The Hawthorne effect refers to a tendency in some individuals to alter their behavior in response to their awareness of being observed (Fox et al., 2007).
The Hawthorne effect is named after a set of studies conducted at Western Electric’s Hawthorne Plant in Cicero during the 1920s. The Scientists included in this research team were Elton Mayo (Psychologist), Roethlisberger and Whilehead (Sociologists), and William Dickson (company representative).
There are 4 separate experiments in Hawthorne Studies:
- Illumination Experiments (1924-1927)
- Relay Assembly Test Room Experiments (1927-1932)
- Experiments in Interviewing Workers (1928- 1930)
- Bank Wiring Room Experiments (1931-1932)
Management theories were significantly impacted by the Hawthorne Experiments, which were carried out at Western Electric’s Hawthorne factory in the 1920s and 1930s.
A more human-centric approach to management methods resulted from their emphasis on the psychological and social aspects of workplace productivity, such as group dynamics and employee attentiveness.
Experiment Illumination
The “Illumination Experiment,” which was carried out between 1924 and 1927 and was supported by the National Research Council, is the earliest and most significant of these investigations.
The organisation had aimed to determine whether the work conditions (such as the lighting in a plant) and productivity were related.
A group of workers who built electrical relays encountered many illumination changes throughout the first investigation. The smallest changes in light were used to examine how they performed.
The initial researchers discovered that productivity increased whenever a variable, such lighting levels, was altered. Even when the shift was detrimental, like a return to dim illumination, this was still the case. But as the focus waned, these productivity improvements vanished (Roethlisberg & Dickson, 1939). The result suggested that the company’s employees’ motivation was the only reason for the productivity boost (Cox, 2000). They had evidently increased their productivity because they were aware that they were being watched. It appeared that work performance may be enhanced by supervisors paying more attention.
Elton Mayo’s Hawthorne Experiment
Relay Assembly Test Room Experiment
Encouraged by these first results, the factory carried out a number of trials over the following eight years. Elton Mayo (1880–1949) and his associates conducted a series of investigations on five women from 1928 to 1932 that looked at changes in the organisation of labour (such as the duration of the working day, rest times, and other physical circumstances).
The lighting experiment’s preliminary results were supported by the Elton Mayo studies. The findings of the subsequent set of trials are summed up as follows by Freedman (1981, p. 49):After Landsberger’s (1958) findings were analysed, the phrase “Hawthorne effect” was coined to characterise the improvement in performance of those who are seen, observed, and observed by supervisors or researchers.
Examples of the Hawthorne
Effect in the Workplace:
Managers
The aforementioned research provide valuable insights into the dynamic interplay between production and observation.
On the one hand, informing workers that they are being watched might make them feel more responsible. This kind of responsibility might lead to better performance.
Employees may experience different results, though, if they believe that the observation was made for other reasons. Employees might not be motivated to perform better if they believe, for example, that their improved productivity could hurt their coworkers or eventually have a negative effect on their pay.
This implies that even while workplace observation may have positive effects, it still has to take into consideration other elements including employee camaraderie, the management-employee interaction, and the employees, and the compensation system.
Learning
The Hawthorne effect is either non-existent in children between grades 3 and 9, is not evoked by the intended cues, or is not strong enough to change the experiment’s results, according to a study that examined the effect of awareness of experimentation on student performance (based on direct and indirect cues) (Bauernfeind & Olson, 1973).
However, there would be significant ramifications if the Hawthorne effect were to be observed in other educational settings, as when older kids or teachers are being observed.
For example, it is easy to envision how teachers could change their approach if they knew they were being watched and assessed by a camera or a real person sitting inside the classroom.
Similarly, older pupils may be more motivated to focus on the teachings if they are aware that their participation in class will be monitored.
Criticism
Recent assessments of the original experiments appear to contradict the original results, despite the Hawthorne effect’s apparent significance in a number of circumstances.
For example, it was long believed that the first experiment’s data had been lost. “The original [illumination] research data somehow disappeared,” according to Rice (1982).
According to Gale (2004, p. 439), “the only modern account of these particular experiments comes from a few paragraphs in a trade journal, and the original study reports were lost.”
Nevertheless, these data were discovered and assessed by John List and Steven Levitt of the University of Chicago (Levitt & List, 2011). Despite the potential Hawthorne manifestations, they discovered that the ostensibly noteworthy patterns were wholly fictitious. They suggested another method of testing for the Hawthorne effect: increased reactivity to changes created by the researcher, as opposed to variations occurring spontaneously.
According to Cambridge, Witton, and Elbourne (2014), another study aimed to ascertain whether the Hawthorne effect is real, under what circumstances it occurs, and how big it may be.
After doing a comprehensive analysis of the existing data about the Harthorne effect, the researchers came to the conclusion that although research involvement could have an influence on the behaviours under study, more research is necessary to fully understand how it works, how big it is, and how it works.
