从问卷调查到访谈调查研究:两次世界大战期间维也纳的保罗·拉扎斯菲尔德与wirtschaftsppsychologische Forschungsstelle

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Eric Hounshell
{"title":"从问卷调查到访谈调查研究:两次世界大战期间维也纳的保罗·拉扎斯菲尔德与wirtschaftsppsychologische Forschungsstelle","authors":"Eric Hounshell","doi":"10.1080/17496977.2022.2097583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In interwar Vienna, Paul F. Lazarsfeld and his colleagues developed an approach to survey research that used the questionnaire and the direct, face-to-face interview to gather data about subjective experience for aggregative analysis. For these young researchers, the questionnaire-based interview emerged from a contradictory set of Central European intellectual traditions and political concerns. Enthusiasm on the political left for quantification and the gathering of social data encouraged survey research; yet, local political allies and intellectual mentors also opposed the study of individual attitudes and the quantitative aggregation of such material. Academic psychology legitimized the use of “introspection” and facilitated the extension of this method to populations of untrained subjects. The methodological concept of the “model” helped overcome the Verstehen/Erklären dichotomy within debates over the proper methods of the human and social sciences. This article examines methodological and philosophical statements, study designs, and questionnaires to explain how the interview gained particular importance within this setting.","PeriodicalId":39827,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual History Review","volume":"32 1","pages":"619 - 644"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From questionnaire to interview in survey research: Paul F. Lazarsfeld and the Wirtschaftspsychologische Forschungsstelle in interwar Vienna\",\"authors\":\"Eric Hounshell\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17496977.2022.2097583\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In interwar Vienna, Paul F. Lazarsfeld and his colleagues developed an approach to survey research that used the questionnaire and the direct, face-to-face interview to gather data about subjective experience for aggregative analysis. For these young researchers, the questionnaire-based interview emerged from a contradictory set of Central European intellectual traditions and political concerns. Enthusiasm on the political left for quantification and the gathering of social data encouraged survey research; yet, local political allies and intellectual mentors also opposed the study of individual attitudes and the quantitative aggregation of such material. Academic psychology legitimized the use of “introspection” and facilitated the extension of this method to populations of untrained subjects. The methodological concept of the “model” helped overcome the Verstehen/Erklären dichotomy within debates over the proper methods of the human and social sciences. This article examines methodological and philosophical statements, study designs, and questionnaires to explain how the interview gained particular importance within this setting.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39827,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Intellectual History Review\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"619 - 644\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Intellectual History Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17496977.2022.2097583\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intellectual History Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17496977.2022.2097583","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在两次世界大战之间的维也纳,Paul F. Lazarsfeld和他的同事开发了一种调查研究方法,使用问卷调查和直接面对面的访谈来收集有关主观经验的数据进行综合分析。对于这些年轻的研究人员来说,基于问卷的访谈出现在中欧知识传统和政治关切的矛盾中。政治左派对量化和收集社会数据的热情鼓励了调查研究;然而,当地的政治盟友和知识分子导师也反对对个人态度的研究和这种材料的定量汇总。学术心理学使“内省”的使用合法化,并促进了这种方法在未经训练的受试者群体中的推广。“模型”的方法论概念帮助克服了Verstehen/Erklären在关于人类和社会科学的适当方法的辩论中的二分法。本文考察了方法学和哲学陈述、研究设计和问卷调查,以解释访谈在这种情况下如何变得特别重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From questionnaire to interview in survey research: Paul F. Lazarsfeld and the Wirtschaftspsychologische Forschungsstelle in interwar Vienna
ABSTRACT In interwar Vienna, Paul F. Lazarsfeld and his colleagues developed an approach to survey research that used the questionnaire and the direct, face-to-face interview to gather data about subjective experience for aggregative analysis. For these young researchers, the questionnaire-based interview emerged from a contradictory set of Central European intellectual traditions and political concerns. Enthusiasm on the political left for quantification and the gathering of social data encouraged survey research; yet, local political allies and intellectual mentors also opposed the study of individual attitudes and the quantitative aggregation of such material. Academic psychology legitimized the use of “introspection” and facilitated the extension of this method to populations of untrained subjects. The methodological concept of the “model” helped overcome the Verstehen/Erklären dichotomy within debates over the proper methods of the human and social sciences. This article examines methodological and philosophical statements, study designs, and questionnaires to explain how the interview gained particular importance within this setting.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Intellectual History Review
Intellectual History Review Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信