Abstract
During a prolonged study of small, elected decision-making groups, the observer introduced certain unintended strains in the groups As a result the groups went through three distinctly different phases in defining their relationships with the observer. In the first phase the observer was regarded as an inspector and largely scaled off from communication and access to data. In the second phase the observer was treated as an adviser and consuitant; this threatened the intended non-inter ference of the observer. Finally, in the third phase he was allotted a role of an autonomous observer. The phase development is seen as a general dynamic feature of such relationships. The definition,. of the role of the observer had an impact on the content and amount of communication between the group members and the observer. If the results reported from the study are of a general nature, they must have implications for the validity of data reported from short-term observation in small groups.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
