abstract
Methodological problems
Socio-psychological research
The meaning of methodological problems in modern science
Problems of research methodology are relevant to any science, especially in a modern era, when, in connection with the scientific and technical revolution, the tasks that have to be addressed by science are extremely complicated, and the importance of the funds with which it uses. In addition, new forms of science organization arise in society, large research teams are being created, within which scientists need to develop a unified research strategy, a single system of adopted methods. In connection with the development of mathematics and cybernetics, a special class of so-called interdisciplinary methods used as "cross-cutting" in various disciplines are born. All this requires the researchers to continue to control their informative actions, analyze the funds themselves enjoyed in research practice. Proof of the fact that the interest of modern science to the problems of the methodology is especially great, is the fact of the occurrence of a special branch of knowledge within philosophy, namely the logic and methodology of scientific research. Characteristic, however, should be recognized that not only philosophers, specialists in the field of this discipline, but also representatives of specific sciences themselves are increasingly begin to analyze the analysis of methodological problems. There is a special type of methodological reflection - intra-scientific methodological reflection.
All of the above applies to social psychology (methodology and methodology of social psychology, 1979), and also their special reasons come into effect here, the first of which is the relative youth of social psychology as science, the complexity of its origin and status, which cause the need to be guided in research Practice at the same time methodological principles of two different scientific disciplines: psychology and sociology. This gives rise to a specific task for social psychology - a peculiar correlation, "imposition" of each other of two rows of patterns: the social development and development of the human psyche. The situation is also aggravated by the lack of its own conceptual apparatus, which generates the need for two types of various terminological dictionaries.
Before more specifically, talking about methodological problems in social psychology, it is necessary to clarify what is generally understood under the methodology. In modern scientific knowledge, the term "methodology" is denoted by three different levels of scientific approach.
General methodology - some common philosophical approach, the general way of knowledge taken by the researcher. The overall methodology formulates some of the most general principles that - consciously or unconsciously apply in studies. So, for social psychology, a certain understanding of the issue of the relationship between society and the individual, human nature is necessary. As a general methodology, various researchers take various philosophical systems.
Private (or special) Methodology - a set of methodological principles used in this field of knowledge. Private methodology is the implementation of philosophical principles in relation to the specific object of the study. This is also a certain way of knowledge, but the method adapted for a narrower sphere of knowledge. In social psychology, due to its dual origin, a special methodology is formed under the condition of adaptation of the methodological principles of both psychology and sociology. As an example, it is possible to consider the principle of activity as it is used in domestic social psychology. In the broadest sense of the word, the philosophical principle of activity means recognizing activities by the essence of the method of human being. In sociology, activities are interpreted as a way of the existence of human society, as the implementation of social laws, which manifest themselves not otherwise through the activities of people. Activities and produces, and changes specific conditions for the existence of individuals, as well as society as a whole. It is through activity that the personality is included in the system of social relations. In psychology, activities are considered as a specific type of human activity, as some subject-object attitude, in which a person is a subject - in a certain way refers to the object, mastering them. The category of activity, therefore, "opens now in its actual completeness as a comprehensive band - and a pole object, and a pole subject" (Leontyev, 1975. P. 159). In the course of activity, a person implements its interest, transforming the subject matter. At the same time, a person satisfies the needs, and new needs are born. Thus, the activity appears as a process during which the human personality itself develops.
Social psychology, taking the principle of activity as one of the principles of its special methodology, adapts it to the main subject of his research - a group. Therefore, in social psychology, the most important content of the principle of activity is disclosed in the following provisions: a) understanding of activity as joint social activities of people, during which there are very special connections, such as communicative; b) understanding as a subject of activity not only individual, but also groups, societies, i.e. Introduction of the idea of \u200b\u200ba collective subject of activity; This allows you to explore the real social groups as certain systems of activity; c), subject to the understanding of the Group as a subject of activity, it is overwhelmed with the opportunity to learn all the relevant attributes of the subject of activity - the needs, motives, the objectives of the group, etc.; d) As an output, the inadmissibility of any research is followed only to the empirical description, to a simple statement of acts of individual activity outside a certain "social context" - this system of social relations. The principle of activity is transformed, thus, in a kind of standard of socio-psychological research, determines the research strategy. And this is the function of a special methodology.
Methodology - as a combination of specific methodological methods of research, which is more often indicated by the term "technique". However, in a number of other languages, for example, in English, there is no term, and the methodology is completely understood by the technique, and sometimes only it is. Specific techniques (or methods, if the word "method" is understood in this narrow sense), used in socio-psychological studies are not absolutely independent of more general methodological considerations.
The essence of the introduction of the proposed "hierarchy" of various methodological levels is precisely in order not to allow all methodological problems in social psychology only to the third value of this concept. The main idea is that, whatever empirical or experimental techniques are applied, they cannot be considered isolated from a common and special methodology. This means that any methodological method - a questionnaire, test, sociometry - always applied in a specific "methodological key", i.e. Subject to the decision of a number of more fundamental research issues. The essence of the case is also the fact that philosophical principles cannot be applied in the studies of each science directly: they are refracted through the principles of a special methodology. As for specific methodological techniques, they can be relatively independent of the methodological principles and apply almost in the same form within the framework of various methodological orientation, although the general set of techniques, the general strategy of their application, of course, carry a methodological load.
Now it is necessary to clarify what is understood in the modern logic and the methodology of science under the expression "scientific research". It should be remembered that the social psychology of the XX century. Particularly insisted on the fact that her difference from the tradition of the XIX century. It is precisely in the support for "research", and not on the "speculation". The opposition to the research of speculation is legally, but provided that it is observed exactly, and not replaced by the opposition "Study - theory". Therefore, revealing the features of a modern scientific study, it is important to correctly set these questions. The following features of scientific research are usually called:
1. It deals with specific objects, in other words, with a foreseeable amount of empirical data, which can be assembled by the means available to science;
2. The empirical (selection of facts, the development of measurement methods) is differentiated in it), logical (elimination of some provisions from others, establishing communication between them) and theoretical (search for the causes, identification of principles, formulating hypotheses or laws) Cognitive tasks;
3. It is characterized by a clear distinction between established facts and hypothetical assumptions, since the procedures for testing hypotheses are worked out;
4. His goal is not only an explanation of the facts and processes, but also the prediction of them. If you briefly summarize these distinctive features, they can be reduced to three: obtaining carefully collected data, combining them into principles, check and use these principles in predictions.
Specificity of scientific research in social psychology
Each of the science studies mentioned here has specifics in social psychology. The scientific research model offered in the logic and methodology of science is usually built on the examples of the exact sciences and above all physics. As a result, many of the features are essential for other scientific disciplines turn out to be lost. In particular, for social psychology, a number of specific problems relating to each of these features should be stated.
The first problem that gets here is the problem of empirical data. Data in social psychology can be either data on the open behavior of individuals in groups, or data characterizing some characteristics of the consciousness of these individuals, or the psychological characteristics of the group itself. On the issue of "to allow" the data of these two species in the study, in social psychology there is a fierce discussion: in various theoretical orientations, this issue is solved in different ways.
Thus, in behavior social psychology for data, only the facts of open behavior are accepted; Cognitiveness, on the contrary, focuses on the data characterizing only the cognitive world of the individual: images, values, installations, etc. In other traditions, data of socio-psychological research can be represented by both types. But this immediately puts forward certain requirements and to the methods of their collection. A source of any data in social psychology is a person, but one number of methods is suitable for registration of acts of its behavior, the other - to fix its cognitive entities. Recognition as full data and other genera requires recognition and diversity of methods.
