observer bias

observer bias

(ŏb-zĕr′vĕr) [″]
Distortions introduced into a research investigation by the expectations and/or knowledge of the individuals collecting the data.
Mentioned in ?
References in periodicals archive ?
Outside Perspective In scientific circles, it's referred to as "observer bias," where researchers may tend to see what they expect/ want to see.
However, these assessments may be confounded by multiple factors, for example, observer bias, subjectivity of terminology, imprecise measuring tools, and various external confounders such as ambient light, visual acuity, torch luminosity, and iris pigmentation.
All investigations were done in hospital laboratory free of cost and were reported by the same pathologist who was not aware of the purpose of study in order to avoid observer bias.
Previous studies conducted in seven units of the same facility demonstrated significant differences in the compliance reported by the unit and using cover observers (who unobtrusively observed HH practices), (6) which could be evidence of observer bias. Other studies demonstrate that infection control nurses and unit ambassadors overestimated the compliance by 30.3% and 50.0%, respectively.
Although observational studies of SMA have been criticized for lacking experimental power, to be subject to observer bias, and involve relatively simple measurement techniques, they do provide insight into the spatial behaviour of free-roaming animals in their natural environment, allow observers to collect large amounts of data, and do not require specialized equipment and facilities typically associated with laboratory studies of animal behaviour (Begall et al.
Yes, 235 ways scientists can fool themselves, with sober names such as confounding, selection bias, recall bias, reporting bias, ascertainment bias, sex bias, cognitive bias, measurement bias, verification bias, publication bias, observer bias, and on and on.
To solve the problem of observer bias all tests were carried by a single person to avoid inter-observer variations of test interpretation.
Moreover unilateral involvement was found more common than bilateral hydronephrosis Our both observation has also been endorsed by two recently published articles910.Ultrasonography is operator dependent and therefore it poses more inter observer bias. The review of literature using AP diameter shows that mild hydronephrosis is more common (64%) followed by moderate and severe hydronephrosis (36%)11.
Part two discusses different types of research designs, including survey, experimental, case study, ethnography, and action research, with part three honing in on the specific data collection techniques of questionnaires, individual and group interviews, observation, and document analysis, as well as discussing how the Internet can be used to facilitate participant recruitment, questionnaire administration, reduction of observer bias, and other aspects of research.
This assumption is sometimes violated (Chen 1999, 2000) and information regarding heterogeneity in observer bias should be modeled (Graham and Bell 1989) because it can produce negatively biased estimates.
This policy was adopted to decrease the possibility of any observer bias. In these OSCE sessions, alcohol hand rub was clearly displayed besides the simulated/actual patients and compliance was seen for four opportunities including
There is also the risk of observer bias (the authors are all employees of the company that performed the testing) and participant bias (the subjects are all clients of the company and knew that they were being interviewed by a representative of the company).