Modern natural science is characterized by the strengthening of the role of observation in it. The main reasons for this phenomenon are:

1) the development of the observation method itself: the equipment created for observation can operate in automatic mode for a long time and be controlled at a distance; its connection to a computer makes it possible to quickly and reliably process observational data;

2) the realization by the scientific community that experiments on objects that are vital for humanity cannot be carried out. This is, first of all, the ocean and the earth's atmosphere. They can only be studied by observation;

3) the emergence of new possibilities for observing the Earth with the development of space technology. Observations of the Earth from space make it possible to obtain information about integral terrestrial formations in an integrative form, which cannot be obtained in the conditions of being the subject of observation on the Earth. They make it possible to observe integral pictures of the interactions of several subsystems of the Earth at once, to observe the dynamics of a number of processes on the Earth;

4) the removal of observation equipment beyond the Earth's atmosphere and even beyond its gravitational field expanded the possibility of astronomical observations. So, with the help of automata, it was possible to see the far side of the Moon, to survey the surface and the environment of other planets of the solar system. The fact is that outside the earth's atmosphere there is no absorption of electromagnetic cosmic radiation in a wide frequency range by the atmosphere. After the removal of instruments from the earth's atmosphere, X-ray and gamma-ray astronomy arose and began to develop rapidly.

What is scientific observation?

Observation- this is a deliberate, systematic perception of a phenomenon, carried out in order to identify its essential properties and relationships.

Observation is an active form of scientific activity of the subject. It requires the formulation of the task of observation, the development of a methodology for its implementation, the development of methods for fixing the results of observation and their processing.

The emerging tasks of observation are caused by the internal logic of the development of natural science and the demands of practice.

Scientific observation is always associated with theoretical knowledge. It shows what to observe and how to observe. It also specifies the degree of observation accuracy.

Observations can be:

-immediate - the properties and aspects of the object are perceived by the human senses;

-mediated- performed with the help of technical means (microscope, telescope);

- indirect- in which not objects are observed, but the results of their impact on some other objects (electron flow, which is fixed by the glow of a screen with a special coating).

Observation conditions should provide:

a) the unambiguity of the intention of the observation;

b) the possibility of control either by repeated observation, or by applying new, different methods of observation. Observation results must be reproducible. Of course, there is no absolute reproducibility of the results of observations. The results of observations are recorded only within the framework of certain scientific knowledge.

In the process of observation, the subject does not interfere with the nature of the observed phenomenon. It breeds shortcomings of observation as a scientific method of cognition:

1. It is impossible to isolate the observed phenomenon from the influence of factors obscuring its essence. The concept of the obscuring factor is easy to understand on the example of the free fall of bodies. Indeed, the free fall of bodies shows that air resistance clearly affects the nature of the motion of the body, but it does not have any effect on the dependence of this motion on the force of gravity. Thus, a darkening factor is a factor on which the phenomenon under study does not depend, but which modifies the form of manifestation of the phenomenon under study.

2. You can not reproduce the phenomenon as many times as required for this study; you have to wait for it to repeat itself.

3. It is impossible to study the behavior of a phenomenon under different conditions, i.e. it is impossible to study it comprehensively.

It is these shortcomings of observation that force the researcher to proceed to the experiment. In concluding this question, we note that in modern natural science, observation is increasingly taking the form of measuring the quantitative value of the properties of a system. The results of the observation are recorded in the protocols. They are tables, graphs, verbal descriptions, etc. Having received observation protocols, the researcher tries to establish dependencies between certain properties: quantitative, following in time, concomitance, mutual exclusion, etc.

10. Method of experiment

Experiment- this is a method of cognition based on controlling the behavior of an object with the help of a number of factors, the control over the action of which is in the hands of the researcher.

The experiment did not completely replace observation. Observation under experimental conditions fixes the impact on the object and the reaction of the object. Without this, the experiment goes to waste. For example, Ohm's law for a section of a circuit says: for metals and electrolytes, the current in the circuit is proportional to the applied voltage. In order to verify this pattern experimentally, it is necessary to change the voltage in the circuit and observe (fix) how the current strength changes in this case.