The data problem also has the other side: what should be their volume? Accordingly, what amount of data is present in a social and psychological study, all of them are divided into two types: a) correlations based on a large data array, among which various kinds of correlation are installed, and b) experimental, where the researcher works with a limited amount of data and where the meaning of the work consists in randomly introduced by a researcher of new variables and controls. Again, in this matter, the theoretical position of the researcher is very significant: what objects, from his point of view, are generally "admissible" in social psychology (suppose whether large groups are included in the number of objects or not).
The second trait of scientific research is the integration of data into principles, the construction of hypotheses and theories. And this feature is quite specifically revealed in social psychology. Theories in the understanding, in what about them are stated in the logic and methodology of science, it does not possess. As in other humanitarian sciences, theories in social psychology do not wear a deductive nature, i.e. Do not constitute such a well-organized connection between the provisions so that you can with one to bring any other. In social and psychological theories there is no rigor of such order, as, for example, in the theories of mathematics or logic. In such conditions, an important place in the study begins to occupy a hypothesis. The hypothesis "represents" in a socio-psychological study theoretical form of knowledge. Hence the most important link of socio-psychological research - the formulation of hypotheses. One of the reasons for the weakness of many studies is the absence of hypotheses or illiterate their construction.
On the other hand, no matter how difficult it was to build theories in social psychology, more or less complete knowledge and here cannot develop in the absence of theoretical generalizations. Therefore, even a good hypothesis in the study is not a sufficient level of inclusion of theory into research practice: the level of generalizations obtained on the basis of the test of the hypothesis and on the basis of its confirmation, there is still only the most primary form of "organization" data. The next step is to transition to higher-level generalizations, to generalizations theoretical. Of course, it would be optimal to build some common theory, explaining all the problems of social behavior and the activities of the individual in the group, the mechanisms of the dynamics of the groups themselves, etc. But the development of so-called special theories is more affordable (in a certain sense, they can be called the theories of medium rank), which cover the narrower sphere - some separate parties of socio-psychological reality. These theories can be used, for example, to attribute the theory of group cohesion, the theory of group decision-making, theory of leadership, etc. Just as the most important task of social psychology is the task of developing a special methodology, the creation of special theories is also extremely relevant here. Without this, the accumulated empirical material can not be values \u200b\u200bfor the construction of forecasts of social behavior, i.e. To solve the main task of social psychology.
The third feature of the scientific research, according to the requirements of the logic and methodology of science, is the mandatory verifiability of the hypotheses and the construction of reasonable predictions on this base. Checking the hypotheses, of course, the necessary element of scientific research: without this item, strictly speaking, the study is generally deprived of meaning. And at the same time, in the verification of hypotheses, social psychology is experiencing a number of difficulties associated with its dual status.
As an experimental discipline, social psychology obeys the standards for testing hypotheses that exist for any experimental sciences, where various models of testing hypotheses have long been developed. However, possessing features and humanitarian discipline, social psychology falls into difficulties associated with this characteristic. There is an old controversy inside the philosophy of neosopitism on the matter that general means checking the hypotheses, their verification. Positivism announced a legitimate only one form of verification, namely, a comparison of the judgments of science with the data of direct sensual experience. If such a comparison is impossible, then relatively verified judgment cannot be said at all, it is true or false; It simply cannot in this case is to be judged, it is a "pseudo-seen".
If it is strictly followed by such a principle (i.e., to take the idea of \u200b\u200b"tough" verification), no more or less general judgment of science has no right to exist. Two important investigations taken by positiviste oriented researchers: 1) Science can only use the experiment method (for only under these conditions it is possible to organize a comparison of judgment with the data of direct sensual experience) and 2) Science essentially cannot deal with theoretical knowledge (for Not any theoretical position may be verified). The nomination of this requirement in the philosophy of neosopitism closed the possibilities for the development of any non-experimental science and put restrictions in general to any theoretical knowledge; It has long been criticized. However, in the environment of researchers, experimenters, there are still well-known nihilism with respect to any forms of non-experimental research: the combination within the social psychology of two began gives a well-known space for neglecting the part of the problems that cannot be studied by experimental methods, and where, therefore, the verification of hypotheses in The only form in which it is designed in the non-stop-off version of the logic and the methodology of science.
But in social psychology, there are subject areas such as the area of \u200b\u200bstudy of the psychological characteristics of large groups, mass processes, where it is necessary to use completely different methods, and on the grounds that verification here is impossible here, these areas cannot be excluded from science issues; Here we need to develop other ways to check the hypotheses extended. In this part, social psychology is similar to most of the humanities and, like them, must approve the right to the existence of its deep specificity. In other words, there are also other criteria for scientific relations, except those developed only on the material. exact Sciences. It is impossible to agree with the statement that any inclusion of elements of humanitarian knowledge reduces the "scientific standard" of discipline: crisis phenomena in modern social psychology, on the contrary, show that it is completely losing precisely because of the lack of "humanitarian orientation".
Thus, all three formulated requirements for scientific research are applied in social psychology with famous reservations, which multiplies methodological difficulties.
The problem of the quality of socio-psychological information
Closely related to the previous information of the quality of information in a socio-psychological study. Other this problem can be formulated as a problem for obtaining reliable information. IN general The quality of information problem is solved by providing the principle of representativeness, as well as by checking the method of obtaining data on reliability. In social psychology, these common problems acquire specific content. Whether it is an experimental or correlation study, the information that is collected in it must satisfy certain requirements. Accounting for the specifics of non-experimental studies should not turn into disregard for the quality of information. For social psychology, as for other sciences about a person, two types of quality parameters of information can be allocated: objective and subjective.
Such an assumption follows from the particular discipline that the source of information in it is always a person. It means that it is impossible not to reckon with this fact and you should only provide the highest possible level of reliability and those parameters that are qualified as "subjective". Of course, the answers to the questionnaire or interviews make up "subjective" information, but it can be obtained in the most complete and reliable form, but you can miss many important momentsarising from this "subjectivity". To overcome this kind of errors and a number of requirements are entered regarding the reliability of information.
The reliability of the information is achieved primarily by checking the reliability of the tool by which the data is collected. In each case, at least three reliability characteristics are provided: validity (validity), stability and accuracy (poisons, 1995).
The validity (validity) of the tool is its ability to measure exactly the characteristics of the object, which must be measured. The researcher is a social psychologist, building some scale, must be sure that this scale will measure precisely those properties, such as the installations of the individual, which he intends to measure. There are several ways to verify the tool for validity. You can resort to the help of experts, the circle of persons whose competence in the question studied is generally accepted. Distribution of the characteristics of the test properties obtained using the scale can be compared with those distributions that will give experts (acting without a scale). The coincidence of the results obtained to a certain extent convinces the validity of the scale used. Another way, again based on the comparison is to carry out an additional interview: questions in it must be formulated so that the answers to them also gave an indirect characteristic of the distribution of the property being studied. Coincidence and in this case is considered as a certain evidence of the validity of the scale. As can be seen, all these methods do not give an absolute guarantee of the validity of the instrument used, and this is one of the significant difficulties of socio-psychological research. It is explained by the fact that there are no ready-made methods that have already proven their validity, on the contrary, the researcher is essentially to build a tool every time.
Sustainability of information is its quality to be unequivocal, i.e. Upon receipt of it in different situations, it must be identical. (Sometimes this information is called "confidence"). Methods for checking information on stability are as follows: a) re-measurement; b) measurement of the same property with different observers; c) the so-called "scale splitting", i.e. Check scale in parts. As can be seen, all these rechecking methods are based on a multiple repetition of measurements. All of them must create confidence from the researcher in the fact that it can trust the data obtained.
