首页> 外文期刊>Integrative physiological and behavioral science: the official journal of the Pavlovian Society >Culture of Science: Strange History of the Methodological Thinking in Psychology
【24h】

Culture of Science: Strange History of the Methodological Thinking in Psychology

机译:科学文化:心理学方法论思维的奇怪历史

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

In pre-World-War-II psychology, two directions in methodological thought—the German–Austrian and North American ways—could be differentiated. After the war, the German–Austrian methodological orientation has been largely abandoned. Compared to the pre-WWII German–Austrian psychology, modern mainstream psychology is more concerned with accumulation of facts than with general theory. Furthermore, the focus on qualitative data—in addition to quantitative data—is rarely visible. Only external–physical or statistical-rather than psychological controls are taken into account in empirical studies. Fragments—rather than wholes—and relationships are studied, and single cases that contradict group data are not analyzed. Instead of complex psychological types simple trait differences are studied, and prediction is not followed by thorough analysis of the whole situation. Last (but not least), data are not systematically related to complex theory. These limits have hindered the growth of knowledge in the behavioral sciences. A new return to an updated version of the German–Austrian methodological trajectory is suggested.
机译:在第二次世界大战之前的心理学中,方法论思想的两个方向可以区分:德国-奥地利和北美方式。战后,德国-奥地利的方法论取向已基本被放弃。与第二次世界大战前的德国-奥地利心理学相比,现代主流心理学更关注事实的积累而不是一般理论。此外,除了定量数据外,很少关注定性数据。在实证研究中,只考虑外部的物理或统计控制,而不是心理的控制。研究碎片而不是整体,并研究关系,不分析与群体数据相矛盾的单个案例。与其研究复杂的心理类型,不如研究简单的特质差异,并且在对结果进行透彻分析之前不能进行预测。最后(但并非最不重要),数据与复杂理论没有系统地关联。这些限制阻碍了行为科学知识的增长。建议重新使用德国-奥地利方法论轨迹的更新版本。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号