I notice a double meaning in the word experiment as it’s used in the forum: Sometimes it means formal experiment as @Max_Eastwood is using it, and sometimes it just means trying something, including trying to observe something, as I think @bretbernhoft may be using it. Projects described as experiments in the latter sense of the word can be presented more formally; for instance, it’s possible for hypothesize that I would be capable of collecting data of certain type using a certain instrument, and then execute the experimental activities of deploying the instrumentation, etc. But this formality tends to be more or less empty, so maybe just better to accept the double meaning.
I’ve noticed that formal experiments, with blinding, an analysis framework described in advance, etc., arrive very late in QS projects, if they arrive at all. Often, there’s a lot to be learned from just trying to make observations. I actually believe this is typical even of academic science and clinical research: there is an exploratory phase involving observing and tinkering that prepares scientists for planning formal experiments. It’s just that this phase is not often described in any detail in published accounts. Here is a wonderful essay that talks about the hidden dimension of scientific research: Night Science.