Finally, the accuracy of the information (in some works coincides with stability - see Saganneco, 1977. P. 29) is measured by how fragments are the metrics, or in other words, how sensitive to the tool is. Thus, it is the degree of approximation of the measurement results to the true meaning of the measured value. Of course, each researcher should strive to obtain the most accurate data. However, the creation of a tool possessing the desired degree of accuracy is a rather difficult case in some cases. It is always necessary to decide which measure of accuracy is permissible. In determining this measure, the researcher includes the entire arsenal of its theoretical ideas about the object.
Violation of one requirement negates the other: let's say, the data may be justified, but unstable (in a social and psychological study, such a situation may arise when the conducted survey turned out to be situational, i.e. the time for it could play a certain role, and in The strength of this arose some additional factor that is not manifested in other situations); Another example when the data may be stable, but are not substantiated (if, suppose, the entire survey turned out to be shifted, then the same picture will be repeated on a long period of time, but the picture will be false!).
Many researchers note that all ways to verify information on reliability are not perfect enough in social psychology. In addition, R. Pento and M. Gorvitz, for example, rightly notice that these ways are working only in the hands of a qualified specialist. In the hands of inexperienced researchers, the test "gives inaccurate results, does not justify mortgaged labor and serves as the basis for insolvent statements" (Panto, Gravitz, 1972. P. 461).
Requirements that are considered elementary in other science studies in social psychology are a number of difficulties in virtue of the specific source of information. What characteristic features of such a source, as a person, complicate the situation? Before becoming a source of information, a person must understand the question, instructions or any other requirement of the researcher. But people have a different ability to understand; Consequently, in this paragraph of the researcher, various surprises are waiting. Further, to become a source of information, a person must have it, but after all, the sample of the subjects is not built in terms of the selection of those who have information, and the rejection of those who do not possess it (for to identify this distinction between the subject, again Conduct a special study). The following circumstance concerns the properties of human memory: if a person understand the question, has information, he still has to remember everything that is necessary for the completeness of information. But the quality of memory is the thing is strictly individual, and there are no guarantees that in the sample the subjects are selected on the principle of more or less than the same memory. There is another important circumstance: a person must give consent to issue information. Its motivation in this case, of course, to a certain extent can be stimulated by the instructions, the conditions for conducting the study, but all these circumstances do not guarantee the consent of the subjects under cooperation with the researcher.
Therefore, along with ensuring the reliability of data, the question of representativeness is especially acute in social psychology. The statement of this issue itself is associated with the dual character of social psychology. If it were about it only as an experimental discipline, the problem would be relatively simple: the representativeness in the experiment is quite strictly determined and is checked. But in the case of a correlation research, a social psychologist is faced with a completely new problem for him, especially if we are talking about mass processes. This new problem is to build a sample. The conditions for solving this task are similar to the conditions for solving it in sociology.
Naturally, in social psychology, the same norms of sampling are applied as described in statistics and how they are used everywhere. The researcher in social psychology in principle is given, for example, such types of sampling, such as random, typical (or stratified), sample by quota, etc.
But in what way to apply one or another type - this question is always creative: it is necessary or not in each individual case to share a pre-general set of classes, but only then make a random sample from them, this task is to decide this task again in relation to this study, To this object, to these characteristics of the general population. The allocation of classes (types) inside the general population is strictly dictated by the meaningful description of the object of the study: when it comes to behavior and activity of people of people, it is very important to accurately determine which parameters of behavior types can be highlighted here.
The most difficult problem, however, it turns out the problem of representativeness arising in a specific form and in a socio-psychological experiment. But, before highlighting it, it is necessary to give the overall characteristics of those methods that are used in socio-psychological studies.
The overall characteristics of the methods of socio-psychological research. The entire set of methods can be divided into two large groups: research methods and methods of impact. The latter refer to the specific area of \u200b\u200bsocial psychology, to the so-called "impact psychology" and will be considered in the chapter on practical applications of social psychology. Here are analyzed by research methods in which, in turn, the methods of collecting information and methods of its processing are distinguished. There are many other classifications of social and psychological research methods. For example, three groups of methods are distinguished: 1) the methods of empirical research, 2) modeling methods, 3) management-educational methods (Svenzitsky, 1977. P. 8). At the same time, all those about which will be discussed and in this chapter will go to the first group. As for the second and third groups of methods designated in the given classification, they do not have any special specificity in social psychology (which recognize at least relative to modeling, and the authors of the classification). Data processing methods are often simply not highlighted in a special block, since most of them are also not specific to socio-psychological research, but use some general scientific techniques. This can be agreed, but nevertheless, for a complete idea of \u200b\u200ball methodological armaments, social psychology should be mentioned about the existence of this second group of methods.
Among the methods of collecting information, it is necessary to name: observation, study of documents (in particular, content analysis), various types of surveys (questionnaires, interviews), various types of tests (including the most common sociometric test), finally, experiment (as laboratory, so And natural). Doctor is advisable in the general course, and even at its beginning it is in detail each of these methods. It is more logical to indicate cases of their use in the presentation of certain meaningful problems of social psychology, then such a statement will be much clearer. Now it is necessary to give only the most overall characteristics of each method and, most importantly, to designate those moments where they are found in their application. In most cases, these methods are identical to those used in sociology (poisons, 1995).
Observation is the "old" method of social psychology and is sometimes contrasting the experiment as an imperfect method. At the same time, not all the possibilities of the observation method today are exhausted in social psychology: in case of obtaining data on open behavior, the actions of individuals the observation method plays a very important role. the main problemIt comes to the use of the observation method, it is how to fix some specific characteristics classes so that the "reading" of the observation protocol was clear to another researcher, could be interpreted in terms of hypothesis. In ordinary language, this question can be formulated as: what to watch? How to fix the observed?
There are many different proposals for organizing the so-called monitoring of observation data, i.e. Selects in advance of some classes, for example, personal interactions in the group, followed by fixing the number, the frequency of the manifestation of these interactions, etc. Below will be described in detail by one of these attempts taken by R. Beils. The question of the allocation of classes of observed phenomena is essentially the question of the observation units, as is known, and in other sections of psychology. In a social and psychological study, it can be resolved only separately for each specific case, subject to the research subject. Another fundamental question is a time interval that can be considered sufficient to fix any units of observation. Although there are many different procedures in order to ensure fixation of these units at certain intervals and their coding, the question cannot be fully solved. As can be seen, the observation method is not as primitive, as it seems at first glance, and undoubtedly can successfully be applied in a number of socio-psychological research.
Studying documents is of great importance, since with the help of this method, it is possible to analyze the products of human activity. Sometimes it is unreasonably opposed by the method of studying documents, for example, the method of polls as the "objective" method "subjective" method. It is unlikely that this opposition is appropriate: after all, in the documents, the source of information is a person, therefore, all the problems that arise are in force. Of course, the measure "subjectivity" of the document is different depending on whether the official or purely personal document is being studied, but it is always present. A special problem arises here and due to the fact that the document interprets is a researcher, i.e. Also, a person with his own, inherent individual psychological characteristics. Crucial role When studying the document plays, for example, the ability to understand the text. The problem of understanding is a special problem of psychology, but here it turns on in the process of applying the technique, therefore, can not be taken into account.