The main difference between the experiment from observation lies in the fact that even in the simplest experiment an artificial system of elements is created that has not previously been encountered in human practice. This artificial system will be an experimental facility.

The main requirement for the experiment- reproducibility of its results. This means that an experiment conducted at different points in time, other things being equal, should give the same result. Nevertheless, not every biological experiment, for example, can be repeated as many times as desired (heart transplantation, etc.). Such repetition is possible in principle. But there is also the question of the expediency of repetition.

Depending on the subject of research experiment subdivide on natural science, technical and social. The choice of one or another type of experiment, as well as the plan for its implementation, depends on the research task. In this regard, experiments are divided into: search, measurement, control, verification.

search engines experiments are set up to discover unknown objects or properties. Measuring- to establish the quantitative parameters of the subject or process being studied.

Control– to check the results obtained earlier. Testing- to confirm or refute a certain hypothesis or some theoretical statement.

A modern experiment is theoretically loaded. Really:

Instruments are used in the experiment, and they are the materialized result of previous theoretical activity;

Any experiment is built on the basis of some theory, and if the theory is well developed, then it is known in advance what result the experiment will lead to;

An experiment, as a rule, does not give a continuous picture of the process, but only its nodal points. Only theoretical thinking is capable of restoring the whole process from them;

When processing experimental data, it is necessary to carry out averaging and apply the theory of errors.

The theoretical loading of the experiment increases. The reason for this is the occurrence mathematical theory of experiment, the use of which reduces the number of samples in the experiment, increases its accuracy.

In order to have a good understanding of the possibilities and limits of applicability of the theory of experiment planning, the creation of automated experiment control systems, it must be taken into account that all decisions and actions of the experimenter can be conditionally divided into two types:

1) based on a detailed and scrupulous study of a particular phenomenon;

2) based on more general properties characteristic of a variety of phenomena and objects.

We call the first decisions and actions heuristic, and the second - formalizable. If we are talking about the heuristic part, then here success is determined by the level of training of the experimenter in a particular field of knowledge, as well as his intuition. The mathematical theory of experiment deals with the study of only the formalized part of experimental activity. Success here is entirely determined by the development of the theory and the level of training of the experimenter in the framework of this theory.

The most important concept of the theory of planning an experiment is the concept of a factor. factor called a controlled independent variable corresponding to one of the possible ways of influencing the object of study. Often such variables are called adjustable factors. Temperature, pressure, composition of the reaction mixture, concentration, etc. can act as controlled factors. In each particular case, the number of these factors and their numerical values ​​are clearly defined. When choosing factors, it is desirable to take into account as many of them as possible. They are established based on the results of a literature review, a study of the physical essence of the process, logical reasoning and a survey of specialists.

The quantitative and qualitative states of the factors chosen for the experiment are called factor levels. As factors, it is advisable to choose such independent variables that correspond to one of the reasonable effects on the object of study and can be measured by the available means with a sufficiently high accuracy.

The main requirements for factors, such:

a) manageability, i.e. the ability to set and maintain the selected desired level of the factor constant during the entire experience and its changes according to a given program. The controllability requirement is associated with the need to change the factors during the experiment at several levels, and in each individual experiment, the level of variation must be maintained fairly accurately.

b) compatibility, i.e. the feasibility of any combination of factors. Compatibility of factors means that all their combinations can be implemented in practice. This requirement is serious, since in some cases the incompatibility of factors can lead to the destruction of the installation (for example, as a result of the formation of a mixture of gases prone to self-explosion) or measuring instruments.

c) independence, i.e. the possibility of establishing factors at any level, regardless of the level of other factors. The concept of independence implies that a factor is not a function of other factors. In particular, such a factor as room temperature is a function of other factors: the number of heat emitters and their location, etc.

d) the accuracy of measurement and control must be known and sufficiently high (at least an order of magnitude higher than the accuracy of measuring the output parameter). The low accuracy of measuring factors reduces the possibility of reproducing the experiment;

e) there must be a one-to-one correspondence between the factors and the output parameter, i.e. a change in factors will entail a change in the output parameter;

f) the areas of definition of the factors should be such that at the limiting values ​​of the factors, the output parameter remains within its boundaries.

