The Methodology of the Social Sciences

join(, Ernest Kilzer; Weber, Max; Shils, Edward; Finch, Henry

doi:10.2307/3707961

Cited by 14 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Vague definitions and inconsistent use of key terms and concepts in scientific psychology (e.g., 'mind', 'behaviour'; Zagaria et al, 2020) may therefore derive from researchers' intuitive reliance on their everyday psychology, leading to widespread jingle-jangle fallacies (same term denotes different concepts, and vice versa; Uher, 2013Uher, , 2021b. In consequence, psychologists' own experiencesas humans, members of particular communities, and as individuals-may (unintentionally) influence their scholarly thinking (Danziger, 1997;Weber, 1949). This may entail anthropo-centric, ethno-centric and ego-centric (type-I and type-II) biases, such as when researchers misattribute properties of their own ingroup to outgroups or ignore outgroup properties uncommon in their ingroup (Uher, 2013(Uher, , 2015b(Uher, , 2015c(Uher, , 2020a.…”

Section: Challenge (1)mentioning

confidence: 99%

What's wrong with rating scales? Psychology's replication and confidence crisis cannot be solved without transparency in data generation

Uher

2023

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantitative explorations of behaviour, psyche and society are common in psychology. This requires methods that justify the attribution of results to the measurands (the entities to be measured, e.g., in individuals) and that make the results' quantitative meaning publicly interpretable (e.g., for decision making). Do rating scales-psychology's primary methods to generate numerical data-meet these criteria? This article summarises selected epistemological and methodological problems of rating scales that arise, amongst others, from the intricacies of language-based methods and from psychologists' challenges to distinguish their study phenomena from their means of exploring these phenomena. Failure to make this logical distinction entails that disparate scientific activities are conflated, thereby distorting scientific concepts and procedures. Rating scales promote such conflations because they serve both as description of the empirical study system (e.g., behaviours) and as symbolic study system (e.g., data variables), leaving the interpretation of each system and the mapping relations between them to raters' intuitive decisions. Verbal scales, however, have broad semantic fields of meanings, which are context-sensitive and therefore interpreted differently, and which cannot logically match the quantitative meaning commonly ascribed to the numerical scores derived from them. The ease of using

show abstract

Section: Challenge (1)mentioning

confidence: 99%

What's wrong with rating scales? Psychology's replication and confidence crisis cannot be solved without transparency in data generation

Uher

2023

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, Durkheim believes that if one wants to know the reason why any social phenomenon is happening, the rst thing one should do is to identify the objective social facts externally from the individuals. [5] Weber, on the other hand, positions himself on the opposite side of the spectrum and claims that it is through the subjectively meaningful social actions of the individuals who are constantly interacting with one another that the society is constructed (Weber, 1949). For Weber, the reality is 'the endless ux of the in nite multiplicity' (as cited in John, 1991: 245).…”

Section: Kantian Epistemology: the Transcendental Shiftmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One can argue that the construction of ideal types is what makes Weberian sociology Kantian in its essence. They constitute the most fundamental Kantian character of his 'Verstehende Soziologie' (Oakes, 1987;Weber, 1949). In this section, the paper will try to show how Weberian methodology in general, and ideal types in particular, is related to Kantian epistemology.…”

Section: Ideal Types and Understanding: Kantian In Uences In Weberian...mentioning

confidence: 99%

How is Sociological Knowledge Possible? Influences of Kantian Epistemology in Max Weber’s ‘Verstehende Soziologie’ and the Problem of Objectivity

Atakan

2023

Reinvention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kant’s ‘Copernican Revolution’ has caused a radical change in the common-sense theory of knowledge. The subject became the centre and the necessary premise for the validity of the objective world. This change in the understanding of knowledge has best manifested itself in Weber’s ‘Verstehende Soziologie’. Therefore, in order to understand the Weberian sociological method and to be able to detect the possible problems that may arise from his sociology, a better grasp of what Kantian epistemology is and in what ways it has influenced Weberian sociology is needed. Accordingly, this paper will firstly analyse Kantian epistemology with a special emphasis on transcendental idealism, and will expand and explain in detail Weber’s ‘Verstehende Soziologie’. Next, the paper will show how Weberian sociology relates to Kantian epistemology through the construction of ideal types. Before concluding, the focus moves to the objectivity claim of both Kantian epistemology and Weberian sociology and shows how objectivity arises from subjectivity through the establishment of causality. Finally, the paper will propose an objection to the objectivity claim of Weberian sociology and will argue that Kantian epistemology, when adopted as a method of sociology, becomes reflexive and threatens to deprive sociology of its objectivity claim.

show abstract

“…More widely accepted is that Evaluation is a practice of the Social Sciences-although this is debatable and it depends on what is classed as a Social Science. Further to this, Evaluation was demonstrably central the founding doctrines of the Social Sciences in the early 1900s (Weber, 1949). As an aside it is acknowledged that there are a number of distinct schools of Evaluation that have emerged as independent entities (e.g., Empowerment…”

Section: A Disciplinary Perspective Of the Modern History Of Program ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critical-Historical Review of Program Evaluation and the Emerging Motif ‘Evaluation Science’

Fear

2020

J Multidiscip Eval

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: It is important to distinguish between evaluation as an inherent, automatic, affective process and Program Evaluation (Evaluation, with capitalised ‘E’) as an institution, and equally important to consider what a good understanding of evaluation tells us about Evaluation. Evaluation is an established social institution whose modern roots can be traced back to 16th century France. Since the early 1900s the institution has developed within and across a range of scientific disciplines with interests in perceived social problems and efforts to resolve the said problems. This can be demonstrated objectively by the number and scale of relevant publications within relevant disciplines. This, in turn, helps us understand more about Evaluation as an institution. Set in this context is the question of Evaluation Science: is this simply a fashionable institutional motif or is it a potential new era for Evaluation? Purpose: Commentary on the history and development of Program Evaluation. Setting: Not applicable. Intervention: Not applicable. Research design: Not applicable. Data collection & analysis: Not applicable. Findings: Not applicable. Keywords: program evaluation; evaluation; history; evaluation science.

show abstract

The Methodology of the Social Sciences

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

What's wrong with rating scales? Psychology's replication and confidence crisis cannot be solved without transparency in data generation

What's wrong with rating scales? Psychology's replication and confidence crisis cannot be solved without transparency in data generation

How is Sociological Knowledge Possible? Influences of Kantian Epistemology in Max Weber’s ‘Verstehende Soziologie’ and the Problem of Objectivity

A Critical-Historical Review of Program Evaluation and the Emerging Motif ‘Evaluation Science’

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About