To overcome this new type of "subjectivity" (interpretation of the document by the researcher), a special reception is introduced, called "Content Analysis" (literally: "Content Analysis") (Bogomolova, Stefenenko, 1992). This is a special, more or less formalized method of analyzing the document when special "units" stand out in the text, and then the frequency of their use is calculated. The content analysis method makes sense to apply only in cases where the researcher is dealing with a large array of information, so it has to analyze numerous texts. Almost this method is applied in social psychology in research in the field of mass communications. A number of difficulties are not removed, of course, and the use of the content analysis technique; For example, the process of selection of text units, naturally, largely depends on the theoretical position of the researcher, and on his personal competence, the level of its creative possibilities. As with the use of many other methods in social psychology, here the causes of success or failure depend on the art of the researcher.
Polls - a very common reception in social and psychological studies, causing perhaps the greatest number of complaints. Usually, critical comments are expressed in bewilderment on how it is possible to trust the information obtained from the immediate responses of the subjects, essentially from their self-reports. The accusations of this kind are based or on a misunderstanding, or on absolute incompetence in the field of surveys. Among the numerous types of polls, the greatest distribution is obtained in social psychology interviews and questionnaires (especially in research of large groups).
The main methodological problems that arise when applying these methods are concluded in the design of the questionnaire. The first requirement here is the logic of building it, providing that the questionnaire deliver exactly the information that is required on the hypothesis, and that this information is as reliable as possible. There are numerous rules for building each issue, their location in a certain order, grouping into separate blocks, etc. The literature describes in detail (lectures on the method of specific social research. M., 1972) Typical errors arising from the illiterate design of the questionnaire. All this is to ensure that the questionnaire does not require the answers "in the forehead" so that its content is clear to the author only under the condition of a certain intent, which is not set out in the questionnaire, but in the research program, in the hypothesis constructed by the researcher. The design of the questionnaire is the most difficult job, it cannot be fulfilled hastily, because every bad questionnaire serves only compromising the method.
A separate big problem is an interview, since the interaction of the interviewer and the respondent takes place here (that is, a person who answers the questions), which in itself is some socio-psychological phenomenon. During the interview, all the ways described in social psychology are manifested by one person on another, all laws of perception of each other, the norms of their communication. Each of these characteristics may affect the quality of information, can bring another kind of "subjectivity", which was concluded above. But you need to keep in mind
Features of the survey method as one of the most common methods for obtaining information about the subjects. His varieties and rules for compiling issues. The purpose of using the survey method. Essence and purpose of personal tests, interview methods.
Consideration of the psychological research algorithm: setting the problem, hypothesis, planning, choice of methods (observation, experiment, modeling), data collection and their processing, interpretation of results and their inclusion in the knowledge system.
Methodological approaches to the construction and explanation of the history of psychology: the prospects for meaningful synthesis.
The purpose of the experiment is to identify natural bonds, i.e. Sustainable bonds between phenomena and processes. The target is distinguished by an experiment from other research methods that perform the function of collecting empirical data. Experiment as a research method.
Observation method. Survey method. Laboratory experiment. Methods for building ordinary and complex theoretical objects. Transforming or constructive methods of labor psychology.
The study of the set of methodological principles of psychology as the basis for the construction of any psychological research. Psychology method as a way to know internal mental phenomena through analysis external factors. Levels of methodological analysis.
Mathematical statistics, construction of probabilistic models, systematization and analysis of empirical data obtained in the study of mass phenomena. The concepts of "validity" and "reliability". Description of the group of test indicators in the central trend measures.
Research is the type of human cognitive activity. Elemental and scientific research. Organizational and procedural stages of psychological research. The form of scientific display of the problem situation. Objectives and objectives of the study. Research hypothesis.
The formation of ideological and methodological reflection, adequate modern state and the trends in the development of psychological theory and practice. Stages of psychological research. Statement of scientific problem. Subtle comparative analysis.
One of the sections of the methodology of historical and psychological research is the source studies of the history of psychology. Being a science, reconstructive historical past, history Psychology is based on the analysis and interpretation of historical sources.
The concept and types of experiment, its organization. Ethical problems when conducting it. Using the test for an objective assessment of individual psychological differences. The essence of human studies in a social context through high-quality methods.
Empirical methods in psychology. About methodology. Classification of methods of psychological research. Non-experimental psychological methods. Observation. Conversation. Purposeful poll interview. "Archive Method": biographical, continent-analysis.
Consideration of methods of psychological research, carrying out their classification. Grouping of psychological research methods: non-experimental psychological methods; diagnostic methods; experimental methods; Forming methods.
The concept and general logic of psychological research, development of the concept and its planning. Determining variables, features, parameters of the phenomena, selection of methods and techniques, determining the size of the sample. Interpretation and synthesis of results.
Methods used in scientific psychology.
The main terms of the concept of content analysis as a quantitative analysis of texts and text arrays in order to follow the meaningful interpretation of the identified numerical patterns. Goal this method In a socio-psychological study.
The main sources of artifact conclusions, evaluation of the validity of the experiment and adequacy of generalizations. The conclusion on the reinforcement of the theory of experimental facts. Problems of the emergence of new hypotheses and incorrect generalizations. The reductionism of artifact conclusions.
Collection of information about the human psyche. Modern psychological diagnosis. The essence of differential psychometry. Various reliability assessment methods. Test ability to protect information from motivational distortion. Recovery to ensure reliability.
The main stages and methods of research, the possibility of their use in practical activity. Analysis of psychological research methods shows that they are not isolated, but play a role component parts One whole psychodiagnosis.
Before more specifically, talking about methodological problems in social psychologyIt is necessary to clarify what is generally understood under the methodology. In modern scientific knowledge, the term "methodology" is indicated by three different levels of scientific approach.
1 . General methodology - Some common philosophical approach, the general way of knowledge taken by the researcher. The overall methodology formulates some of the most general principles that - consciously or unconsciously apply in studies. So, for social psychology, a certain understanding of the issue of the relationship between society and the individual, human nature is necessary. As a general methodology, various researchers take various philosophical systems.
2. Private (or special) Methodology- A combination of the methodological principles used in this area of \u200b\u200bknowledge. Private methodology is the implementation of philosophical principles in relation to the specific object of the study. This is also a certain way of knowledge, but the method adapted for a narrower sphere of knowledge. In social psychology, due to its dual origin, a special methodology is formed under the condition of adaptation of the methodological principles of both psychology and sociology. As an example, it is possible to consider the principle of activity as it is used in domestic social psychology. In the broadest sense of the word, the philosophical principle of activity means recognizing activities by the essence of the method of human being. In sociology, activities are interpreted as a method for the existence of human I society, as the realization of social laws, which manifest itself not otherwise through the activities of people. Activities and produces, and changes specific conditions for the existence of individuals, as well as society as a whole. It is through activity that the personality is included in the system of social relations. In psychology, activities are considered as a specific type of human activity, as some subject-object attitude, in which a person is a subject - in a certain way refers to the object, mastering them. The category of activity, thus, "opens now in its actual completeness as a comprehensive band - and a pole object, and a pole subject" (Leontyev, 1975. P. 159). In the course of activity, a person implements its interest, transforming the subject matter. At the same time, a person satisfies the needs, and new needs are born. Thus, the activity appears as a process during which the human personality itself develops.