Uncontrolled factors also affect the experiment - these are uncontrolled conditions for conducting experiments. In principle, it is impossible to describe them all, and it is not necessary.

The next important concept of the mathematical theory of experiment is concept of “response function”. What is behind these concepts?

The course of the process is quantitatively characterized by one or more quantities. Such quantities in the theory of experiment planning are called response functions. They depend on influencing factors.

Under the mathematical description of the process, we mean a system of equations relating the response functions to the influencing factors. In the simplest case, this can be a single equation. Often such a mathematical description is called a mathematical model of the process under study. The value of the mathematical description of the phenomenon under study lies in the fact that it provides information about the influence of factors, allows you to quantify the value of the response function for a given process mode, and can serve as the basis for optimizing the process under study.

When choosing an output parameter, the following requirements must be taken into account:

a) the output parameter must have a quantitative characteristic, i.e. must be measured;

b) he must unambiguously evaluate (measure) the performance of the research object;

c) it must be such that it is possible to clearly distinguish between experiments;

d) it should reflect as fully as possible the essence of the phenomenon under study;

e) it must have a sufficiently clear physical meaning.

The successful choice of the output parameter is largely determined by the level of knowledge of the phenomenon under study.

You can use two or more output parameters, but then the task becomes much more complicated. Note that the factors are selected only after the output parameter (or parameters) is selected.

The process is controlled by instruments that measure input and output parameters. For short-term studies, it is recommended to use indicating means of control, and for long-term studies, recording ones.

The space whose coordinates are factors is called the factor space, or the space of independent variables. Mathematical analysis of experiment planning is reduced to the choice of the optimal location of points in the factor space, providing the best research results in a certain sense.

Modern experimental studies have the following features:

1. The impossibility of observing the phenomena under study using only the sense organs of the subject-experimenter (low or high temperatures, pressure, vacuum, etc.);

2. Natural science of the 19th century tried to deal experimentally with well-organized systems, i.e. study systems that depend on a small number of variables. The ideal, for example, of an experimental physicist was single-factor experiment. Its essence is as follows: it was assumed that the researcher could stabilize all the independent variables of the system under study with any degree of accuracy. Then, changing some of them one by one, he installed the dependencies he was interested in. Here is an example of a one-way experiment. Consider a gas that is at a certain temperature, pressure, volume. Each of the named parameters of the system (temperature, pressure, volume) can be made constant. So it is possible, say, to study the change in the volume of a gas with a change in pressure, if the temperature is constant, i.e. conduct an isothermal process. Similarly, isobaric and isochoric processes are carried out.

In the second half of the 20th century, it became necessary to conduct experiments with diffuse, i.e. poorly organized systems. Their peculiarity lies in the fact that in such systems several processes of different nature take place simultaneously. Moreover, they are so closely related to each other that, in principle, they cannot be considered in isolation from each other. For example, these are the physical processes that occur between the cathode and the anode in a lamp, this is an emission spectral analysis, etc.;

H. Use of filtering devices. The bottom line: not all signals given out experimentally have the same value. It is often difficult to identify from a large amount of information the one that is significant. In such situations, filter devices are used. These are automata capable of selecting incoming signals and giving the researcher the information that is needed to solve the problem.

Example. In the physics of the microworld, it is known that the same particle can decay through several channels. The decay probabilities for different channels are different. Some of them are negligible. For example, the K + -meson decays through seven channels. The decay of the K + - meson, which takes place with a low probability, is very difficult to fix if the results of the experiment are processed manually. This is where filters come into play. They automate the search for the desired type of decay of an elementary particle;

4. Modern experiments are characterized by the use of sophisticated equipment, a large amount of measured and recorded parameters, and the complexity of algorithms for processing the information received.

All experiments are set with the following goals:

1) to obtain new empirical data subject to further generalization;

2) in order to confirm or refute already existing ideas and theories, and it is necessary to understand what the experiment in theory confirms and what does not.

