ArticleIntegrative psychological & behavioral science2010
Historizing epistemology in psychology.
Article in Integrative psychological & behavioral science, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epistemological Alienation in Scientific Psychology.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2024Article
- Can We Abandon Mediation? A Commentary on the Article "Theorizing with/out 'Mediators'".Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2019Article
- The living fossil of human judgment.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2014Article
- Peeking into personality test answers: inter- and intraindividual variety in item interpretations.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The conflict between the psychometric methodological framework and the particularities of human experiences reported in psychotherapeutic context led Michael Schwarz to raise the question whether psychology is based on a methodological error. I take this conflict as a heuristic tool for the reconstruction of the early history of psychology, which bears witness to similar epistemological conflicts, though the dominant historiography of psychology has largely forgotten alternative conceptions and their valuable insights into complexities of psychic phenomena. In order to work against the historical amnesia in psychology I suggest to look at cultural-historical contexts which decisively shaped epistemological choices in psychology. Instead of keeping epistemology and history of psychology separate, which nurtures individualism and naturalism in psychology, I argue for historizing epistemology and for historical psychology. From such a historically reflected perspective psychology in contemporary world can be approached more critically.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.