History of Psych 1 Flashcards
Kuhn’s idea of Paradigm shifts
Kuhn thought that science works in two different modes’
first mode; In normal science: scientists use a particular conceptual frame work to understand. and solve specific problems (he called the problems puzzles)
when they cant solve the ‘Puzzles” scientists look for new paradigms .
Non f————— theories tell us nothing about the world
Science proceeds through invention, hypothesising about what is not already known. BUT theories need to be falsifiable
Criticised p————– and M—————
Non falsifiable theories tell us nothing about the world
Science proceeds through invention, hypothesising about what is not already known. BUT theories need to be falsifiable
Criticised psychoanalysis and Marxism
HYPOTHETICO-DEDUCTIVE METHOD
Introduced by P——-
Combination of inductive and deductive reasoning –formulation of theory –tested through experiment
Hypothesis testing –seeks to f——-, not c—— theory
Observation –i——— –h———- –test
HYPOTHETICO-DEDUCTIVE METHOD
Introduced by Popper
Combination of inductive and deductive reasoning –formulation of theory –tested through experiment
Hypothesis testing –seeks to falsify, not confirm theory
Observation –interpretation –hypothesis –test
SOPHISTICATED FALSIFICATIONISM
Falisifactionism needs to demonstrate p————- element. Science should progress through theories becoming M—- falsifiable
Can be better to make a————to existing theory than r——-it completely and start anew
Alterations can be made through use of ‘a– h— modifications’
SOPHISTICATED FALSIFICATIONISM
Falisifactionism needs to demonstrate progressive element. Science should progress through theories becoming MORE falsifiable
Can be better to make alterations to existing theory than reject it completely and start anew
Alterations can be made through use of ‘ad hoc modifications’
LIMITS OF FALSIFICATION
Observations dependent on theories, and as such not ‘d—– a——–’ to the world
Individual’s experiences m——— observation
Observation involves ‘interpretation’
Fallibility of falsifications
Popper’s theories do not explain why scientists s—- with their theories
LIMITS OF FALSIFICATION
Observations dependent on theories, and as such not ‘direct access’ to the world
Individual’s experiences mediate observation
Observation involves ‘interpretation’
Fallibility of falsifications
Popper’s theories do not explain why scientists stick with their theories
KUHN’S PARADIGMS
Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996) developed theory that science proceeds through succession of historically specific dominant theories (aka paradigms)
Agreed with Popper that focus should be on t——- rather than o———–
KUHN’S PARADIGMS
Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996) developed theory that science proceeds through succession of historically specific dominant theories (aka paradigms)
Agreed with Popper that focus should be on theory rather than observation
KUHN’S PARADIGMS
Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific R————- (1962)
Science progresses through revolutionary shifts in theories
Abandonment of dominant theory through replacement by another
P—s ———
N———– s————-
C—–
R————
NEW N———– S ———
KUHN’S PARADIGMS
Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962)
Science progresses through revolutionary shifts in theories
Abandonment of dominant theory through replacement by another
PRE-SCIENCE
NORMAL SCIENCE
CRISIS
REVOLUTION
NEW NORMAL SCIENCE
WHAT IS A PARADIGM?
A general framework (theory) about how to investigate scientific problems
Shared view of how science should operate
Defines: “what is o———– and s————; what questions should be asked; how the questions are to be s————; and how the results of scientific investigations should be i————-” (Brysbaert & Rastle, 2009: 312)
WHAT IS A PARADIGM?
A general framework (theory) about how to investigate scientific problems
Shared view of how science should operate
Defines: “what is observed and scrutinised; what questions should be asked; how the questions are to be structured; and how the results of scientific investigations should be interpreted” (Brysbaert & Rastle, 2009: 312)
PARADIGM FORMATION
A paradigm determines:
W— is to be observed and scrutinised
W—— questions should be asked
How the questions are to be s———
How the results of scientific investigations should be i————
PARADIGM FORMATION
A paradigm determines:
What is to be observed and scrutinised
Which questions should be asked
How the questions are to be structured
How the results of scientific investigations should be interpreted
PRE-SCIENCE
Designates stage in science in which each research discipline is made up of an assortment of explanations for small scale phenomena
Stage before scientists work to create a more powerful general theoretical framework
PRE-SCIENCE
Designates stage in science in which each research discipline is made up of an assortment of explanations for small scale phenomena
Stage before scientists work to create a more powerful general theoretical framework
NORMAL SCIENCE
Period when scientists are investigating shared paradigm; testing theories to see how strong they are
Shared assumption that worthy to carry on investigating the paradigm. Negative outcome for scientists who break away from paradigm
NORMAL SCIENCE
Period when scientists are investigating shared paradigm; testing theories to see how strong they are
Shared assumption that worthy to carry on investigating the paradigm. Negative outcome for scientists who break away from paradigm
CRISIS AND REVOLUTION
Findings from normal science inevitably do not all agree with paradigm. First few inconsistencies framed as a———
Frequent contradictory findings leads to c—–
Leads to loss in c——– in paradigm = crisis
Crisis leads to a scientific revolution (paradigm shift) where previous paradigm is replaced by new one
CRISIS AND REVOLUTION
Findings from normal science inevitably do not all agree with paradigm. First few inconsistencies framed as anomalies.
Frequent contradictory findings leads to crisis
Leads to loss in confidence in paradigm = crisis
Crisis leads to a scientific revolution (paradigm shift) where previous paradigm is replaced by new one
PARADIGM SHIFT
Paradigm shift
Change in dominant theory
New theory becomes part of normal science and guides research
Process repeats
Paradigms distinguish between science and non-science
E.g. geocentric vs heliocentric theories of universe
PARADIGM SHIFT
Paradigm shift
Change in dominant theory
New theory becomes part of normal science and guides research
Process repeats
Paradigms distinguish between science and non-science
E.g. geocentric vs heliocentric theories of universe
PARADIGMS IN PSYCHOLOGY
History of psychology has been claimed to be explained through paradigm shifts (e.g. behaviourism to cognitivism)
However, this claim has been criticised for simplifying the reality of psychology. For instance, Brysbaert and Rastle (p150-152) discuss some of the diversity of psychology at the time that a shift is often said to occur. They point out that b————– was not that popular in UK, being largely a US based approach, so it was not a c———– paradigm in the way Kuhn meant it.
Leahey (1992) also states psychology’s history too d———- to be explainable through succession of revolutions
PARADIGMS IN PSYCHOLOGY
History of psychology has been claimed to be explained through paradigm shifts (e.g. behaviourism to cognitivism)
However, this claim has been criticised for simplifying the reality of psychology. For instance, Brysbaert and Rastle (p150-152) discuss some of the diversity of psychology at the time that a shift is often said to occur. They point out that behaviourism was not that popular in UK, being largely a US based approach, so it was not a collective paradigm in the way Kuhn meant it.
Leahey (1992) also states psychology’s history too disparate to be explainable through succession of revolutions
REAL OR NOT?
Unclear whether Kuhn meant paradigm shifts to involve theories being replaced by better ones (i.e. p———–) or just a succession of different paradigms (h——— d———–)
What does this mean for knowledge?
Questions whether theories help us discover true facts about the world, or whether they tell us more about the shared views of scientists at a given time, and thus are influenced by historical and cultural values
REAL OR NOT?
Unclear whether Kuhn meant paradigm shifts to involve theories being replaced by better ones (i.e. progressive) or just a succession of different paradigms (historically dependent)
What does this mean for knowledge?
Questions whether theories help us discover true facts about the world, or whether they tell us more about the shared views of scientists at a given time, and thus are influenced by historical and cultural values
