Encyclopedia of Sciences and Religions

2013 Edition
| Editors: Anne L. C. Runehov, Lluis Oviedo

Methodology in Psychology

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8265-8_695

Related Terms

Description

Methodology in psychology refers to procedures researchers use to answer specific questions. There is no single methodology that all psychologists use. Instead, different schools and disciplines within psychology employ specific methods, some unique to a given discipline, while others are common across disciplines (Todd et al. 2004). For instance, for many psychologists, methodology refers to procedures and designs that permit the identification of causal relationships between independently defined variables. An explicit method by which such relationships are identified assures that other researchers can produce identical results using the same procedures. This produces the single most important criterion identifying a discipline as a science, the public replication of causal claims. Thus, the major criteria that methodology addresses are repeatable findings by independent investigators in support of nomothetic laws or...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

  1. Denizen, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2002). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Lee, M. (2000). Unobtrusive methods in social research. Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Miles, G. (2007). Science and religious experience: Are they similar forms of knowledge? Brighton: Sussex Academic Press.Google Scholar
  5. Motterling, M. (Ed.). (1999). For and against method: Including Lakato’s lectures on scientific method and the Lakatos-Feyerabend correspondence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Pashler, H. (Editor-in-Chief) (2001). Steven’s handbook of experimental psychology (Vol. 3). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. Roth, P. A. (1987). Meaning and method in the social sciences: The case for methodological pluralism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Shanon, B. (2002). Antipodes of the mind: Charting the phenomenology of the ayahuasca experience. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Todd, Z., Nerlich, B., McLeown, S., & Clarke, D. D. (2004). Mixing methods: The integration of qualitative and quantitative methods in theory and practice. East Sussex: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  10. Wallerstein, R. S. (1992). The common ground of psychoanalysis. Northvale: Aronson.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Tennessee at ChattanoogaChattanoogaUSA