Social psychology, taking the principle of activity as one of the principles of its special methodology, adapts it to the main subject of his research - a group. Therefore, in social psychology, the most important content of the principle of activity is disclosed in the following provisions:
a) understanding of activity as a joint social activity of people
b) understanding as a subject of activity not only individual, but also groups, societies
c), subject to the understanding of the group as a subject of activity, it is overwhelmed with the opportunity to learn all the relevant attributes of the subject of activity - the needs, motives, the objectives of the group, etc.;
d) as an output follows the inadmissibility of information of any study only to the empirical description, to a simple statement of acts of individual activity outside the specific "social context 3. Methodology - as a combination of specific methodological methods of research,what more often in Russian is indicated by the term "technique". However, in a number of other languages, for example, in English, there is no term, and the methodology is completely understood by the technique, and sometimes only it is. Specific techniques (or methods, if the word "method" is understood in this narrow sense), used in socio-psychological studies are not absolutely independent of more general methodological considerations.
The essence of the introduction of the proposed "hierarchy" of various methodological levels is precisely in order to avoid in social psychology, all methodological problems only on the third value of this concept. the main idea It is that, whatever empirical or experimental techniques are applied, they cannot be considered isolated from a common and special methodology. This means that any methodological method - a questionnaire, test, sociometry - always applied in a specific "methodological key", i.e. Subject to the decision of a number of more fundamental research issues. The essence of the case is also the fact that philosophical principles cannot be applied in the studies of each science directly: they are refracted through the principles of a special methodology. As for specific methodological techniques, they can be relatively independent of the methodological principles and apply almost in the same form within the framework of various methodological orientation, although the general set of techniques, the general strategy of their application, of course, carry a methodological load.
Paradigm - the original conceptual scheme, the model of problem formulation and their decisions that dominate a certain historical period in society. Changing paradigms is a scientific revolution.
The basis of the selection of orientation in social psychology is 2 criteria:
1) solving the issue of human nature;
2) predominant issues.
The development of social psychology in the twentieth century was due to the urgent needs of human society, the need to use science in solving the tasks in its various fields: industry, business, management, politics, social sphere. It can be stated that the social psychology of the twentieth century. It does not represent a single holistic knowledge system, it developed as paradigm. Its feature is the absence of a single methodological approach to the subject of its research in the presence of many theories of the "middle" level (t. N. Private methodology) - explaining a relatively small circle social phenomena.
Getting Started by the consideration of orientations in paradigms in social psychology, focus their key ideas:
In psychoanalysis: man is a field of battle between animal nature and society.
For behavior: behavior determined by immediate responses to incentives - focus on the social situation.
For interactionism - recognition of social determination with the clarification of how the role of a person in society determines the values \u200b\u200bsignificant for it.
For cognitiveness (person - a thinking creature) - the main focus of research is the development of a meaningful and organized view of a person to the world.
Beheviorism (non-versioned)
One of the most influential directions positioning as strictly scientific.
The central idea of \u200b\u200bthis direction is the idea of \u200b\u200breinforcement (in the variants of the classic (by Pavlov, the relationship between the stimulus and the reaction) or the operated content (on the skinner, the relationship between the behavioral reaction and its reinforcement affecting the subsequent behavior) is investigated.
Principles:
Absolitization of the standard of scientific research that has established in the natural sciences.
Verification and operationalism.
Naturalism (ignoring the specifics of human behavior)
A negative attitude towards the theory and absolutization of an empirical description based on fixation directly observed.
Refusal to the value approach, the desire to eliminate the value attitudes in relation to the objects studied as preventing the achievement of truth and in general, scientific relations.
Principal rupture of connections with philosophy.
Scheme 3.1. The main paradigms and the theories of social psychology
Before talking about methodological problems in social psychology, we clarify what they understand under the methodology. In modern scientific knowledge, three of its levels were:
1. General methodology - Some common philosophical approach taken by the researcher. So for social psychology, the philosophical installation on the problem of the relationship between society and individuals, nature and society is important.
2. Private (or special) Methodology - A combination of the methodological principles used in this area of \u200b\u200bknowledge. Private methodology is the implementation of philosophical principles in relation to the specific object of the study. So the activity approach is applied to domestic social psychology. Through the activity of the personality is included in the system of social relations, mental activities Considered as a specific type of social activity. In the course of activity, a person implements his internal potency, satisfies the needs, new needs are born in it. In social psychology, the content of the activity is disclosed in the following points: a) an understanding of activities as a joint social activity of people, during which special connections arise, for example, communicative, b) understanding as a subject of activity not only individual, but also groups, society as a whole, That is, the introduction of the idea of \u200b\u200ba collective subject of activity, c), subject to the understanding of the Group as a subject of activity, it is overwhelmed with the possibility of investigating all attributes of the needs, motives, goals, etc., d) as an output follows the inadmissibility of research information only to the empirical description, to A simple statement of individual acts outside a certain "social context" is a given system of public relations.
3. Methodology As a combination of specific methodological methods of research, which in Russian is more often used as a technique.
Before switching to the analysis of specific socio-psychological methods, we draw attention to some problems of a socio-psychological study. One of the problems is the reliability of information. In general, the quality of the quality of information is solved by providing the principle of representativeness, as well as by checking the method of obtaining data on reliability. The reliability of information is achieved by checking the reliability of the tool by which the information is collected, especially since the subject of this process is a person. In each case, at least three reliability characteristics are provided: rationalth (validity), stability and accuracy.
Rationalth (validity) - This is his ability to measure exactly the characteristics of the object, which should be measured. There are several ways to verify the tool for validity. It can be resorted to the help of experts whose competence in this issue is generally accepted, or to carry out additional interviews in order to compare the results obtained.
Sustainability of information - This is its quality to be unequivocal, that is, in different situations, it must be identical. There are a number of methods for verifying the identity of information: a) re-measurement, b) measurement of the same property with different observers, c) "splitting of the scale", that is, the scales check in parts. All methods are based on multiple repetition.
Accuracy of information (In some sources, it is identified with stability) is measured by how sensitive tool is.
It is believed that all ways to verify information on reliability are not perfect enough in social psychology and they work only in the hands of qualified specialists. One of the complex problems in social psychology is the problem of source of information. Before becoming a source of information, a person must understand the question, instructions or other Researcher Requirements. We have varying degrees of understanding, the memory of a person is a complex tool: we forget a lot, on the question that is examined not all the same competent, etc.
From here, very acute in social psychology is a problem representativeness. If we were talking about social psychology as an experimental discipline, then this problem would be easier: Representativeness in the experiment is strictly determined and is checked. But in the case of a correlation (based on a large data array) study, the researcher faces the problem of building a sample. In social psychology, both in statistics are used, such sampling methods such as random, typical, quota sample, etc., but here there are problems.
In social psychology, methods are divided into two groups: research methods and methods of impact.
Research methods In turn, divided into methods for collecting information and methods for its processing. There are other approaches to the classification of social and psychological research methods: a) the methods of empirical research, b) modeling methods, c) management-educational methods.
Methods for collecting information. Among them can be called: observation, study of documents, various types of surveys (interviews, interviews), various types of tests (including the most common sociometric test), experiment (both laboratory and natural).
Observation One of the "old" methods of social psychology. There are many proposals for organizing the structuring of observation data, that is, the allocation of in advance classes, for example, personal interactions in the group, followed by fixing the number, the frequency of their interaction, etc. The question of allocating classes of observed phenomena is the question of observation units. In social psychology, he is solved for each specific case. Another fundamental question is a question of the time interval, which is considered sufficient to fix any observation units.
Studying documents. With this method, the information obtained information is analyzed. A special problem arises in the fact that the information processes a person with the psychological characteristics inherent in it, the abilities for understanding the text. To overcome this "subjectivity" in the study, a receipt applied "Content analysis" (Literally: "Content Analysis"). This is a special method of analyzing a document when special "units" stand out in the text, and then often consistently calculated. This method makes sense to use if there is a large array of information. In social psychology, it is mainly used in the study of the problems of mass communications. But this method does not remove all the difficulties of sociole-psychological research.
