Jump to content

Talk:Hawthorne effect

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Outline of proposed rewrite

[edit]

I propose the following outline for this article. The case studies section will be more complete (and longer), but the overall article should be shorter since I’ll delete much of the content that came from Steve Draper’s webpage. Note that not all bullets will be headings. It’s just to give an idea of what should be included.

1. General information about the Hawthorne effect (general definition, place, researchers, purpose, significance, controversy)

2. Case studies

  • Illumination studies
  • Relay assembly test room
  • Mica splitting
  • Bank wiring room
  • Interviewing
  • Personnel counseling

3. Sources of information on the studies

  • Primary resources from the researchers and their backgrounds
  • Major secondary sources

4. Definitions and significance of the Hawthorne effect

  • Sample definitions of Hawthorne effect
  • Significance
    • industrial and occupational pscychology
    • organizational development
    • social psychology
    • business management
    • medicine (placebo effect)
    • educational psychology (halo effect)
    • research methods and experiment variables (meaning the researchers thought they were only changing the lights and didn’t take into account other changes they introduced to conduct the experiments) – nice segue to:

5. Interpretation, criticism, and conclusions

  • other possible causes of results
  • untruthful reporting of events (use part of section Can we trust the literature?)
  • accepted without foundation

6. Footnotes

7. References (books and websites referenced in text)

8. Further reading

  • halo effect (add part of section Teacher effects)
  • placebo effect
  • Pygmalian effect
  • John Henry effect (create article base on information in this one)
  • etc.

9. External links

Please let me know what you think. Dblomgren 04:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems very reasonable. Andrew73 18:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That appears to be a sound approach with a good flow. M jurrens 18:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed that it sounds like a good approach. Something missing from the current article are the implications of the Hawthorne effect for experimental design. I gather that you plan to cover this under your section 4, which would be a vaulable addition. Zoe Ocean 02:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

In case anyone's wondering, I am rewriting and reorganizing the article. I was hoping to replace the text in one fell swoop, but I decided it would be more reassuring to other editors to add it piece by piece. DBlomgren 03:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uhh, and just out of reference, not sure of the correct section to place this, but per a discussion above... in the UK at least, the hawthorne effect is a part of the Sociology Syllabus for A-level, which is a college level qualification.... but not the Psychology Syllabus - if you reference it in psychology you lose marks as each subject has pretty specific terminology. 90.240.133.130 22:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Please do not link this article to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. It is a misconception to attribut observers interfering with the experiment as the reason behind HUP. Quantum mechanics is not applicable in these scenarios. Thanks, --ScienceApologist 15:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Quite right. Steved2 18:26, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very important topic for every management student.So,this should not be removed from the wiki.

I understand that the actual topic is not a Psychology topic. There still remains the fact that the improvements were short lived. I would endevor to relate finding this to regression psychology in order to understand the stress of observation. From an Industrial Engineering point of view the sociological factors are also of importance and tend to be overlooked by scholars.

Reactivity

[edit]

As I learned it, a lot of the content on this page applies to the more general concept of reactivity, which Hawthorne effect applies only to situations where study participants alter their behavior in response to the awareness that they are being observed. I would like to move some of this content to that article to tighten this one up a bit, does anyone have a problem with that? Steve CarlsonTalk 05:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be great to do whatever we can to cut this article's length down.--Jlray (talk) 17:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

University of Chicago Economists' Self Promotion?

[edit]

It saddens me to see an article like this apparently being hijacked for the self promotion of the two University of Chicago economists (or their employer) mentioned in the opening section. (They even appear so clumsy as to refer to their work in the first person at the end of the article.) The paper they refer to is as yet an unpublished manuscript and so has not been subject to the rigours of peer review. If the claims they make in that paper are correct it does not alter the whole body of scholarship on the subject as they appear to suggest, it provides additional information supporting SRG Jones' interpretation of the original Hawthorne experiments in his 1992 article. Self promotion or institutional self-promotion are contrary to Wikipedia policies and I therefore suggest that references to this work are removed or significantly downplayed.

Econobbler (talk) 23:24, 1 October 2009 (UTC)Econobuster[reply]

Missing Illumination experiment

[edit]

