Psychology as a Science of Subject and Comportment, beyond the Mind and Behavior

Looking from within: Comparing first-person approaches to studying experience

Fostering our understanding of how humans behave, feel and think is a fundamental goal of psychological research. Widely used methods in psychological research are self-report and behavioral measures which require an experimenter to collect data from another person. By comparison, first-person measures that assess more subtle facets of subjective experiences, are less widely used. Without integrating such more subtle first-person measures, however, fundamental aspects of psychological phenomena remain inaccessible to psychological theorizing. To explore the value and potential contribution of first-person methods, the current article aims to provide an overview over already established first-person methods and compare them on relevant dimensions. Based on these results, researchers can select suitable first-person methods to study different facets of subjective experiences. Overall, the investigation of psychological phenomena from a first-person perspective can complement and enrich existing research from a third-person perspective.

Quantity Over Quality? Reproducible Psychological Science from a Mixed Methods Perspective

A robust dialogue about the (un)reliability of psychological science findings has emerged in recent years. In response, metascience researchers have developed innovative tools to increase rigor, transparency, and reproducibility, stimulating rapid improvement and adoption of open science practices. However, existing reproducibility guidelines are geared toward purely quantitative study designs. This leaves some ambiguity as to how such guidelines should be implemented in mixed methods (MM) studies, which combine quantitative and qualitative research. Drawing on extant literature, our own experiences, and feedback from 79 self-identified MM researchers, the current paper addresses two main questions: (a) how and to what extent do existing reproducibility guidelines apply to MM study designs; and (b) can existing reproducibility guidelines be improved by incorporating best practices from qualitative research and epistemology? In answer, we offer 10 key recommendations for use within and outside of MM research. Finally, we argue that good science and good ethical practice are mutually reinforcing and lead to meaningful, credible science.

Psychological Science within a Three-Dimensional Ontology

The present paper outlines the nature of a three-dimensional ontology and the place of psychological science within this ontology, in a way that is partly similar to and partly different from that of Pérez-Álvarez. The first dimension is the material realities, and involves different levels (physical, chemical, biological, psychological, etc.), where each level builds on a lower level but also involves the development of new emergent properties, in accordance with Bunge’s emergent materialism. Each level involves systems, with components, structures and mechanisms, and an environment. This dimension can be studied with natural scientific methods. The second dimension is the subjective-experiential realities, and refers to our subjective perspective on the world. In accordance with Husserl’s phenomenology, it is argued that this subjectivity does not exist in the world (i.e., should not be reified as an object among other objects), but represents a perspective on the world that we enter in our capacity as conscious human beings. Essential characteristics of this subjectivity (such as intentionality, temporality, embodiment, and intersubjectivity) can be explored by phenomenological methods. The third dimension is the social-constructional realities, and includes social institutions, norms, categories, theories, and techniques. It is argued that psychological science spans over all three dimensions. Although almost all psychological research by necessity starts from a problem formulation where the subjective-experiential dimension plays an essential role (either explicitly or implicitly), most of present-day psychological research clearly emphasizes the material dimension. It is argued that a mature psychological science needs to integrate all three dimensions.