Psychology is not primarily Empirical Science: A Comparison of Cultures in the Lexical Hypothesis Tradition as a Failure of Introspection
Language English Country United States Media print
Document type Journal Article
PubMed
28035626
DOI
10.1007/s12124-016-9375-1
PII: 10.1007/s12124-016-9375-1
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Keywords
- Big five, Copypasting fallacy, Czech, Empirical research, Introspection, Korean, Lexical hypothesis,
- MeSH
- Language * MeSH
- Culture MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Psychology methods MeSH
- Research Design * MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Geographicals
- Czech Republic MeSH
- Republic of Korea MeSH
A large part of psychology has become an empirical science that assumes that there might exist one set of research methods suitable for psychological research in all human cultures. Research questions, methods, and theories formulated from one cultural perspective are not thoroughly introspectively examined when being used in another cultural environment. This leads to research that answers questions that are not meaningful in such environments. Research coming from the lexical hypothesis tradition is given as an example. The original research in English language decided that the lexicon was enough to represent language structures for the purpose of examining how language reflects personality; however, some languages might use specific grammatical structures to reflect personality, so the lexicon is not enough to adequately represent these languages. Despite this, researchers still follow the research method developed for the English language. The Czech and Korean languages are examples of this approach. A solution to this problem is the thorough use of introspection during the formulation of research questions.
See more in PubMed
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2016 Jun;50(2):185-95 PubMed
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2015 Jun;49(2):288-308 PubMed
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2011 Mar;45(1):21-47 PubMed
J Pers. 1992 Jun;60(2):329-61 PubMed
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2014 Jun;48(2):143-60 PubMed
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2015 Jun;49(2):162-73 PubMed
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2013 Mar;47(1):1-55 PubMed
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2009 Jan;4(1):24-5 PubMed
J Pers. 2001 Dec;69(6):847-79 PubMed
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2010 Sep;44(3):245-51 PubMed
J Pers Disord. 2005 Jun;19(3):303-8 PubMed
