Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2026 other

Evaluating the impact of video cameras on participant behaviour in research: a systematic review and meta-analysis

0Citations signalées — pas une note de qualité
1Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Background Human behavioural research is often clouded with the risk that study results may be contaminated by the participant’s awareness that they are being observed. Direct observation by a person is associated with this phenomenon, but limited data exists evaluating this Hawthorne Effect when less invasive video recording devices are used. Here we present the first quantitative analysis to identify the extent to which this occurs, based on self-reported behavioural change when cameras are used. Methods Searches of MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Google Scholar were performed on 01/12/2022. No limitations were set. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who changed their behaviour due to awareness of being recorded. Two blinded reviewers performed screening in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. I2 statistic was used to assess for heterogeneity and a random effects model was subsequently applied for the meta-analysis. Results Preliminary searches identified 1728 publications. After screening, twenty-eight studies were included in the final analysis involving 2586 participants. Nine publications were suitable for quantitative analysis of the primary outcome. Pooled analysis using a random-effects model demonstrated the proportion of participants who reported behavioural change because of the camera was 15% (95% CI 0.08, 0.23) [I2 = 96.16%]. Conclusion The presence of a video camera may cause behavioural change in a small proportion of study participants. Cameras may cause a much lower rate of reactivity compared to a direct human observer. The heterogeneity and high risk of bias of the publications highlight the need for further high-quality research into this subject area. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42022370498

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Contrôle bibliographique ouvert

La source scientifique ouverte est momentanément indisponible.

Institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Recherche à la demande dans Crossref et Europe PMC, sans clé ; OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant requis, aucune réponse conservée. Sources et limites.