Titlebook: Explanation and Experiment in Social Psychological Science; Realism and the Soci John D. Greenwood Book 1989 Springer-Verlag New York Inc.

極小量

Scientific Empiricism and Scientific Psychology,tself upon the practice of the natural sciences. In fact it did nothing of the kind. While psychologists quite justifiably rejected philosophical speculations about human nature in favor of empirical research, from the earliest days psychology was modeled upon an . philosophy of science, derived fro

加花粗鄙人

Realism,human representations of physical, biological, social, and psychological reality. The realism advocated in this volume includes the seperate theses of ontological, epistemological, and linguistic realism that are directly opposed to the forms of ontological, epistemological, and linguistic idealism

美學

圓錐體

Theory, merely sentential instruments for the deductive integration and prediction of observational regularity. The instrumentalists Osiander and Ursus protected Copernicus’s theory from church antogonism (since the Catholic church was committed to the Ptolemeic theory as church dogma) by arguing that the

小淡水魚

Hermeneutical Psychology,bjections to the assimilation of the natural and human sciences have been propounded for centuries. The central claim of critics who may be classified as . (Gauld & Shotter, 1977; Taylor, 1971) is that the explanation of action is essentially hermeneutic in nature. Its object is not the causal expla

休息

Causal Explanation and the Meaning of Human Action, empiricist account onto the social psychological domain. The critical arguments of the hermeneutical psychologist are vitiated because they are based not upon real contrasts with causal explanations in natural science, but upon contrasts between explanations of human action and scientific empiricis

確定

Gorilla

生存環(huán)境

逗留

The Experimental Analysis of Human Action,entury. A variety of writers have drawn attention to problems such as “experimenter bias” (Rosenthal, 1976), “demand characteristics” (Orne, 1962), “evaluation apprehension” (Rosenberg, 1969), and the unrepresentative nature of many (usually volunteer student) experimental subjects (Rosnow & Rosenth