The experiment does not test the theory as a whole, but its observable consequences. By means of measurements, two groups of facts are compared: those predicted by the theory and those found as a result of the measurement. If there is not at least an approximate coincidence between them, the theory, even if it is logically coherent, cannot be considered satisfactory. At the same time, the experiment does not allow making an absolute conclusion about the correctness of the theory. Having received experimental confirmation of a theoretical position, it is far from always possible to guarantee that the experiment confirmed only it. The researcher does not always know how many other valid assumptions the result satisfies. This, in particular, is connected with the impossibility of the “decisive experiment”. The experiment with absoluteness confirms not the theoretical construction itself, but its specific interpretation.

In a number of cases, observation and in all cases experiment are associated with the measurement of certain characteristics of the system under study.

What is a dimension?

The procedure for establishing one quantity with the help of another, taken as a standard, is called measurement. Measurement links observation to mathematics and allows the creation of quantitative theories.

The measurement method includes three main points:

a) choosing a unit of measurement and obtaining an appropriate set of measures;

b) establishment of the rule for comparing the measured quantity with the measure and the rule for adding measures;

c) description of the measurement procedure.

So, the measurement involves the implementation of a particular physical procedure, but is not limited to it. Measurement, in order to fulfill its purpose, must also involve a certain theory. It is also necessary to know the theory of the device, since without such knowledge its readings will remain incomprehensible to us.

The purpose of observations and experiments is to give facts to science. What is meant by fact?

There are different definitions of fact in the literature. We assume fact empirical knowledge, which either performs the function of a starting point in the construction of a scientific theory, or plays the role of verifying its truth. By the way, theoretical knowledge can also perform these two named functions. And then it will act as a fact.

Since fact is an element of knowledge, it often merges with its explanation. It is very important to always clear the facts from their explanation as much as possible. Why? If we pass off a fact that has already been explained as a real fact, then we will unreasonably impose a ban on other possible explanations for this fact. However, it must be borne in mind that the facts in their pure form do not exist. Every fact bears the seal of existing knowledge. As a form of knowledge for natural science, a fact is valuable in that it has a certain invariance in various systems of knowledge.

What is the difference between experiment and observation? and got the best answer

Answer from Denis Odessa[active]
It differs from observation by active interaction with the object under study. Usually, an experiment is carried out as part of a scientific study and serves to test a hypothesis, establish causal relationships between phenomena.

Answer from Vasily Khaminov[guru]
when experimenting, you subject an object to some kind of test)) And observations are just observing it in natural conditions))

Answer from Daria Shevchuk[active]
observation is a passive way of knowing, and experience is an active way.

Answer from Vinera Ovechkin[newbie]
Observation is the perception of natural objects, and experiment is observation in specially created and controlled conditions. That is, the difference is that Observation all depends on nature, while Experiment there everything needs to be done by yourself

Answer from Dima Kuznetsov[guru]
you can watch the experiment O_O

Answer from _BE`Z analoga_ I`[newbie]
Scientific observation (N.) is the perception of objects and phenomena of reality, carried out with the aim of their knowledge. In N.'s act, one can single out:
1) object;
2) subject;
3) funds;
4) conditions;
5) a system of knowledge, on the basis of which the goal of N. is set and its results are interpreted.
All these components should be taken into account when reporting N.'s results so that any other observer can repeat it. The most important requirement for scientific N. is the observance of intersubjectivity. It implies that N. can be repeated by each observer with the same result. Only in this case the result of N. will be included in science. Therefore, eg. , observations of UFOs or various parapsychic phenomena that do not satisfy the requirement of intersubjectivity still remain outside of science.
N. are subdivided into direct and indirect. With direct N., the scientist observes the chosen object itself. However, this is not always possible. Eg. , objects of quantum mechanics or many objects of astronomy cannot be observed directly. We can judge the properties of such objects only on the basis of their interaction with other objects. This kind of N. is called indirect, it is based on the assumption of a certain regular connection between the properties of directly unobservable objects and the observed manifestations of these properties and contains a logical conclusion about the properties of an unobservable object based on the observed effect of its action. It should be noted that a sharp boundary cannot be drawn between direct and indirect N.. In modern science, indirect N. are becoming more widespread as the number and sophistication of the instruments used in N. increases, and the scope of scientific research expands. The observed object affects the device, and the scientist directly observes only the result of the interaction of the object with the device.
Experiment (E.) is a direct material impact on a real object or the conditions surrounding it, produced with the aim of knowing this object.
The following elements are usually distinguished in E.:
1) purpose;
2) the object of experimentation;
3) the conditions in which the object is located or in which it is placed;
4) E. means;
5) material impact on the object.
Each of these elements can be used as the basis for the classification of electrons; they can be divided into physical, chemical, biological, etc., depending on the differences in the objects of experimentation. One of the simplest classifications is based on differences in the goals of E.: for example. , establishment of k.-l. patterns or discovery of facts. E., conducted for this purpose, are called "search". The result of search E. is new information about the area under study. However, most often the experiment is carried out in order to test some hypothesis or theory. Such E. is called "verification". It is clear that it is impossible to draw a sharp line between these two types of E. The same E. can be used to test a hypothesis and at the same time provide unexpected information about the objects under study. In the same way, the result of search E. can force us to abandon the accepted hypothesis or, on the contrary, give an empirical justification to our theoretical reasoning. In modern science, the same E. more and more often serves different purposes.
E. is always called upon to answer a particular question. But for a question to be meaningful and allow a definite answer, it must be based on prior knowledge of the area under study. It is theory that provides this knowledge, and it is theory that poses the question for the sake of answering which E. is posed. Therefore, E. cannot bring the correct result without theory. Initially, the question is formulated in the language of theory, that is, in theoretical terms denoting abstract, idealized objects. In order for E. to answer the question of theory, this question must be reformulated in empirical terms, the meanings of which are sensually perceived objects. It should, however, be emphasized that, by implementing N. and E., we go beyond purely

