Understanding the Hawthorne effect in wound research—A scoping review

Abstract

The Hawthorne Effect (HE) is considered a methodological artefact in research, although its definition and influence on research outcomes lack consensus. This review explored how this term has been mentioned and discussed in the area of wound research. A scoping review was conducted on ProQuest Central, Scopus, EbscoHost, and online databases of indexed wound journals using the methodological framework by Arksey and Malley. A review protocol was applied to detail key terms, truncation and Boolean operators, and inclusion and exclusion criteria. Search findings were reported using PRISMA guidelines. A total of 38 articles reporting primary evidence were identified. Three themes emerged from the review: wound researchers' awareness of HE, the acknowledgement of the existence or otherwise of HE, and the mentioning of HE in passing. These results reflect a lack of attention to and understanding and awareness of the HE in the area of wound research. It is suggested that the HE receives more attention as a methodological concern, and its potential influence is considered and mitigated when planning future studies. Recommendations are provided to minimise the impact of the HE on the rigour of the research and confidence afforded to research findings.

Hawthorne effect on surgical studies

“…This highlights what has been reported in the reviews by McCambridge and Nguyen et al . about the incorrect use of the Hawthorne as justification for unexpected results . The remaining four studies have used the Hawthorne effect as an explanation for improved outcomes reported by the patients (Table ).…”

“…have noted, there is potential for research participation bias to occur in a study due to the interaction of the participation effect on the intervention and this form of bias will not be eliminated completely by randomization . A proposed study design to overcome research participation bias is the Solomon four‐group design, with assessed and unassessed, hence unaware of the study, control and intervention groups …”

“…(1) The intervention affected by the Hawthorne effect must be surgical or related to the technical steps in a surgical procedure. (2) Measuring the Hawthorne effect was stated in the aims or objectives of the study or offered as an explanation for a reported change in an outcome either clinically relevant or affecting the technical steps of a surgical procedure. (3) Randomized and non-randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or observational studies.…”

“…The Hawthorne effect or ‘observer effect’ describes the modification of activity when individuals are aware that they are being observed. The Hawthorne effect was used as a term to explain the change in behaviour seen as a result of being observed …”

“…The Hawthorne effect was used as a term to explain the change in behaviour seen as a result of being observed. 1,2 The Hawthorne effect has since been interpreted in different ways in industrial, social psychology and healthcare studies. 1,[3][4][5][6] It can act in different ways in research, either influencing the behaviour of the participants by direct observation by making them aware of being studied or by answering questionnaires.…”