A Reflective Science

  • Davood Gozli


This final chapter reviews the methods of critique in to experimental research. The critique emphasizes the presence of active subjects (researchers and participants) and the hierarchy of goals that motivate their actions. The reliance on naïve and uninterested participants, who are treated as means to scientific ends, resembles the mode of participation that researchers assign to themselves. The active roles of subjects are disregarded on both sides of the relation, both turning into tools of research productivity, performing a set of unquestioned tasks within fixed normative-descriptive contexts.


Experimental psychology Reflective science Meta-science Subjectivity 


  1. Bergner, R. (2010). What is descriptive psychology? An introduction. In K. Davis, F. Lubuguin, & W. Schwartz (Eds.), Advances in descriptive psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 325–360). Ann Arbor, MI: Descriptive Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  2. Blackman, L. (2014). Affect and automaticy: Towards an analytics of experimentation. Subjectivity, 7(4), 362–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Colzato, L. S., Hommel, B., & Shapiro, K. (2010). Religion and the attentional blink: Depth of faith predicts depth of the blink. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 147.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Elster, J. (2015). Explaining social behavior: More nuts and bolts for the social sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Engelsted, N. (2017). Catching up with Aristotle: A journey in quest of general psychology. New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Frith, C. D. (2014). Action, agency and responsibility. Neuropsychologia, 55, 137–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology: A modified Husserlian approach. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Hibberd, F. J. (2014). The metaphysical basis of a process psychology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 34(3), 161–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mammen, J. (2017). A new logical foundation for psychology. New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Concepts: Core readings (pp. 189–206). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  11. Smaldino, P. E., & McElreath, R. (2016). The natural selection of bad science. Royal Society Open Science, 3(9), 160384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Smedslund, J. (1997). The structure of psychological common sense. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. Valsiner, J. (2017). From methodology to methods in human psychology. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Zajonc, R. B. (2001). Mere exposure: A gateway to the subliminal. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(6), 224–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Davood Gozli
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of MacauTaipaMacao

Personalised recommendations