Answer from Vladimir Sudin[guru]
Well, you know, HELLO!
Experiment - when you participate, and observation - NOTHING depends on you ....

Answer from hungry ghost[guru]
experiment - they make experiments, observation - they just observe, look (for example, how quickly a plant grows under the influence of some kind of fertilizer) ... experiment - practice, observation - theory

It is generally accepted that the defining property of observation is its non-intervention into the processes under study, in contrast to the active introduction into the study area, which is carried out during experimentation. In general, this statement is correct. However, upon closer examination, it needs to be clarified: after all, observation is also active to a certain extent. There are also situations when, without intervention in the object under study, observation itself will be impossible. For example, in histology, without prior dissection and staining of living tissue, there will simply be nothing to observe.

The intervention of the researcher during observation is aimed at achieving optimal conditions for the very same observations. The task of the observer is to obtain a set of primary data about the object. Of course, in this set, certain dependences of data groups on each other, some regularities and trends are often already visible. Preliminary guesses and assumptions about important connections may arise in the researcher during the observation itself. However, the researcher does not change structure this data, does not interfere with the relations between phenomena.

So, if the phenomena BUT and AT accompany each other in the entire series of observations, the researcher only fixes their coexistence (without trying, say, to cause the phenomenon BUT with absence AT). This means that the empirical material increases during observation. extensive way - by expanding observations and accumulating data. We repeat a series of observations, increase the duration and detail of perception, study new aspects of the original phenomenon, and so on.

In the experiment, the researcher takes a different position. Here, active intervention is carried out in the area under study in order to isolate various kinds of connections in it. Unlike observation, in an experimental research situation, the experimental material grows intense way. The scientist is not interested in the accumulation of ever new data, but selection in the empirical material of some significant dependencies. Applying various controlling influences, the researcher tries to discard everything insignificant, to penetrate into the interconnections of the studied area. An experiment is an intensification of experience, its detailing and deepening.

On the whole, the relationship between the experimental and observational components is complex, each time depending on the specific circumstances of the study. It should be understood that in their "pure form" observation and experiment are, rather, idealized strategies. In various situations, as a rule, the methodological strategy of either observation or experiment prevails. According to this predominance, we qualify this or that research situation. Of course, we call the study of distant space objects observation. And conducting an experimental laboratory intervention with predetermined objectives (say, testing a working hypothesis), well-defined dependent and independent variables comes close to the ideal of a “pure experiment”.

Thus observation and experiment are idealized strategies actions in real research situations. The activity of the researcher during observation is aimed at rubbing and extensifying empirical data., and when experimenting - to deepen them, intensification.

observation method. Stages of observation

Observation is carried out by the researcher by inclusion in the experimental situation or by indirect analysis of the situation and fixation of phenomena and facts of interest to the researcher.

