Knowledge claim: Human behaviour can be influenced by an observer.

Real-life example: Hawthorne Studies – Hawthorne was considered a progressive place to work due to benefits workers received such as paid pension plans and sickness disability pay. An experiment was conducted there on the effects of illumination on worker efficiency. Output increased in general but was not affected by light as both workers working in light and in dim light had an increase in output. The study was ceased due to lack of results. However a similar idea was experimented on women making relays. These women were given rest breaks and different hours were tried. As a result, output increased by 30%. The observers studied workers producing more in less time.

TOK analysis: We must acknowledge that output increased wherever these tests were tried, and thus wherever workers were observed and studied. There is a knowledge issue presented here as the observers did not notice this with the Hawthorne studies. There was a connection found that simply did not exist. The conclusion that was ignored was that human behaviour (in this context, the output produced) changed drastically when these workers were observed. The observers influenced the workers behaviour and resulted in an increase in output. They were now in a more pressured environment where they could not slack in their work and thus were in general more efficient. To avoid this issue, we must consider the effects of the experimental process itself on the results and not just the factor(s) (independent variable) that is tested/changed in the experiment.