Comparability of methods used in the sampling of primate behavior

Two measures of a behavior are defined as comparable if one is predictable from the other. The comparability of one-zero, instantaneous, actual-frequency, and actual-duration sampling was investigated using a Monte Carlo simulation to extend the range of sampling intervals beyond those ordinarily found in the literature. Several combinations of bout time, rate of response, and observation interval were simulated. Comparability between one-zero or instantaneous scores and actual frequency or actual duration was higher for higher behavior rates, decreased with longer observation intervals, and was usually higher for longer bout times. Curves of β²s from multiple regression analyses revealed a fundamental difference in the source of one-zero and instanteous predictability. Both actual frequency and actual duration contributed substantially to one-zero predictability, indicating high comparability between one-zero scores and a weighted combination of actual frequency and actual duration. Once the contribution of actual duration to instantaneous scores was accounted for, actual frequency contributed virtually nothing additional. Long-standing meanings of validity, reliability, and comparability were applied to the findings, resulting in the conclusion that all of the sampling methods are useful, depending upon the researcher's approach, resources, and problem.