Stages of observational research (according to Zarochentsev K.D.):

1) Definition of the subject of observation, object, situation.

2) Choice of observation and data recording method.

3) Create an observation plan.

4) Choice of method for processing results.

5) Actually observation.

6) Processing and interpretation of the received information.

Similarities and differences between observation and experiment

Observation according to Meshcheryakov B.G. - “an organized, purposeful, fixed perception of mental phenomena with the aim of studying them under certain conditions” .

Experiment according to Meshcheryakov B.G. - “experiment conducted under special conditions to obtain new scientific knowledge through the researcher’s targeted intervention in the life of the subject” .

Analyzing the specifics of the methods of observation and experiment, we will determine their similarities and differences.

Common features in observation and experiment:

Both methods require advance preparation, planning, and goal setting;

The results of research using observation and experiment require detailed processing;

The results of the study may be influenced by the personal characteristics of the researcher.

Differences in methods of observation and experiment:

The possibility of changing the situation and influencing it in the experiment and the inability to make changes in the observation;

The purpose of observation is to state the situation, the purpose of the experiment is to change the situation, to track the degree of influence of certain means on the situation;

The experimental method requires a clear knowledge of the object under study, and this knowledge is often acquired in observation.

Practical task

The topic of the survey was developed taking into account the characteristics of the target group with which we intended to work. As such, teenagers of the senior classes of the school were chosen. According to Vygotsky L.S. the leading activity at this age is intimate-personal communication. Through communication with peers and adults, a teenager builds his personal attitude to the world, forms his own unique image. In this regard, it is dangerous not to get into the environment of peers for a teenager. It is extremely important to have friends and associates at this age.

That is why the topic of the survey was chosen as follows: "Me and my friends."

The purpose of the survey: to determine the level of formation of friendly relations among modern adolescents of senior school age.

To achieve the goal, a questionnaire was developed:

Questionnaire "Me and my friends"

Instruction:

Hello.

You are invited to participate in a scientific study.

Please read each question carefully and answer it as honestly as possible by circling the answer that seems correct to you, or by entering the correct one in the special answer field. For multiple-choice questions, only one must be selected.

Personal data:

Last name, first name _____________________________ Class ___________________

1. Do you have a circle of friends?

a) yes; b) no.

2. What do you have in common?___________________________________________

3. Which friend would you trust with your secret?______________

4. Which of your friends would you turn to for help in a difficult situation? ____________________________________________________

5. What qualities do friends value in you? ____________________________

6. Recall the times when you helped one of your friends cope with a problem ________________________________

7. How do you feel with your friends?

a) good, fun;

b) bored, sad;

c) one or the other.

8. What kind of friends would you like to have?________________________

9. What qualities of character are most valued among your circle of friends? ____________________________________________

10. What would you call the group where you spend your free time?

a) my friends

b) my company;

c) a party

d) my yard;

e) my team;

f) own version __________________________________________________________

11. Do you have adults with whom you communicate? Who is it?_______________________________________________________

12. Do you have conflicts? If so, how are they usually resolved?

b) a fight;

c) due to the intervention of the leader;

d) due to the intervention of an adult;

e) a compromise of a part of the guys.

13. How do adults feel about your group?

a) kindly

b) hostile;

c) neutral.

14. Please mark which statements you agree with:

a) I am often consulted;

b) I cannot make an important decision without my friends;

c) no one really understands me;

d) it is easier for me to make a decision myself and tell others about it;

e) it is easier for me to make a decision together with everyone.

15 How would you portray your mood when you are with your friends?

The questionnaire contains a fairly informative instruction that helps to understand the essence of the task. In total, the questionnaire contains 15 questions, both open and closed. Questions of different types are mixed, which helps the respondent to focus on each of the questions. The most difficult questions that require the most honest answers are located in the middle of the questionnaire.

The survey involved 12 people - students of grades 9-10 of a comprehensive school. The gender and age composition of the target group is shown in the diagrams below.

Diagram 1-2. Gender and age composition of respondents

Let us proceed to the analysis of the obtained data and their interpretation.

