元科学是不够的——复制危机后对心理学人文学科的呼吁

IF 3.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
L. Malich, C. Rehmann-Sutter
{"title":"元科学是不够的——复制危机后对心理学人文学科的呼吁","authors":"L. Malich, C. Rehmann-Sutter","doi":"10.1177/10892680221083876","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The replication crisis led to the rise of metascience as a possible solution. In this article, we examine central metascientific premises and argue that attempts to solve the replication crisis in psychology will benefit from a tighter integration of approaches from the psychological humanities. The first part of our article identifies central epistemic merits that metascientific endeavors can contribute to psychology. However, we argue secondly against the widespread claim that metascience is the only way to deal with the replication crisis in psychology and point to major epistemic problems: the one-sided notion of a singular scientific method, the homogenizing view of psychology, and the exclusion of practices of theorizing. As a possible compensation for such shortcomings, we introduce, third, the reflective and pluralistic approach of psychological humanities. In so doing, we show how psychological humanities can serve as an important complement to the objective of improving psychological research. Psychological humanities contribute to a more precise determination of validity, to ethical considerations, and a better understanding of psychology’s objects in regard to replication. Accordingly, we argue for the integration of psychological humanities into both metascience and psychology to provide a better basis for addressing epistemic and ethical questions.","PeriodicalId":48306,"journal":{"name":"Review of General Psychology","volume":"26 1","pages":"261 - 273"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Metascience Is Not Enough – A Plea for Psychological Humanities in the Wake of the Replication Crisis\",\"authors\":\"L. Malich, C. Rehmann-Sutter\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10892680221083876\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The replication crisis led to the rise of metascience as a possible solution. In this article, we examine central metascientific premises and argue that attempts to solve the replication crisis in psychology will benefit from a tighter integration of approaches from the psychological humanities. The first part of our article identifies central epistemic merits that metascientific endeavors can contribute to psychology. However, we argue secondly against the widespread claim that metascience is the only way to deal with the replication crisis in psychology and point to major epistemic problems: the one-sided notion of a singular scientific method, the homogenizing view of psychology, and the exclusion of practices of theorizing. As a possible compensation for such shortcomings, we introduce, third, the reflective and pluralistic approach of psychological humanities. In so doing, we show how psychological humanities can serve as an important complement to the objective of improving psychological research. Psychological humanities contribute to a more precise determination of validity, to ethical considerations, and a better understanding of psychology’s objects in regard to replication. Accordingly, we argue for the integration of psychological humanities into both metascience and psychology to provide a better basis for addressing epistemic and ethical questions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48306,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of General Psychology\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"261 - 273\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of General Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10892680221083876\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of General Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10892680221083876","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

复制危机导致了元科学作为一种可能的解决方案的兴起。在本文中,我们考察了元科学的中心前提,并认为解决心理学中的复制危机的尝试将受益于心理人文学科方法的更紧密整合。我们文章的第一部分确定了元科学努力可以为心理学做出贡献的核心认识优点。然而,第二,我们反对普遍的主张,即元科学是处理心理学复制危机的唯一途径,并指出主要的认识论问题:单一科学方法的片面概念,心理学的同质化观点,以及排除理论实践。为了弥补这些不足,我们引入了心理人文学科的反思性和多元性方法。在这样做的过程中,我们展示了心理人文学科如何作为改进心理学研究目标的重要补充。心理学人文学科有助于更精确地确定有效性,伦理考虑,以及更好地理解心理学在复制方面的目标。因此,我们主张将心理人文学科整合到元科学和心理学中,为解决认知和伦理问题提供更好的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Metascience Is Not Enough – A Plea for Psychological Humanities in the Wake of the Replication Crisis
The replication crisis led to the rise of metascience as a possible solution. In this article, we examine central metascientific premises and argue that attempts to solve the replication crisis in psychology will benefit from a tighter integration of approaches from the psychological humanities. The first part of our article identifies central epistemic merits that metascientific endeavors can contribute to psychology. However, we argue secondly against the widespread claim that metascience is the only way to deal with the replication crisis in psychology and point to major epistemic problems: the one-sided notion of a singular scientific method, the homogenizing view of psychology, and the exclusion of practices of theorizing. As a possible compensation for such shortcomings, we introduce, third, the reflective and pluralistic approach of psychological humanities. In so doing, we show how psychological humanities can serve as an important complement to the objective of improving psychological research. Psychological humanities contribute to a more precise determination of validity, to ethical considerations, and a better understanding of psychology’s objects in regard to replication. Accordingly, we argue for the integration of psychological humanities into both metascience and psychology to provide a better basis for addressing epistemic and ethical questions.
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
Review of General Psychology
Review of General Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Review of General Psychology seeks to publish innovative theoretical, conceptual, or methodological articles that cross-cut the traditional subdisciplines of psychology. The journal contains articles that advance theory, evaluate and integrate research literatures, provide a new historical analysis, or discuss new methodological developments in psychology as a whole. Review of General Psychology is especially interested in articles that bridge gaps between subdisciplines in psychology as well as related fields or that focus on topics that transcend traditional subdisciplinary boundaries.
×
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