Qualitative Qualitative research in research in psychology psychology

A distinct research A distinct research processprocess

Inquiries of knowledge that are outside the Inquiries of knowledge that are outside the framework prescribed by the scientific framework prescribed by the scientific method, method,

as well as assumptions of inferential as well as assumptions of inferential statisticsstatistics

Important to review modern philosophies of Important to review modern philosophies of science which have set rules for how science which have set rules for how psychologists have thought about research psychologists have thought about research for past 80 years.for past 80 years.

Philosophy of science Philosophy of science

Understand why & how philosophy Understand why & how philosophy of science is relevant to psychology of science is relevant to psychology

Appreciate the basic issues of Appreciate the basic issues of hypotheses and disconfirmationhypotheses and disconfirmation

Be able to assess the relevance of Be able to assess the relevance of different models of science to different models of science to different areas of psychology different areas of psychology

What is the ‘philosophy of What is the ‘philosophy of science’?science’?

concerned with the question of how concerned with the question of how we should carry out scientific we should carry out scientific research given our understanding of research given our understanding of the nature of knowledge. the nature of knowledge.

how most scientists actually work given how most scientists actually work given the social and practical circumstances the social and practical circumstances of their work. of their work.

Reality, Knowledge & Reality, Knowledge & ScienceScience

Philosophers interested in the relation Philosophers interested in the relation betweenbetween

OntologyOntology (the study of what (the study of what actuallyactually exists)exists)

EpistemologyEpistemology (the study of what (the study of what knowledgeknowledge is, what we can know and what is, what we can know and what the limits of knowledge are)the limits of knowledge are)

MethodologyMethodology (the study of the (the study of the waysways in in which the world can be studiedwhich the world can be studied)). .

DefinitionDefinition Example in Example in physical physical sciencescience

Example in Example in psychologypsychology

OntologyOntology The study The study of what of what actually actually existsexists

Is space Is space infinite?infinite?

Is the mind part Is the mind part of the brain?of the brain?

EpistemologEpistemologyy

The study The study of the of the varieties, varieties, foundationfoundations & limits s & limits of what we of what we

can knowcan know

What are the What are the limits to our limits to our understanding understanding of the of the relationship relationship between time between time

& space?& space?

What kind of What kind of limits are there limits are there on our on our understanding understanding of the link of the link between the between the brain and brain and consciousness? consciousness?

MethodologMethodologyy

The study The study of means of means of of investigatiinvestigating a ng a phenomenphenomen

onon

How should we How should we study time & study time & space?space?

How should we How should we study the effects study the effects of drugs on of drugs on

consciousness?consciousness?

Ontological assumptions Ontological assumptions

↓↓

Epistemological assumptions Epistemological assumptions

↓↓

Methodological assumptionsMethodological assumptions

What is science?What is science?

Objective testing of theories based Objective testing of theories based on evidenceon evidence

Public sharing of dataPublic sharing of data Theories competing with each otherTheories competing with each other Careful Careful

measurements/recording/data measurements/recording/data analysis analysis

Therefore psychology is a science…?Therefore psychology is a science…?

Key concepts in philosophy Key concepts in philosophy of science of science

PositivismPositivism Logical PositivismLogical Positivism DisconfirmationDisconfirmation ParadigmsParadigms AnarchyAnarchy Social ConstructionismSocial Constructionism

Comte, Ayer and logical Comte, Ayer and logical positivismpositivism

Auguste Comte (1798-1857)Auguste Comte (1798-1857)three phases of searching for understandingthree phases of searching for understandingtheologicaltheological ; ; metaphysicalmetaphysical ; ; positivepositive or or

scientificscientific

PositivismPositivism ‘unity of science project’ ‘unity of science project’ process of process of inductioninduction. . Vienna Circle 1920s - ‘logical positivism’ Vienna Circle 1920s - ‘logical positivism’ emphasis on theories & logical emphasis on theories & logical deductiondeduction

of hypotheses of hypotheses

Alfred Ayer (1910-89,) Alfred Ayer (1910-89,) Language, Truth and LogicLanguage, Truth and Logic 1936. 1936.

a statement can only be true only if a statement can only be true only if

(i) it is a self-evident analytic, deductive truth (i) it is a self-evident analytic, deductive truth (e.g. ‘2+2=4’) (e.g. ‘2+2=4’)

(ii) the statement matches reality precisely. (ii) the statement matches reality precisely.

Statements had to be Statements had to be verifiableverifiable to be meaningful. to be meaningful.

commitment to commitment to empiricismempiricism, checking ideas , checking ideas against the world. against the world.

not about the not about the processprocess of discovery per of discovery per se - just specifying what should be se - just specifying what should be permittedpermitted as scientific – conservative as scientific – conservative

logical positivist criteria - Psychology logical positivist criteria - Psychology borderlineborderline

picked up by behaviourism. picked up by behaviourism.

PositivismPositivism

FactsFacts FactsFacts More factsMore facts Generalise from those factsGeneralise from those facts = induction= induction

Logical PositivismLogical Positivism

Theory Theory VerifiabilityVerifiability TestsTests GeneraliseGeneralise = deduction= deduction

DisconfirmationDisconfirmation Karl Popper (1902-1994) first major Karl Popper (1902-1994) first major

attack on logical positivism attack on logical positivism The Logic of The Logic of Scientific DiscoveryScientific Discovery (1935 / 1959) (1935 / 1959)

verifiability encouraged verifiability encouraged confirmationconfirmation of of theories rather than genuine discovery; theories rather than genuine discovery; consistent evidence is merely consistent evidence is merely corroboration. corroboration.