Interview- A fairly common technique in social psychology and causes a lot of critical comments. Among the numerous types of polls are the most common in social psychology are interviews and questionnaires. The main problem here is to construct a questionnaire. The first design requirement is the logic of construction. The questionnaire must deliver the information that the hypothesis requires and the information must be extremely reliable.
The implementation of the recruitment process between the interviewer and the respondent (a person responsible for the questions) is quite difficult, all parties are manifested here between personalities. This is one of the most difficult methods in social psychology.
Tests Used in all areas of psychology, in social psychology they are personally character, less often group. This is a special kind of test, during which the subject responds to the developed issues, or performs certain tasks. Questions in tests are indirectly, and they differ from questions in an interview. Using the "key", the data obtained are processed. The most important thing in testing is the question of the compliance of the results obtained with the personal characteristics of the subject. There is an illusion about absolute adequacy, the coincidence of the test results and the characteristics of the real person. This is not so. It is necessary to compare the results with the results that were obtained from the use of other methods. In addition, the use of tests is local and they, as a rule, relate to one area of \u200b\u200bsocial psychology - personal problems.
Experiment It is one of the main methods of social psychology. Two groups of the experiment of a socio-psychological study differ: laboratory and natural. For them there are several rules: an arbitrary introduction by an experimenter of independent variables and control over them, as well as as amended by dependent variables; Allocation of the control I. experimental groupsso that measurement results can be comparable to some standard.
The experiment differs from observation in that it is possible to actively interfere with the situation by the researcher, which carries out systematic manipulation by one or more variables (factors). The experimentally supplied experiment allows you to test hypotheses about causal relations, not limited to the establishment of communication (correlation) between variables. Traditional and factor plans are distinguished. With traditional planning, only one independent variable changes, and in factant - several. If the area of \u200b\u200bthe study has been little studied and the hypothesis system is absent, in this case, they are talking about a pilotal (sample search) study, in which the results can help clarify the direction of further research.
The type of studies of social phenomena by studying them in normal, natural conditions is called a field study. An important condition for conducting a field study is to respect such presence of the researcher when it does not affect the course of the experiment, does not distort the natural course of the observed process.
Output. Social psychology is an independent industry of psychology, which studies the patterns of behavior and activities of people, their existence in groups, as well as psychological characteristics Group themselves. As a science, social psychology includes sections: the patterns of communication of people, the psychology of the individual, the problems of socialization, etc.
Literature
1. Andreeva G.M. Social Psychology. - M., 1998.
2. Bogomolova N.N., Stephenko T.G. Content analysis. - M., 1992.
4. Essays on the history of theoretical sociology XIX- XX centuries. - M., 1994.
5. Rudensky E.V. Social Psychology. - M., Novosibirsk. 1997.
6. Smelzer N. Sociology. - M., 1994.
7. Shibutani T. Social Psychology. - Rostov-on-Don. 1998.
8. Yadov V.A. Sociological research. Methodology, program, methods. - Samara. 1995.
Topic 2.
Similar information.
Literature
Andreeva G.M., Bogomolova N.N., Petrovskaya L.A. Modern social psychology in the West (theoretical orientations). M., 1978.
Velichkovsky B.M. Modern cognitive psychology. M., 1982.
Ghost X., Forverg M. Introduction to Marxist social psychology. Per. with it. M., 1972.
Donzov A.I., Emelyanova TP The concept of social ideas in modern French psychology. M., 1987.
Essays on the history of theoretical sociology of the XIX - beginning. XX centuries. M., 1994.
Parygin B. Ya. Basics of socio-psychological theory. M., 1971.
Petrovskaya L.A. Theoretical and methodological foundations of socio-psychological training. M., 1982.
Smelzer N. Sociology. Per. from English M.: Phoenix, 1994.
Modern overseas social psychology. Texts, M., 1983.
Tard of the law of imitation. St. Petersburg., 1892.
Trowers VP Cognitive processes in social psychology. L., 1983.
Shibutani T. Social Psychology. Per. from English M., 1961.
Shikhev L.N. Modern social psychology of the United States. M., 1979.
Shikhev P.N. Social psychology in Western European countries. M., 1985.
Yaroshevsky MG History of psychology. M., 1985. Yaroshevsky M.G. Psychology in the XX century. M., 1974.
Methodological problems of socio-psychological research
The value of methodological problems in modern science. Problems of research methodology are relevant to any science, especially in a modern era, when, in connection with the scientific and technical revolution, the tasks that have to be addressed by science are extremely complicated, and the importance of the funds with which it uses. In addition, new forms of science organization arise in society, large research teams are being created, within which scientists need to develop a unified research strategy, a single system of adopted methods. In connection with the development of mathematics and cybernetics, a special class of so-called interdisciplinary methods used as "through" in various disciplines are born. All this requires the researchers to continue to control their informative actions, analyze the funds themselves enjoyed in research practice. Proof of the fact that the interest of modern science to the problems of the methodology is especially great, is the fact of the occurrence of a special branch of knowledge within philosophy, namely the logic and methodology of scientific research. Characteristic, however, should be recognized that not only philosophers, specialists in the field of this discipline, but also representatives of specific sciences themselves are increasingly begin to analyze the analysis of methodological problems. There is a special type of methodological reflection - intra-scientific methodological reflection.
All of the above applies to social psychology (methodology and methodology of social psychology, 1979), and also their special reasons come into effect here, the first of which is the relative youth of social psychology as science, the complexity of its origin and status, which cause the need to be guided in research Practice at the same time methodological principles of two different scientific disciplines: psychology and sociology. This creates a specific task for social psychology - a kind of correlation, "imposition" of each other of two rows of patterns: the social development and development of the human psyche. The situation is also aggravated by the lack of its own conceptual apparatus, which generates the need for two types of various terminological dictionaries.
Before more specifically, talking about methodological problems in social psychology, it is necessary to clarify what is generally understood under the methodology. In modern scientific knowledge, the term "methodology" is indicated by three different levels of scientific approach.
1. General methodology - some common philosophical approach, the general way of knowledge taken by the researcher. The overall methodology formulates some of the most general principles that - consciously or unconsciously apply in studies. So, for social psychology, a certain understanding of the issue of the relationship between society and the individual, human nature is necessary. As a general methodology, various researchers take various philosophical systems.
2. Private (or special) Methodology - a set of methodological principles used in this area of \u200b\u200bknowledge. Private methodology is the implementation of philosophical principles in relation to the specific object of the study. This is also a certain way of knowledge, but the method adapted for a narrower sphere of knowledge. In social psychology, due to its dual origin, a special methodology is formed under the condition of adaptation of the methodological principles of both psychology and sociology. As an example, it is possible to consider the principle of activity as it is used in domestic social psychology. In the broadest sense of the word, the philosophical principle of activity means recognizing activities by the essence of the method of human being. In sociology, activities are interpreted as a way of the existence of human society, as the implementation of social laws, which manifest themselves not otherwise through the activities of people. Activities and produces, and changes specific conditions for the existence of individuals, as well as society as a whole. It is through activity that the personality is included in the system of social relations. In psychology, activities are considered as a specific type of human activity, as some subject-object attitude, in which a person is a subject - in a certain way refers to the object, mastering them. The category of activity, thus, "opens now in its actual completeness as a comprehensive band - and a pole object, and a pole subject" (Leontyev, 1975. P. 159). In the course of activity, a person implements its interest, transforming the subject matter. At the same time, a person satisfies the needs, and new needs are born. Thus, the activity appears as a process during which the human personality itself develops.