Although the illumination experiment is mentioned, unless I missed it it doesn't seem to be described. I didn't see any reference to it either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghaag (talk • contribs) 10:27, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a good source about the illumination experiment? Then maybe you could write something about it. Lova Falk talk 14:07, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This section has grown out of control, so I have moved it out of the article into this talk page. Please see Wikipedia:Further reading and put only entries that are topical, reliable and balanced, and please, keep the section limited in size. "Wikipedia is not a catalogue of all existing works." Please, if you add an entry back into the article, motivate why. Thank you! Lova Falk talk 16:45, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Adair, G. (1984). "The Hawthorne effect: A reconsideration of the methodological artifact". Journal of Applied Psychology. 69 (2): 334–345. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.69.2.334. [Reviews references to Hawthorne in the psychology methodology literature.]
  • Bramel, D.; Friend, R. (1981). "Hawthorne, the myth of the docile worker, and class bias in psychology". American Psychologist. 36 (8): 867–878. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.36.8.867. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |lastauthoramp= ignored (|name-list-style= suggested) (help)
  • Clark, R. E.; Sugrue, B. M. (1991). Anglin, G. J. (ed.). Instructional technology: past, present, and future. Englewood, Colorado: Libraries unlimited. pp. 327–343. ISBN 0-87287-820-1. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |lastauthoramp= ignored (|name-list-style= suggested) (help)
  • Gillespie, Richard (1991). Manufacturing knowledge: a history of the Hawthorne experiments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-40358-8.
  • Jastrow (1900). Fact and fable in psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  • Jones, Stephen R. G. (1992). "Was there a Hawthorne effect?". American Journal of Sociology. 98 (3): 451–468. doi:10.1086/230046. JSTOR 2781455.
  • Landsberger, Henry A. (1958). Hawthorne Revisited. Ithaca.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  • Lovett, R. (20 March 2004). "Running on empty". New Scientist. 181 (2439): 42–45.
  • Leonard, K. L.; Masatu, M. C. (2006). "Outpatient process quality evaluation and the Hawthorne effect". Social Science and Medicine. 69 (9): 2330–2340. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.06.003. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |lastauthoramp= ignored (|name-list-style= suggested) (help)
  • Levitt, Steven D.; List, John A. (2011). "Was There Really a Hawthorne Effect at the Hawthorne Plant? An Analysis of the Original Illumination Experiments". American Economic Journal: Applied Economics. 3 (1): 224–238. doi:10.1257/app.3.1.224. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |lastauthoramp= ignored (|name-list-style= suggested) (help)
  • Marsh, H. W. (1987). "Student's evaluations of university teaching: research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research". International Journal of Educational Research. 11 (3): 253–388. doi:10.1016/0883-0355(87)90001-2.
  • Mayo, Elton (1933). The human problems of an industrial civilization. New York: MacMillan.
  • Mayo, Elton (1949). Hawthorne and the Western Electric Company. The Social Problems of an Industrial Civilisation. Routledge.
  • Mayo, Gael Elton (1984). The Mad Mosaic: A Life Story. London: Quartet. ISBN 0-7043-2360-5.
  • Orne, M. T. (1973). "Communication by the total experimental situation: Why is it important, how it is evaluated, and its significance for the ecological validity of findings". In Pliner, P.; Krames, L.; Alloway, T. (eds.). Communication and affect. New York: Academic Press. pp. 157–191. ISBN 0-12-053050-3.
  • Parsons, H. M. (1974). "What happened at Hawthorne?: New evidence suggests the Hawthorne effect resulted from operant reinforcement contingencies". Science. 183 (4128): 922–932. doi:10.1126/science.183.4128.922. PMID 17756742. [A very detailed description, in a more accessible source, of some of the experiments; used to argue that the effect was due to feedback-promoted learning.]
  • Roethlisberger, Fritz J.; Dickson, W. J. (1939). Management and the Worker. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Rosenthal, R. (1966). Experimenter effects in behavioral research. New York: Appleton.
  • Rhem, J. (1999). "Pygmalion in the classroom". The national teaching and learning forum. 8 (2): 1–4.
  • Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith. ISBN 0-85117-231-8.
  • Shayer, M. (1992). "Problems and issues in intervention studies". In Demetriou, A.; Shayer, M.; Efklides, A. (eds.). Neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development: implications and applications for education. Eastern London: Routledge. pp. 107–121. ISBN 0-415-05471-0.
  • Trahair, Richard C. S.; Zaleznik, Abraham (2005). Elton Mayo: The Humanist Temper. London: Transaction Publishers. ISBN 1-4128-0524-4. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |lastauthoramp= ignored (|name-list-style= suggested) (help)
  • Wall, P. D. (1999). Pain: the science of suffering and lack of skills. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ISBN 0-297-84255-2.
  • Zdep, S. M.; Irvine, S. H. (1970). "A reverse Hawthorne effect in educational evaluation". Journal of School Psychology. 8 (2): 89–95. doi:10.1016/0022-4405(70)90025-7. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |lastauthoramp= ignored (|name-list-style= suggested) (help)

redundancy

[edit]

Most of the fourth paragraph in "History" is redundant and is mentioned again, in part even word by word, under "Interpretation and Criticism". I don't dare doing it myself but maybe somebody with a bit more knowledge of the matter wants to clean that up. Sansmalrst (talk) 16:51, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you and I have therefore turned that section into a comment and moved the part that was not mentioned into the interpretation section. Kind regards. --Suturn (talk) 11:47, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Hawthorne effect/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The Hawthorn effect refers to an increase in performance caused by the special attention given to employees, rather than tangible changes in the work. (pg 12. Lussier.R, "Human Relations in Organizations"

Last edited at 02:55, 4 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 17:18, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm not going to be the one to remove this, but I agree that it should be deprecated. Lussier, quoted, is retailing a discredited hypothesis for why or how the Hawthorne Effect works. There is no reason to take that "observer effect" chatter seriously. It's just a phase that social science went through in one of those storms of "let's all talk about quantum mechanics blahblahblah."
David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 08:11, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Grammatical Error

[edit]

I noticed the second sentence of the article is a sentence fragment:

"Descriptions of this well-known and remarkable effect, which was discovered in the context of research conducted at the Hawthorne Western Electric plant, which some scholars feel turned out to be fictional"

I am not familiar enough with the effect to feel confident correcting the issue. Could someone more knowledgable please correct this, or let me know which "which" clause should become the primary action of the sentence?

Cheers, Flyingpinkpotato (talk) 20:02, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Flyingpinkpotato, going off the source, I've attempted to address the issue. Thanks for pointing it out; I just happened upon this article today. Sdrqaz (talk) 21:13, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Sdrqaz ! 🥳 Flyingpinkpotato (talk) 01:33, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Landsberger or French???

[edit]

According to https://sociology.unc.edu/henry-landsberger-1926-2017/, Landsberger "coin[ed] the term “the Hawthorne Effect” in an early major critique of Elton Mayo’s workplace study". According to this Wikipedia page, "The term "Hawthorne effect" was coined in 1953 by John R. P. French".

So who was it guys??? 149.111.26.128 (talk) 14:00, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hawthorne_effect&oldid=1252435886"