Final answer:
To learn about behaviors on public transportation, one can use case studies for in-depth analysis, naturalistic observations to capture real-world behavior, and surveys for broad, quantifiable data. Each method has strengths and weaknesses related to depth, generalizability, observer influence, and accuracy.
Step-by-step explanation:
To understand what people do while they ride public transportation using case studies, a researcher would observe specific individuals or groups over a period of time. This method could involve in-depth documentation of behaviors and experiences, potentially providing rich descriptive data about how people spend their time during commutes.
In contrast, naturalistic observation means watching the behaviors of individuals in their natural environment without interference. For this scenario, it could involve observing passengers unobtrusively to record their actions and interactions authentically, although the presence of the observer might still influence behavior somewhat.
To employ surveys to garner information, the researcher could distribute questionnaires to a larger number of passengers asking about their activities during their commute. This method allows for the collection of a wide range of data from diverse individuals and can include both qualitative and quantitative questions.
The advantage of case studies is that they can provide a thorough, in-depth understanding of an individual's behaviors. Yet, a significant disadvantage is the limited ability to generalize findings to the broader population. The strength of naturalistic observation lies in its ability to capture behavior in its real-world context, while a downside is the potential for observer influence and difficulty in controlling external variables. Surveys can reach a broad audience and can easily quantify results, but they may suffer from self-report biases and may not accurately capture the complexity of behaviors.