Empirical tests of scientific realism: A quantitative framework

The scientific realism debate in philosophy of science raises some intriguing methodological issues. Scientific realism posits a link between a scientific theory's observational and referential success. This opens the possibility of testing the thesis empirically, by searching for evidence of such a link in the record of theories put forward in the history of science. Many realist philosophers working today propose case study methodology as a way of carrying out such a test. This article argues that a qualitative method such as case study methodology is not adequate for this purpose, for two reasons: to test scientific realism is to pose an effects-of-causes question, and observational and referential success are quantities that theories possess to a greater or lesser degree. The article concludes that an empirical test of scientific realism requires a quantitative method.     

Reflexivity in quantitative research: A rationale and beginner's guide

Reflexivity is the act of examining one's own assumption, belief, and judgement systems, and thinking carefully and critically about how these influence the research process. The practice of reflexivity confronts and questions who we are as researchers and how this guides our work. It is central in debates on objectivity, subjectivity, and the very foundations of social science research and generated knowledge. Incorporating reflexivity in the research process is traditionally recognized as one of the most notable differences between qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Qualitative research centres and celebrates the participants' personal and unique lived experience. Therefore, qualitative researchers are readily encouraged to consider how their own unique positionalities inform the research process and this forms an important part of training within this paradigm. Quantitative methodologies in social and personality psychology, and more generally, on the other hand, have remained seemingly detached from this level of reflexivity and general reflective practice. In this commentary, we, three quantitative researchers who have grappled with the compatibility of reflexivity within our own research, argue that reflexivity has much to offer quantitative methodologists. The act of reflexivity prompts researchers to acknowledge and centre their own positionalities, encourages a more thoughtful engagement with every step of the research process, and thus, as we argue, contributes to the ongoing reappraisal of openness and transparency in psychology. In this paper, we make the case for integrating reflexivity across all research approaches, before providing a ‘beginner's guide’ for quantitative researchers wishing to engage reflexively with their own work, providing concrete recommendations, worked examples, and reflexive prompts.     

Mapping physical characteristics in face images to social judgements

Sutherland and Young (Br. J. Psychol., 113, 2022, 1056) provide a comprehensive and timely overview of recent developments in research on social judgements of faces, emphasizing the utility of data-driven approaches. Here, we expand on this theme, focusing on how data-driven approaches can provide new insights into the physical characteristics in face images that best predict social judgements.     

Linking qualitative and quantitative methods in cross-cultural survey research: Techniques from cognitive science

Survey research with diverse cultural and ethnic minority groups is a complex and challenging endeavor that confronts the researcher with problems related to linguistic and conceptual equivalence and measurement as well as problems related to difficulties that respondents have with the sociocultural dimensions of the survey/interview process. One way to improve the quality of cross-cultural surveys and to insure that the findings are culturally relevant and accurate is to combine qualitative and quantitative methods. This paper proposes that certain qualitative techniques from cognitive science, specifically cognitive anthropology and cognitive psychology, are particularly well suited to being combined with survey research. These techniques provide information corresponding to the underlying thought processes of respondents and enable researchers to better understand how different cultural and ethnic groups construe the world. The information obtained can be used improve the formulation of survey questions, design and structure questionnaire formats to coincide with the way particular groups organize concepts, and help researchers understand difficulties respondents may have with the survey/interview process. In addition, the techniques produce data that are easily codifiable and more manageable than traditional qualitative techniques including participant observation and in-depth interviews.     

Use and misuse of metrics in research evaluation

This paper addresses some critical issues in the applicability of quantitative performance measures (including bibliometric, economic, and co-occurrence measures) to the assessment of basic research. The strengths and weaknesses of metrics applied as research performance measures are examined. It is concluded that metrics have a useful role to play in the evaluation of research. Each metric employed, whether bibliometric, economic, co-occurrence, or others, brings a new dimension of potential insight to the complex problem of research assessment. However, when used in a stand-alone mode, metrics can be easily misinterpreted and result in misleading conclusions. Metrics should be an integral part of a more comprehensive approach to research evaluation, in which the leading role is assumed by expert peer review. Under this structure, the reviewers must be broadly constituted, so that the technical correctness of the research approaches being taken (doing the job right) can be evaluated by technical experts and the correctness of the research target (doing the right job) can be evaluated as well. This comprehensive approach insures quality in the implementation of existing research paradigms and allows the introduction of revolutionary new research paradigms as well. The views contained in this paper are solely those of the author and do not represent the views of the Department of the Navy. Ronald Kostoff received a Ph.D. from Princeton University, performed technical and economic research at Bell Laboratories, managed energy programs at U.S. Department of Energy, was Director of Technical Assessment at the Office of Naval Research for many years and presently manages the Navy’s In-House Laboratory Independent Research Program.     