Social psychology, taking the principle of activity as one of the principles of its special methodology, adapts it to the main subject of his research - a group. Therefore, in social psychology, the most important content of the principle of activity is disclosed in the following provisions: a) understanding of activity as joint social activities of people, during which there are very special connections, such as communicative; b) understanding as a subject of activity not only individual, but also groups, societies, i.e. Introduction of the idea of \u200b\u200ba collective subject of activity; This allows you to explore real social groups as certain systems of activity; c), subject to the understanding of the group as a subject of activity, it is overwhelmed with the opportunity to learn all the relevant attributes of the subject of activity - the needs, motives, the objectives of the group, etc.; d) As an output, an inadmissibility of any study is imposed only to the empirical description, to a simple statement of acts of individual activity outside a certain "social context" - this system of public relations. The principle of activity is transformed, thus, in a kind of standard of socio-psychological research, determines the research strategy. And this is the function of a special methodology.
3. Methodology - as a combination of specific methodological methods of research, which is more often indicated by the term "technique". However, in a number of other languages, for example, in English, there is no term, and the methodology is completely understood by the technique, and sometimes only it is. Specific techniques (or methods, if the word "method" is understood in this narrow sense), used in socio-psychological studies are not absolutely independent of more general methodological considerations.
The essence of the introduction of the proposed "hierarchy" of various methodological levels is precisely in order not to admit information in social psychology to all methodological problems only to the third value of this concept. The main idea is that, whatever empirical or experimental techniques are applied, they cannot be considered isolated from a common and special methodology. This means that any methodological method - a questionnaire, test, sociometry - always applied in a specific "methodological key", i.e. Subject to the decision of a number of more fundamental research issues. The essence of the case is also the fact that philosophical principles cannot be applied in the studies of each science directly: they are refracted through the principles of a special methodology. As for specific methodological techniques, they can be relatively independent of the methodological principles and apply almost in the same form within the framework of various methodological orientation, although the general set of techniques, the general strategy of their application, of course, carry a methodological load.
Now it is necessary to clarify what is understood in the modern logic and the science methodology under the expression "scientific research". It should be remembered that the social psychology of the XX century. Particularly insisted on the fact that her difference from the tradition of the XIX century. It is precisely in support for "research", and not on the "speculation". Contrasting the research of speculation is legal, but provided that it is observed exactly, and not replacing the opposition "Study - theory". Therefore, revealing the features of a modern scientific study, it is important to correctly set these questions. The following features of scientific research are usually called:
it deals with specific objects, in other words, with a foreseeable amount of empirical data that can be collected by the tools available at the disposal of science;
it solves the differentiated empirical (identification of the facts, the development of measurement methods), logical (elimination of some provisions from others, the establishment of the relationship between them) and theoretical (search for the causes, identification of principles, formulating hypotheses or laws) cognitive tasks;
it is characterized by a clear distinction between established facts and hypothetical assumptions, since the procedures for testing hypotheses are worked out;
his goal is not only an explanation of the facts and processes, but also the prediction of them. If you briefly summarize these distinctive features, they can be reduced to three: obtaining carefully collected data, combining them into principles, check and use these principles in predictions.
Specificity of scientific research in social psychology. Each of the science studies mentioned here has specifics in social psychology. The scientific research model offered in the logic and methodology of science is usually built on the examples of the exact sciences and above all physics. As a result, many of the features are essential for other scientific disciplines turn out to be lost. In particular, for social psychology, a number of specific problems relating to each of these features should be stated.
The first problem that gets here is the problem of empirical data. Data in social psychology can be either data on the open behavior of individuals in groups, or data characterizing some characteristics of the consciousness of these individuals, or the psychological characteristics of the group itself. On the issue of "allowing" the data of these two species in the study, in social psychology there is a fierce discussion: in various theoretical orientations, this issue is solved in different ways.
Thus, in behavior social psychology for data, only the facts of open behavior are accepted; Cognitiveness, on the contrary, focuses on the data characterizing only the cognitive world of the individual: images, values, installations, etc. In other traditions, data of socio-psychological research can be represented by both types. But this immediately puts forward certain requirements and to the methods of their collection. A source of any data in social psychology is a person, but one number of methods is suitable for registration of acts of its behavior, the other - to fix its cognitive entities. Recognition as full data and other genera requires recognition and diversity of methods.
The data problem also has the other side: what should be their volume? Accordingly, what amount of data is present in a social and psychological study, all of them are divided into two types: a) correlations based on a large data array, among which various kinds of correlation are installed, and b) experimental, where the researcher works with a limited amount of data and where the meaning of the work consists in randomly introduced by a researcher of new variables and controls. Again, in this issue, the theoretical position of the researcher: what objects, from his point of view, are generally "admissible" in social psychology (suppose whether large groups are included in the number of objects or not).
The second trait of scientific research is the integration of data into principles, the construction of hypotheses and theories. And this feature is quite specifically revealed in social psychology. Theories in the understanding, in what about them are stated in the logic and methodology of science, it does not possess. As in other humanitarian sciences, theories in social psychology do not wear a deductive nature, i.e. Do not constitute such a well-organized connection between the provisions so that you can with one to bring any other. In social and psychological theories there is no rigor of such order, as, for example, in the theories of mathematics or logic. In such conditions, an important place in the study begins to occupy a hypothesis. The hypothesis "presents" in a socio-psychological study theoretical form of knowledge. Hence the most important link of socio-psychological research - the formation of hypotheses. One of the reasons for the weakness of many studies is the absence of hypotheses or illiterate their construction.
On the other hand, no matter how difficult it was to build theories in social psychology, more or less complete knowledge and here cannot develop in the absence of theoretical generalizations. Therefore, even a good hypothesis in the study is not a sufficient level of inclusion of theory into research practice: the level of generalizations obtained on the basis of testing the hypothesis and on the basis of its confirmation, there is still the most primary form of "organization" of data. The next step is to transition to higher-level generalizations, to generalizations theoretical. Of course, it would be optimal to build some common theory, explaining all the problems of social behavior and the activities of the individual in the group, the mechanisms of the dynamics of the groups themselves, etc. But the development of so-called special theories is more affordable (in a certain sense, they can be called the theories of medium rank), which cover the narrower sphere - some separate parties of socio-psychological reality. These theories can be used, for example, to attribute the theory of group cohesion, the theory of group decision-making, theory of leadership, etc. Just as the most important task of social psychology is the task of developing a special methodology, the creation of special theories is also extremely relevant here. Without this, the accumulated empirical material can not be values \u200b\u200bfor the construction of forecasts of social behavior, i.e. To solve the main task of social psychology.
The third feature of the scientific research, according to the requirements of the logic and methodology of science, is the mandatory verifiability of the hypotheses and the construction of reasonable predictions on this base. Checking the hypotheses, of course, the necessary element of scientific research: without this item, strictly speaking, the study is generally deprived of meaning. And at the same time, in the verification of hypotheses, social psychology is experiencing a number of difficulties associated with its dual status.
As an experimental discipline, social psychology obeys the standards for testing hypotheses that exist for any experimental sciences, where various models of testing hypotheses have long been developed. However, possessing features and humanitarian discipline, social psychology falls into difficulties associated with this characteristic. There is an old controversy inside the philosophy of neosopitism on the matter that general means checking the hypotheses, their verification. Positivism announced a legitimate only one form of verification, namely, a comparison of the judgments of science with the data of direct sensual experience. If such a comparison is impossible, then relatively verified judgment cannot be said at all, it is true or false; It simply cannot in this case is to be judged, it is a "pseudo-custody."
