Behavioral Laws in Histories of Psychology: Psychological Science,Metascience, and the Psychology of Science

Histories of psychology frequently include statements that explicitly or implicitly express behavioral laws. Usually these "meta-historical generalizations" provide "covering laws" for explanatory accounts, contextual frames, or paradoxical con- trasts. These abstract propositions come from many sources, vary immensely in scientfic validity, and are found in several psychological publications besides histories, including book reviews, obituaries, journal articles, monographs, and trade books. Not only could the authors of these nomothetic claims make better use of empirical results in the metasciences, but these assertions themselves offer an inventory of valuable hypotheses that should inspire future research in the behavioral sciences and especially in the psychology of science.     

从跨文化心理学到文化建构主义心理学——心理学中文化意识的衍变

心理学中的文化意识在跨文化心理学、文化心理学、文化建构主义心理学中经历了3次重大衍变。跨文化心理学视文化为心理规律的干扰因素,认为理论研究应力求“去文化”;文化心理学认为心理是文化的“投射”,寻求理论的“文化敏感”;文化建构主义心理学则认为心理与文化是相互灌注、相互建构的关系,因而更加关注“心理”、“意义”与“现实”的双向建构过程。本文详细分析了上述几种不同的文化意识形态的主要特点,并结合历史背景,对其各自的意义、问题做了简要讨论。     

进化心理学视角下的两性冲突与缓和

进化心理学观点认为两性冲突是一个性别达到最佳适应的过程被另一个性别所阻碍,其根本原因是两性繁衍成功的根本进化利益存在冲突。从进化心理学的角度,根据两性敌对性选择理论,两性冲突可以分为基因座内的两性冲突与基因座间的两性冲突,前者可由性选择理论解释,后者涉及到两性的适应与反适应以及在军备竞赛中的协同进化。而两性冲突缓和则可以由费舍尔模型与基因复制理论、性别二态性和一夫一妻制度解释。两性冲突及缓和也分别具有进化心理学的相关实证依据支持。未来两性冲突领域的研究需要提升研究方法的客观性及两性冲突特质的多样性,并关注两性冲突缓和的现实有效途径以及婚配制度与评估方式对繁衍成功的交互作用。     

Engaged,Embedded, Enjoined: Science and Technology Studies in the National Science Foundation

Engaged scholarship is an intellectual movement sweeping across higher education, not only in the social and behavioral sciences but also in fields of natural science and engineering. It is predicated on the idea that major advances in knowledge will transpire when scholars, while pursuing their research interests, also consider addressing the core problems confronting society. For a workable engaged agenda in science and technology studies, one that informs scholarship as well as shapes practice and policy, the traditional terms of engagement must be renegotiated to be more open and mutual than has historically characterized the nature of inquiry in this field. At the same time, it is essential to protect individual privacy and preserve government confidentiality. Yet there is a scientific possibility for and benefit to introducing more collaborative and deliberative research approaches between scholar and subject in ways that will not violate these first-order ethics. To make the case, this article discusses the possibilities and perils of engaged science and technology scholarship by drawing on our own recent experiences to conduct and apply STS research while embedded in the National Science Foundation. Brief accounts of these experiences reveal the opportunities as well as the challenges of engaged scholarship. They also provide lessons for those fellow travelers who might follow the authors to this or other like host organizations with ambitions of increasing fundamental knowledge about and applying research to the policies, programs, and decisions of the scientific enterprise.     

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

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.

从西方理论心理学的崛起看中国理论心理学发展——兼论中国理论心理学建构

心理学能够从对实证资料积累的追求中解放出来,转而注重学科自身的理论反思与理论建构,是心理科学逐渐走向成熟的一种表现。随着西方理论心理学的崛起,中国心理学理论研究也逐渐得到重视,出现很多有价值的理论成果,但在心理学元理论和实体理论的建设上,仍旧过度依赖欧美心理学,原创性的元理论和实体理论几乎没有。在研究的规模、研究领域、研究水准、研究方法乃至研究从业者数量上的差距也使中国理论心理学发展显得步履维艰。然而,西方理论心理学的崛起却可以给中国理论心理学发展带来重要启示,在对中国理论心理学建构过程中,要积极对国外理论心理学的理论思维和理论研究方法进行筛淘,加强原创性的理论建设,处理好理论与实践、引进与创新、反思和建构的关系。     

The Immorality of Modal Realism,Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Let the Children Drown

Philosophical Studies -