Lecture 3 Flashcards
The empiricist view of concept and theory construction. Is it possible to measure concepts like aggression?
Yes, if the concept of ‘aggression’ can be defined in such a way as to be empirically
measured and tested.
- But, since ‘aggressive personality’ is a theoretical entity, we need a more direct way
of studying it.
- Social learning theory and behavioural-genetic theory offering ways to study
aggression through identifying patterns of behaviour
But still some worries for empirical social sciences
- Correlational studies and survey methodologies rarely provide causal explanations.
This is because
- Unlike natural sciences, social sciences aren’t nicely “carved at the joints”.
- Aggression example indicates that theoretical entities can be difficult to study
directly.
- It’s not evident that the “factors”, “latent variables” and “constructs”, represent
anything real.
➔ This is the problem of construct validity.
Dealing with construct validity:
Realism:
- Takes the goal of science to be the discovery of truths, including mechanisms and
entities that are not directly observable.
- So, the realist holds that a valid construct is one that measures what it purports to
measure.
Anti-realism:
- Denies that the goal of science could be the discovery of truths or theoryindependent facts
- So, the anti-realist holds that a valid construct is one that simplifies and systematizes
our past observations and permits accurate predictions of the future
(instrumentalism)
E.g., of instrumentalism: Cronbach & Meehl (1955)
- As a theoretical posit, ‘aggression’ is part of a network of concepts related by
generalizations. - Sometimes these are rough or pre-theoretical generalizations; sometimes they may
be substantiated by earlier research.
➢ But, if the factors do not correlate in the way that theory predicts, then the theory
must be modified, which means that the content (definition) of the concepts is
modified. - In the end a good theory is one that accounts for all of the observations. We can ask no more, yet a realist seems to want more. The instrumentalist replies that since there is nothing but observations that could answer that question, the realist demand cannot be satisfied (Risjford)
Some problems for instrumentalism
According to realists, instrumentalism violates two commitments:
1. Measuring the properties of an entity requires commitment to its existence.
- It’s incoherent to say, “This instrument measures aggression” and at the same time
deny that aggression exists.
2. Any measurement instrument must be causally related to the things measured,
such that changes in the object cause changes in this instrument.
- Denying such a causal connection renders insignificant any claim that a difference in
measurement entails a difference in the thing measured
Empiricism and the hermeneutical approach
The realism/anti-realism debate raises an important concern regarding the role ofscientists
in doing social research.
The hermeneutical approach = the problem of replication / repeatability is related to the
fact that the ‘objects of research’ themselves can interpret and respond to the research!
Interpretation of social scientific research:
➢ Objects of research are subjects!
➢ What does the ‘object of research’ –as subject –think about, e.g., ‘aggression’,
‘happiness’, ‘psychological problems’, etc.?
➢ What role does the context play in which ‘aggressive behaviour’ takes place,
‘happiness’ is experienced, ‘psychological problems’ arise, etc.?
Relationship between the ‘everyday’ and the ‘scientific’ attitude
Alfred Schütz, there are two levels:
1. Common-sense thinking (of the subjects at group level)
2. Social scientific models of motivations, feelings, meanings
➔ For Schütz, these levels must be consistent.
➔ Postulate of adequacy: the social actors must always understand the concepts
constructed by social scientists.
➔ Risjord: this ‘postulate’ is simultaneously too weak and too strong!
Charles Taylor on the challenges of social science
Reformulate Schütz’ demands in terms of ‘languages’:
there are two ‘languages’ involved in the social sciences,
(i) everyday and (ii) social scientific language.
- Social phenomena obey to rules (practices) and cannot adequately be described in
‘neutral language’.
- Next: “do not consider social-scientific concepts as representations of the beliefs of
social actors, BUT as translationsof their everyday language.”
Geertz elaborates on this idea
- Do not concentrate on the individual but on the culture to which the individual
belongs.
- Describe the task of the social scientist as formulating thick descriptions* that show
what the individuals of a culture share with each other.
E.g., Not ‘he moved’, but ‘he ran to school in a hurry
Digital Reader: De Vries and Beuving
Grounded theory in naturalistic inquiry
➢ Theorizing is done by formulating propositions inspired by empirical data (inductive)
➢ Grounded theory is not an exercise in theorizing but in ‘thinking with data’
Dus: beginnen bij observaties. Na de fase van theoretische reflectie over de gegevens, gaat
de onderzoeker meer gegevens verzamelen om de theorie aan te scherpen. Inductie bevat
geen logische zekerheid.
Grounded Theory:
- Tries to generalize from individual experiences and specific situations, looking for
broader patterns in those experiences and situations: the clustering and how it
changes over time.
- Try to link generalizations in an explanation of the phenomenon under study.
- Revolves around a constant combination of data collection and making abstract
statements.
- Process begins with relatively open-ended sensitizing concepts inspired by
theoretical debated and guiding the data collection.
➔ Generalizing from empirical situations to theoretical ideas and how that related to
the problem of sampling: key to grounded theory in naturalistic inquiry (no prior
familiarity with theoretical debates is necessary).
