Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41561590›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2025

Phenomenological reduction and quantitative psychology: a conflict in the study of self-consciousness.

Hu Ren

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Hu RenSchool of Humanities, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper explores the methodological tensions between quantitative psychology and phenomenological reduction in the study of self-consciousness. Quantitative psychology, historically modeled on the natural sciences, treats self-consciousness as a psychological attribute and operationalizes it through standardized scales. It emphasizes causal relationships between self-consciousness and other factors and primarily adopts a third-person perspective. Despite its contributions, this approach faces persistent challenges, including contextual dependence, constructed measurement tools, and the lack of natural measurement units. In contrast, phenomenology, originating with Husserl, emphasizes the intrinsic, pre-reflective dimension of self-consciousness present in all conscious experience. Unlike quantitative psychology, phenomenology contributes by clarifying meaning prior to causal explanation, recognizing the indispensability of the first-person perspective while acknowledging the value of third-person analysis. From the phenomenological standpoint, contextual dependence is not a limitation, and the aim is not to criticize the absence of natural measurement units in quantitative research, but to clarify the true meaning of the scores and the constructed units from the perspective of lived experience.

Indexed as

phenomenological reductionqualitative researchquantitative psychologyquantitative researchself-consciousness

Identifiers

PMID41561590
PMCPMC12813081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.