Bold conjectures required by science Bold conjectures required by science Disconfirmation/falsifiability principle: Disconfirmation/falsifiability principle:

hypotheses need to be capable of being hypotheses need to be capable of being wrongwrong

Several problems:Several problems:

theories and observations are theories and observations are neither independent nor neutral neither independent nor neutral

science is a practical business - find science is a practical business - find best answer rather than the best answer rather than the application of logic application of logic

Science should proceed in 4 Science should proceed in 4 stages:stages:

1.1. Formal Stage.Formal Stage. theory checked for internal theory checked for internal consistency.consistency.

2.2. Semi-formal Stage.Semi-formal Stage. separate propositions which separate propositions which do/do not have empirical consequences do/do not have empirical consequences

3.3. Comparison Stage.Comparison Stage. new theory compared with new theory compared with existing theories If it explains the same/less existing theories If it explains the same/less known facts known facts then new theory should be then new theory should be abandonedabandoned. .

4.4. Empirical Testing Stage. Empirical Testing Stage. test hypothesis test hypothesis least least likelylikely to be true - informativeness. to be true - informativeness.

And if prediction And if prediction notnot supported? supported? still our beststill our best guessguess

Criticism: scientists propose ‘auxiliary hypotheses’ Criticism: scientists propose ‘auxiliary hypotheses’

What are the implications of What are the implications of Popper’s ideas for how we think Popper’s ideas for how we think about psychological research?about psychological research?

difficulty arises when considering difficulty arises when considering theories rather than hypothesestheories rather than hypotheses

Theories which are internally Theories which are internally inconsistent are incapable of being inconsistent are incapable of being disconfirmed disconfirmed

Kuhn and revolution: Kuhn and revolution: ParadigmsParadigms

Thomas Kuhn(1922-96) scientific progress Thomas Kuhn(1922-96) scientific progress not a purely rational process: peaceful not a purely rational process: peaceful interludes- interludes- normal sciencenormal science where where scientists share a scientists share a paradigmparadigm - punctuated - punctuated by violent intellectual revolutions. by violent intellectual revolutions.

scientists don’t listen to the datascientists don’t listen to the data Routine procedures and ideas = paradigmRoutine procedures and ideas = paradigm Normal scienceNormal science Revolutionary science Revolutionary science

most scientists conservative: do not most scientists conservative: do not abandon or revise theory but dismiss abandon or revise theory but dismiss datadata

when inconsistent data build up and new when inconsistent data build up and new radical paradigm is offered there is a radical paradigm is offered there is a revolution revolution

old paradigm is never decisively shown old paradigm is never decisively shown to be wrong but simply withers away as to be wrong but simply withers away as fewer and fewer experiments are carried fewer and fewer experiments are carried out within its frame of reference. out within its frame of reference.

What are the implications of What are the implications of Kuhn's ideas for how we think Kuhn's ideas for how we think about psychological research?about psychological research?

relationship between evidence & relationship between evidence & theory framed by paradigm in which theory framed by paradigm in which research is carried out.research is carried out.

EpistemologicalEpistemological Anarchy Anarchy Paul Feyerabend (1924-94) Paul Feyerabend (1924-94) Against MethodAgainst Method 1975 1975

No single correct method in science: rejected No single correct method in science: rejected realismrealism for a for a form of form of relativismrelativism

in principle all forms of theories are worthwhile = in principle all forms of theories are worthwhile = theoretical theoretical pluralismpluralism

Anything that works is fine = epistemological anarchyAnything that works is fine = epistemological anarchy

argued theories could not be compared - concept of argued theories could not be compared - concept of incommensurabilty incommensurabilty

theories give meaning to facts, not vice versatheories give meaning to facts, not vice versaa form of a form of social constructionismsocial constructionism emphasising that the ‘world’ is emphasising that the ‘world’ is

not singular but plural. not singular but plural. Scientific inquiry Scientific inquiry constructsconstructs the objects it inquires into, scientific the objects it inquires into, scientific

objects are created by the very practice of investigation itself.objects are created by the very practice of investigation itself.

Implications of Feyerabend’s ideas Implications of Feyerabend’s ideas for how we think about for how we think about psychological research?psychological research?

demystifies logical positivism. If no demystifies logical positivism. If no single correct method for doing single correct method for doing science for all problems at all time in science for all problems at all time in all places, then every research all places, then every research project has to find its own method. project has to find its own method.

Incommensurabilty principle forces Incommensurabilty principle forces us to think about each theory in its us to think about each theory in its own terms. own terms.

emphasises the doubts that logical emphasises the doubts that logical positivism is studying the real world positivism is studying the real world out there. out there.

SummarySummary

Many different ideas about science Many different ideas about science Psychology uses ‘logical positivism’Psychology uses ‘logical positivism’ ……but may not be always the best choicebut may not be always the best choice Qualitative work needs alternative model of Qualitative work needs alternative model of

science science

Philosophies of science clarify why Philosophies of science clarify why experimental, scientific psychology adopts experimental, scientific psychology adopts the practices that it does, but also that there the practices that it does, but also that there are other models which can be adopted. are other models which can be adopted.

Questions to askQuestions to ask

What model of science is this study What model of science is this study using?using?

Could it have used a different one?Could it have used a different one? What model of science is best for What model of science is best for

psychology?psychology? Should different areas of psychology Should different areas of psychology

have different models of science?have different models of science?