➔ Distinguishing different mental steps in making generalizations through theoretical
inference.
Different mental steps in the use of grounded theory in naturalistic inquiry: (de Vreus en Beuving)
Stage 1: Description: field notes contain vivid descriptions (such as buildings, use of space
and people and so on).
Travelogue: how an outsider would describe that society to someone else not present.
- At this stage it’s not yet possible to attribute motives or values to what is being
observed.
Stage 2: Interpretation: interpret what has been described (verstehen).
- Grasping the diversity of opinions, linking these to an analysis of the social structure
of the studied society.
Stage 3: Explanation: telling about society in terms of general processes and principles, that
is, using a more detached language than the language used for interpretation and
description.
Major task ground theory: to maintain a ‘chain of evidence’ running from the
viewpoint of members of a society to the abstract statements that circulate among
social scientist.
Naturalistic task is to contribute to social science discourse and to remain faithful to
reporting the native’s point of view.
Chapter 3 book – Theories, Interpretations and ConceptsThe objects of a social science are not objects at all, they are subjects.
→ subjects have their own ideas, concepts and perspectives
Two frameworks understanding social scientific theories and concepts:
- Naturalism
Have traditionally used a conception of theories that draws on empiricism
- Interpretivism
Argues that searching for laws and causal explanations misses the unique character
of the social world
Aggression, Violence and Video Games
Do violent video games cause aggressive behaviour?
Social learning theories:
- How to act in a given kind of situation is encoded in memory
- Children learn patterns of response to social situation
- As we mature, these responses get hardened into personality that resist change
It may be, that exposure to violent games would effectively train children to respond
aggressively to social situation
But, maybe exposure to live aggression would be much stronger force shaping of behaviour.
→ Correlation between playing video games and aggressive behaviour is explained by a third
underlying factor: the innate disposition (=de aangeboren aanleg)
The Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire (29 statements, randomized order)
- Question divide into groups corresponding four factors
o Physical aggression; verbal aggression; anger and hostility
Defining Theoretical Concepts
The Empiricist view
Difference between the social learning theories and the innate/genetic theories
Aggressive personality is a theoretical entity or posit
- Not directly observable
- Know only through knowledge of the theory
Empiricist view of theory:
- Theory is a structure of general statements that explain some phenomena and
permits predictions about them
- These statements often called: laws or nomological generalizations
- Newton’s mechanics exemplar of scientific theory
o Weight is easily observable, but mass must be calculated
- Concepts of a theory are expressed by the substantive words that appear in the
theory’s general statements.
“Theoretical concepts” often called relatively remote from observation
Empiricist view: the statements of the theory give content to the theoretical
concepts
To test the theory, hypotheses have to satisfy 2 criteria
1. The hypothesis should be logically entailed by the theory
2. It should include concepts that are amenable to direct of indirect oberservation
Realism, Instrumentalism and the Problem of Construct Validity
Why should we think that patterns of survey responses represent anything?
→ Philosophical question often called construct validity
Realist: position about construct validity holds that a valid construct is one that measures
what it purports to measure. Real features of the world correspond to theoretical concepts
or constructs and valid surveys (or other tests) can measure them.
Instrumentalist: view of construct validity that a valid construct is one that simplifies and
systematizes our past observations and permits accurate predictions of the future.
Commitment of the “reality” of theoretical construct is simply unnecessary.
The canonical expression of construct validity is Cronbach and Meehl’s essay
- If the factors do not correlate in the way that theory predicts, then the theory must
be modified, which means that the content (definition) of the concepts is modified
- Instrumental approach to construct validity
o The best we can do is to compare observations with each other, using them
to rule out theories that do not conform to the data
Realist: wants to ask whether the theoretical constructs really correspond to the hidden
properties or structures
→ Instrumentalist: replies that since there is nothing but observations that could answer
that question, the realist demand cannot be satisfied
→ Realist: response: the idea of measurement requires two commitments and
instrumentalism violates both.
1. Measuring the properties of an entity requires commitment to its existence.
2. Any measurement instrument must be causally related to the thing measure, such
that changes in the object cause changes in this instrument.
To adopt an instrumentalist attitude toward theoretical concepts, the realist argue, is to deny
the very thing which makes measurement possible.
Interpretivism
Whether an act is aggressive depends on how the subjects understand “aggression,” as well
as their views about contextually appropriate behaviour. → Interpretivism
Max Weber
Central to his methodological approach was the notion of an “ideal type”
- Relates to observable behaviours by identifying the motivations that stand behind
them
- Needs to identify the typical feelings, beliefs and social meanings that stand behind
the behaviour
- Ideal types are independent of and prior to generalizations
- Ideal types were idealizations: tools for the identification of central aspects of a
phenomenon
We know expectations, regulations, roles, and institutions that make up our social reality.
→ Alfred Schutz called this “common-sense thinking,”
→ He argued that verstehen is “the particular experiential form in which common- sense
thinking takes cognizance of the social cultural world”
→ A full-blooded verstehen approach to the social sciences would thus capture the subjects’
own understanding of their world.
