Final answer:
Participant observation is useful in studying hard to observe physiological changes, allowing for immersive and direct observation from an "insider" perspective. Observer bias can be a potential problem in observational research and can be minimized by establishing clear criteria and comparing observations by multiple observers.
Step-by-step explanation:
In situations where there are hard to observe physiological changes, participant observation is useful. This type of observation involves a researcher immersing themselves in a group or social setting in order to make observations from an "insider" perspective. By being a part of the group, the researcher can better understand and observe the subtle physiological changes that may be difficult to detect through other means.
One potential problem in observational research is observer bias, where the observer unconsciously skews their observations to fit their research goals or expectations. To mitigate this bias, it is important for researchers to establish clear criteria for recording and classifying behaviors. Additionally, comparing observations by multiple observers can help test the consistency and reliability of the observations.
Overall, naturalistic observation and participant observation are valuable tools in studying hard to observe physiological changes, as they allow for direct and immersive observation of behaviors in their natural settings.