include making the observer's presence explicit to participants and negotiating (verbal and/or written) consent from individuals to be observed with structured schedules, filmed or photographed, and for such data to then also be used in dissemination activities. However, the actual conduct of the research thereafter is not necessarily as straightforward as this implies. For example, whilst London cemeteries might be deemed public settings, Kellaher's explorations of how people behaved in these environments, demanded that ‘approaches be delicate and low key’ (p. 64), and further that ‘tape recording was deemed too intrusive’ (ibid.). She therefore combined observations of activities at the grave with ‘interviews’ of varying length and intensity following the researcher's opening gambit: ‘Would I be intruding if I were to ask you about your visit here, today?’ (p. 70).
An alternative view about observation, held in some quarters, is that as Southwell comments: ‘behaviour in open public spaces can be observed secretly, as long as anonymity is preserved’ (p. 49). This is sometimes justified by the need to ‘avoid disturbing the naturalness of events’ (ibid.) and, with the technologies now available, it is possible, for example, to film from a great distance away. If it is important to preserve closer details, however, technology also makes it possible to blur the faces of research participants; or perhaps to present only transcriptions of video-recorded data; or present only audio recordings. In Cook and Hubbard's work, which researched non-verbal communication behaviours of participants whose capacity to give consent was problematic, they provided a detailed account of how they developed their approach and how they negotiated formal consent at the start and then ongoing consent as the research proceeded. This was closely interwoven with the active involvement of participants in both shaping how recordings were done, and in reviewing and analysing the material. Like Kellaher, these authors are acutely aware of how carefully and sensitively this had to be managed not least because the recordings provided evidence of people ‘getting confused, forgetting the names of people and objects as well as arguing with each other and gossiping about other service users’ (p. 25). Consequently, in order to overcome the ethical challenges of preserving anonymity in visual dissemination activities, they took the innovative step of working with a film director and actors to dramatise and film the material and turn it into an interactive CD-Rom.
The authors of all the chapters question both the observational methods and tools they have used, as well as the value of the data they have generated, and not surprisingly come to different conclusions. Southwell contends that it is a tried and trusted method in her own field of landscape design, but also emphasises the importance of a transactional approach which will examine both ‘“what is going on” as well as asking “does it work?”, and how things might be changed to improve the user experience’ (p. 58). As she also notes, observation is sometimes at odds with what people say, a point cogently argued by Kellaher who shows how observation alone might well have led her to draw the conclusion that mourning is primarily a personal commitment which excludes other people and other relationships rather than, as she demonstrates, being an activity which emphasises ‘social interdependence across generational time and across the life-death divide’ (p. 76). Combining observation with other methods – be they brief unrecorded conversations using aide-memoir/check lists (Kellaher); [in-depth] interviews (Kellaher; Johnson); behavioural mapping (Southwell); or simultaneous note-taking and video-recording (Cook and Hubbard) – yields rich data sets which can then be analysed, interpreted and reinterpreted over time.
These kinds of commonalities and differences among the chapters are also drawn out in Clark's introductory chapter. In addition, he provides a useful thumbnail sketch of how observation methods have been used in gerontology research over the years and what the key debates have been, and still are. He revisits the well-rehearsed distinction made some 50 years ago by the American sociologist Raymond Gold, which placed observation methods on a spectrum from ‘complete participant’ at one end to ‘complete observer’ at the other, and also draws attention to the subsequent refinements of this typology which now incorporate additional dimensions such as whether the observer is an ‘insider’ or an ‘outsider’, and how long, and over what time period, observations are carried out. In practice of course, observation research – as all the contributors show – is a multi-faceted and more nuanced activity than simple typologies and models would suggest. Usefully too, Clark points to the benefits and problems associated with observation methods as well as reflecting on how they might be used in future gerontology research. He argues that even where interview and survey methods are the focus of data collection, researchers often also use observation methods but fail to make these explicit in their accounts of what has been done or what findings have been generated. He believes that observation methods should play as important a role as others, not least because they have ‘the potential to reveal some of the ways in which structured aspects of social life are played out in the social practices and particularities of the everyday lives of older people’ (p. 11). He further contends that observation methods are important for theory-building and for generalising beyond the sampled populations, and that far from being confined to traditional gerontological settings such as residential or hospital environments, they clearly lend themselves to exploring how older people behave and interact in socially heterogeneous settings such as neighbourhoods, parks, shopping centres and other public spaces.
One project which has done just this is Clark and his colleagues' recent study in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, funded under the Joseph Rowntree Foundation's ‘Public Spaces Programme’. Published under the title of Social Interactions in Urban Public Places, this year-long research project sought to examine how people of all ages use public spaces and what implications the findings might have for emerging policy agendas around shared and contested spaces; intergenerational relationships; safety and security; and the management of public space. Whilst I am a great fan of ‘the Rowntree way’ of doing and disseminating research, the focus of their short, accessible reports is to draw out policy and practice implications rather than provide details of what, in this case, was a complex and detailed research design involving not only academic researchers but also 46 members of the ‘general public’ aged from 16 to 73 years. If, like me, you want to know much more about how these ‘co-observers’ were recruited, trained and supported; what they actually did at the nine observation sites in the town; how the ‘observation sheets’ and ‘ethnographic diaries’ were developed, piloted and utilised; and how the co-researchers contributed to and informed the data analysis; then you will find the two-and-a-half pages on methods plus an appendix (containing a table detailing observations in one location for one week), frustrating to say the least. Ironically, the reference list could usefully have directed interested readers to the fifth volume in ‘The representation of older people in ageing research’ series, in which Clark et al. (Reference Clark, Holland, Peace, Katz and C.2005) have a chapter on their recruitment strategies and participative methods.
Research design and methods aside though, does this report achieve what it set out to do in terms of informing policy and practice agendas? Up to a point, but one danger of reports like these is that the detail and the complexity get lost in the drive to convey generalised messages. Consequently, readers will not be surprised to learn that public spaces are used differently by different groups of people; that people of whatever age tend to use and stay longer in spaces that are stimulating, interesting and comfortable (i.e. sheltered, with seating, toilet facilities and adequate lighting); that security is a major consideration; and that barriers to usage are about more than physical accessibility. What may surprise readers more is that the researchers found relatively little evidence of conflict between groups in the spaces they observed, perhaps because groups self-segregate to an extent; for example, older people are more likely to be seen earlier in the day than younger people. They also found evidence that contrary to popular perception, groups of young people often self-manage and self-regulate and that rather than being a problem or a nuisance, they were generally benign. Moreover, people of all ages tended to use public spaces as a way of maintaining connections with the public life of their communities, as an opportunity to meet and socialise, and also just to people-watch. The overriding, and optimistic, message of this research is that no matter how much regeneration and redevelopment an area might undergo to provide pristine public spaces, at the end of the day ‘people make places’. It is an understanding of those people, their commonalities as well as their differing needs and expectations and, importantly, their histories and linkages with particular places, that is crucial to creating spaces which people want to use and where they want to be. And it is detailed observations of these spaces, together with interviews, street surveys and the experiences and feedback from the team of local area observers, which has contributed to this fascinating and informative account of a ‘year in the life’ of Aylesbury's public spaces.
