Abstract
Just a few short years ago one of the co-editors of this volume published an article in the journal Measurement under the title: “A Manifesto on Psychology as Idiographic Science: Bringing the Person Back Into Scientific Psychology, This Time Forever” (Molenaar, 2004). To one who himself has long advocated just such a development, this bold manifesto was most welcome indeed. But the very claim to lately be bringing the person back into scientific psychology begs the questions: why has this proved necessary? and: where had the person been for all of those previous years?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Buckle, H. T. (1857/1898). A history of civilization in England. New York: D. Appleton and Company.
Cattell, R. B. (1952). The three basic factor-analytic research designs—Their interrelations and derivatives. Psychological Bulletin, 49, 499–520.
Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671–684.
Danziger, K. (1987). Statistical method and the historical development of research practice in American psychology. In L. Krueger, G. Gigerenzer, & M. S. Morgan (Eds.), The probabilistic revolution: Vol. 2. Ideas in the sciences (pp. 35–47). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Danziger, K. (1990). Constructing the subject: Historical origins of psychological research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Eysenck, H. J. (1954). The science of personality: Nomothetic! Psychological Review, 61, 339–342.
Hacking, I. (1975). The emergence of probability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harré, R. (2006). Key thinkers in psychology. London: Sage.
Hofstee, W. (2007). Unbehagen in individual differences. Journal of Individual Differences, 28, 252–253.
Holt, R. W. (1962). Individuality and generalization in the psychology of personality. Journal of Personality, 30, 377–404.
Lamiell, J. T. (1981). Toward an idiothetic psychology of personality. American Psychologist, 36, 276–289.
Lamiell, J. T. (1987). The psychology of personality: An epistemological inquiry. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lamiell, J. T. (1990). Explanation in the psychology of personality. In D. N. Robinson & L. P. Mos (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (pp. 153–192). New York: Plenum Press.
Lamiell, J. T. (1997). Individuals and the differences between them. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 117–141). New York: Academic Press.
Lamiell, J. T. (1998). ‘Nomothetic’ and ‘idiographic’: Contrasting Windelband’s understanding with contemporary usage. Theory and Psychology, 10, 715–730.
Lamiell, J. T. (2000). A periodic table of personality elements? The “Big Five” and trait “psychology” in critical perspective. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 20, 1–24.
Lamiell, J. T. (2003). Beyond individual and group differences: Human individuality, scientific psychology, and William Stern’s critical personalism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lamiell, J. T. (2006). La psychologie des “traits” dans le cadre de la recherche “néo-galtonien” au vingtieme siecle: Comment elle est censée fonctionner, et pourquoi elle ne fonctionne vraiment pas. Psychologie Francais, 51, 337–355.
Lamiell, J. T. (2007). On sustaining critical discourse with mainstream personality investigators: Problems and prospects. Theory and Psychology, 17, 169–185.
Molenaar, P. C. M. (2004). A manifesto on psychology as idiographic science: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, this time forever. Measurement, 2, 201–218.
Popper, K. (2002). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Routledge. (Original work published 1959)
Porter, T. M. (1986). The rise of statistical thinking: 1820–1900. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Sanford, N. (1963). Personality: Its place in psychology. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science (pp. 488–592). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Skaggs, E. B. (1945). Personalistic psychology as science. Psychological Review, 52, 234–238.
Stern, W. (1900). Über Psychologie der individuellen Differenzen (Ideen zu einer ‘differentiellen Psychologie’). Leipzig: Barth.
Stern, W. (1911). Die Differentielle Psychologie in ihren methodischen Grundlagen. Leipzig: Barth.
Stern, W. (1927). Selbstdarstellung. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Philosophie der Gegenwart in Selbstdarstellung (pp. 128–184). Leipzig: Barth.
Thorndike, E. L. (1911). Individuality. New York: Houghton-Mifflin.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lamiell, J. (2009). Reviving Person-Centered Inquiry in Psychology: Why it's Erstwhile Dormancy?. In: Valsiner, J., Molenaar, P., Lyra, M., Chaudhary, N. (eds) Dynamic Process Methodology in the Social and Developmental Sciences. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-95922-1_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-95922-1_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-95921-4
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-95922-1
eBook Packages: Behavioral ScienceBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)