The relationship between qualitative and quantitative research: Lessons from feminist psychology

The dominant methodological approach in psychological research has involved the use of quantitative methods within a positivist framework. In this article we argue that both qualitative and quantitative methods have their strengths and limitations, depending on the research question under investigation. We examine some of the advantages of qualitative methods, paying particular attention to the value of such methods for feminist researchers. We challenge the positivist assumption that all research should be apolitical and value-free, arguing that the political context in which all research studies take place plays an important role in decisions about the appropriate research methods to use. Despite the value attached to qualitative methods by feminist researchers, there may be projects for which quantitative methods, or a combination of qualitative and quantitative techniques, are more suitable. We draw on examples from our research on the transition from school to the job market for young people, and a study of 16- to 19-year-old first time mothers to illustrate these points, examining the practical implications of our arguments for applied social psychology research.     

Can we learn from the clinically significant face processing deficits,prosopagnosia and capgras delusion?

This review describes two clinically significant face processing deficits, prosopagnosia and Capgras delusion, and provides new knowledge about the face recognition process by a convergence of empirical findings. These empirical findings are structured around two questions that are viewed from the perspectives of the two deficits. First is the question of hemispheric specificity, which inquires into the degree of each hemisphere's contribution to the face recognition process. Second is the question of dual neural pathways, which addresses the possibility that the face recognition process proceeds along two parallel pathways in the brain. Findings from the hemispheric specificity studies reinforce the current view that right hemisphere involvement is necessary for face recognition while left hemisphere involvement is minimal. Findings from the dual neural pathways studies reinforce the plausible but yet unproven hypothesis that two neural pathways pass information from the visual association cortex in the occipital lobe toward the temporal lobes and limbic system when faces are seen and recognized. These findings, which also indicate that each of the dual neural pathways carries different, nonredundant information, could be instrumental in showing that the pathways play different roles in the manifestations of the clinically significant face processing deficits, prosopagnosia and Capgras delusion.     

EDITORIAL Building bridges with mixed methods research?

Mixed methods refers to the use of both qualitative and quantitative approaches and methods in one study or sequentially in two or more studies. Without a mixed methods approach there is – to our minds ‐ a risk that only part of a phenomenon or experience is being explored. Our own involvement in mixed methods research has grown out of a shared interest in the concept ‘research‐practitioner’. Psychotherapy is a notoriously complex and ever‐developing field, and our growing sense has been that mixed methods research can contribute to a more complete – both broad and deep ‐ sense of knowledge and understanding.     

不患不均？容忍和支持经济不平等的心理学解释

不断加剧的经济不平等问题对个体和社会有着巨大危害,然而人们对经济不平等却有着较高的容忍性。基于个体心理的研究证据,本文提出认知和动机双重路径模型来解释个体容忍和支持经济不平等问题。在认知路径上,个体倾向于低估当前社会的经济不平等程度和将经济不平等评价为公平的;在动机路径上,个体预期经济不平等将带来自我利益的增加。未来研究应进一步整合多重心理机制间的关系,并探索有效干预手段以增加人们对减少经济不平等的支持。     

混合情绪能促进心理健康吗？

摘 要 积极和消极情绪的同时体验,即混合情绪,是生活中常见的情绪状态。健康应对的共激活模型、情绪动态模型和积极比模型一致认为混合情绪与心理健康之间呈现非线性的关系,适当的混合情绪有利于个体在困境中全面加工和整合信息,寻求意义,获得控制感,进而实现健康应对和心理症状改善,获得幸福感。未来研究应关注对非线性关系的精确描述;低压力或非压力情境下混合情绪的意义;进一步研究混合情绪促进心理健康的内部机制和影响因素。