Absolutely all teenagers answered positively to the first question, saying that they have friends. Among the factors that unite the respondents with their friends were named: common interests, study, joint pastime, common acquaintances, parents-friends.

Diagram 3. Factors that bring friends together

The column for the answer to the third question often indicated the names of friends, or the number of friends. The number of friends to whom the respondents could entrust personal secrets did not exceed 1-2.

The answers to the fourth question were similar. The circle of help among the respondents was made up of the same people as the circle of trust.

Among the qualities valued by the friends of the respondents in the respondents themselves were: humor, the ability to understand, the ability to trust, the ability to help, sociability.

Diagram 4. Qualities valued by friends

For question 6, the answers were often "difficult to answer" or "can't remember". It is also not uncommon for the question to be skipped by the respondents. Only 15% of the total number of respondents answered this question. Among the answers, they indicated cases from their personal lives that practically did not intersect with each other.

80% of the respondents answered that they feel fun in the company of their friends. 20% of respondents have mixed feelings.

Among the qualities of ideal friends, respondents named honesty, sense of humor, responsibility, devotion, respect.

Most of these qualities were also named among those that are considered basic among the respondent's friends.

Answers to question 10 were distributed as follows:

Diagram 5. Name of circle of friends by respondents

Among the adults with whom adolescents communicate, the following stood out: parents, teachers, coaches. Often, adults have a neutral (55%) or negative (30%) attitude towards age groups.

Conflict situations do not arise often and are resolved by finding a compromise by the guys.

The answers to the penultimate question were divided as follows:

a) I am often consulted - 25%;

b) I can't make an important decision without my friends - 20%;

c) nobody really understands me - 15%;

d) it is easier for me to make a decision myself and tell others about it - 20%;

e) it is easier for me to make a decision together with everyone - 20%.

Positively characterize their mood in the circle of friends - 85%, negatively - 15%.

Interpretation of the data obtained during the survey leads to the following conclusions:

1. Among schoolchildren - adolescents a great desire for the formation of peer groups;

2. All teenagers think they have a large circle of friends. Meanwhile, they can only tell a secret or seek help from a small number of people.

3. Most adolescent groups are formed on the basis of common leisure activities, educational activities and interests.

4. Teenage groups often change their composition and are unstable.

5. Adolescent groups influence the opinions of adolescents included in it, but often they are not a resource for making serious decisions regarding the personality of a teenager.

6. Adolescents have rather vague ideas about friendship. They call a lot of people friends.

7. Adults are practically remote from the processes of formation of adolescent groups and their management.

8. Modern teenagers value reliability, honesty, mutual assistance, trust and the ability to help.

Observation and experiment are two research methods that each of us used, regardless of involvement in science. Remember how exciting it is sometimes to watch pets or how frost draws patterns on glass. In fact, we study this world through daily observation. Experiments, by the way, are also found in ordinary life more often than it might seem. When I, as a schoolgirl, set fire to plasticine to see how it transforms, this was an experiment. What is the difference between these concepts? Why do scientists distinguish between them so clearly? Let's answer these questions!

Observation and experiment: reality and assumptions

Imagine an anthill. It is very entertaining to watch how its inhabitants go about their daily business: they move, carry small objects, dig minks. Contemplating this process, we are dealing with observation. This method allows us to conclude how work is divided between insects, where they crawl out for prey, and much more. Bring a drop of honey from home and put it in the anthill. How will the ants behave? Do they eat honey? Will they try to move a valuable gift? This will be an experiment that will confirm or refute conjectures, and maybe bring new discoveries with it. It turns out that observation differs from experiment in that in the first case it is sufficient connect the senses and record the results, and in the second - create and change conditions, actively participate in what is happening.

How is observation different from experiment?

The fact is that theory always precedes experiment. This means that before you start it, you ask yourself general or specific questions. It is logical that such a research method opens up more space for reflection and research, and its results can be the most unexpected.

In addition, observation is usually does not require additional equipment, except for devices that enhance the work of the senses. They may be:

• microscopes
• magnifiers;
• telescopes;
• binoculars;
• cameras.

In case of experiment, you most likely need a number of items to artificially create certain conditions. What this equipment will be depends only on the subject of research.

Experiment, observe, learn! Let the world be open for you!