If it is strictly followed by such a principle (i.e., take the idea of \u200b\u200b"tough" verification), no more or less general judgment of science has no right to exist. Two important investigations taken by positiviste oriented researchers: 1) Science can only use the experiment method (for only under these conditions it is possible to organize a comparison of judgment with the data of direct sensual experience) and 2) Science essentially cannot deal with theoretical knowledge (for Not any theoretical position may be verified). The nomination of this requirement in the philosophy of neosopitism closed the possibilities for the development of any non-experimental science and put restrictions in general to any theoretical knowledge; It has long been criticized. However, in the environment of researchers, experimenters, there are still well-known nihilism with respect to any forms of non-experimental research: the combination within the social psychology of two began gives a well-known space for neglecting the part of the problems that cannot be studied by experimental methods, and where, therefore, the verification of hypotheses in Toy single formin which it is designed in an insompector version of the logic and science methodology.
But in social psychology, there are subject areas such as the area of \u200b\u200bstudy of the psychological characteristics of large groups, mass processes, where it is necessary to use completely different methods, and on the grounds that verification is impossible here, these areas cannot be excluded from science issues; Here we need to develop other ways to check the hypotheses extended. In this part, social psychology is similar to most of the humanities and, like them, must approve the right to the existence of its deep specificity. In other words, there are also other criteria for scientific relations, except those developed only on the material of the exact sciences. It is impossible to agree with the statement that any inclusion of elements of humanitarian knowledge reduces the "scientific standard" of discipline: crisis phenomena in modern social psychology, on the contrary, show that it is completely losing precisely because of the lack of "humanitarian orientation".
Thus, all three formulated requirements for scientific research are applied in social psychology with famous reservations, which multiplies methodological difficulties.
The problem of the quality of socio-psychological information. Closely related to the previous information of the quality of information in a socio-psychological study. Other this problem can be formulated as a problem for obtaining reliable information. In general, the quality of the quality of information is solved by providing the principle of representativeness, as well as by checking the method of obtaining data on reliability. In social psychology, these common problems acquire specific content. Whether it is an experimental or correlation study, the information that is collected in it must satisfy certain requirements. Accounting for the specifics of non-experimental studies should not turn into disregard for the quality of information. For social psychology, as for other sciences about a person, two types of quality parameters of information can be allocated: objective and subjective.
Such an assumption follows from the particular discipline that the source of information in it is always a person. It means that it is impossible not to reckon with this fact and it should be only possible to ensure the maximum possible level of reliability and those parameters that are qualified as "subjective". Of course, the answers to the questions of the questionnaire or interview make up the "subjective" information, but it can be obtained in the maximum full and reliable form, and you can miss many important points that arise from this "subjectivity". To overcome this kind of errors and a number of requirements are entered regarding the reliability of information.
The reliability of the information is achieved primarily by checking the reliability of the tool by which the data is collected. In each case, at least three reliability characteristics are provided: validity (validity), stability and accuracy (poisons, 1995).
The validity (validity) of the tool is its ability to measure exactly the characteristics of the object, which must be measured. The researcher is a social psychologist, building some scale, must be sure that this scale will measure precisely those properties, such as the installations of the individual, which he intends to measure. There are several ways to verify the tool for validity. You can resort to the help of experts, the circle of persons whose competence in the question studied is generally accepted. Distribution of the characteristics of the test properties obtained using the scale can be compared with those distributions that will give experts (acting without a scale). The coincidence of the results obtained to a certain extent convinces the validity of the scale used. Another way, again based on the comparison is to carry out an additional interview: questions in it must be formulated so that the answers to them also gave an indirect characteristic of the distribution of the property being studied. Coincidence and in this case is considered as a certain evidence of the validity of the scale. As can be seen, all these methods do not give an absolute guarantee of the validity of the instrument used, and this is one of the significant difficulties of socio-psychological research. It is explained by the fact that there are no ready-made methods that have already proven their validity, on the contrary, the researcher is essentially to build a tool every time.
Sustainability of information is its quality to be unequivocal, i.e. Upon receipt of it in different situations, it must be identical. (Sometimes this quality of information is called "confidence"). Methods for checking information on stability are as follows: a) re-measurement; b) measurement of the same property with different observers; c) the so-called "scale splitting", i.e. Check scale in parts. As can be seen, all these rechecking methods are based on a multiple repetition of measurements. All of them must create confidence from the researcher in the fact that it can trust the data obtained.
Finally, the accuracy of the information (in some works coincides with stability - see Saganneco, 1977. P. 29) is measured by how fragments are the metrics, or in other words, how sensitive to the tool is. Thus, it is the degree of approximation of the measurement results to the true meaning of the measured value. Of course, each researcher should strive to obtain the most accurate data. However, the creation of a tool possessing the desired degree of accuracy is a rather difficult case in some cases. It is always necessary to decide which measure of accuracy is permissible. In determining this measure, the researcher includes the entire arsenal of its theoretical ideas about the object.
Violation of one requirement negates the other: let's say, the data may be justified, but unstable (in a social and psychological study, such a situation may arise when the conducted survey turned out to be situational, i.e. the time for it could play a certain role, and in The strength of this arose some additional factor that is not manifested in other situations); Another example when the data may be stable, but are not substantiated (if, suppose, the entire survey turned out to be shifted, then the same picture will be repeated on a long period of time, but the picture will be false!).
Many researchers note that all ways to verify information on reliability are not perfect enough in social psychology. In addition, R. Panto and M. Gravitz, for example, rightly notice that these methods work only in the hands of a qualified specialist. In the hands of inexperienced researchers, the test "gives inaccurate results, does not justify mortgaged labor and serves as the basis for insolvent assertions" (PZNTO, Gravitz, 1972. P. 461).
Requirements that are considered elementary in other science studies in social psychology are a number of difficulties in virtue of the specific source of information. What characteristic features of such a source, as a person, complicate the situation? Before becoming a source of information, a person must understand the question, instructions or any other requirement of the researcher. But people have a different ability to understand; Consequently, in this paragraph of the researcher, various surprises are waiting. Further, to become a source of information, a person must have it, but after all, the sample of the subjects is not built in terms of the selection of those who have information, and the rejection of those who do not possess it (for to identify this distinction between the subject, again Conduct a special study). The following circumstance concerns the properties of human memory: if a person understand the question, has information, he still has to remember everything that is necessary for the completeness of information. But the quality of memory is the thing is strictly individual, and there are no guarantees that in the sample the subjects are selected on the principle of more or less than the same memory. There is another important circumstance: a person must give consent to issue information. Its motivation in this case, of course, to a certain extent can be stimulated by the instructions, the conditions for conducting the study, but all these circumstances do not guarantee the consent of the subjects under cooperation with the researcher.
Therefore, along with ensuring the reliability of data, the question of representativeness is especially acute in social psychology. The statement of this issue itself is associated with the dual character of social psychology. If it were about it only as an experimental discipline, the problem would be relatively simple: the representativeness in the experiment is quite strictly determined and is checked. But in the case of a correlation research, a social psychologist is faced with a completely new problem for him, especially if we are talking about mass processes. This new problem is to build a sample. The conditions for solving this task are similar to the conditions for solving it in sociology.
Naturally, in social psychology, the same norms of sampling are applied as described in statistics and how they are used everywhere. The researcher in social psychology in principle is given, for example, such types of sampling, such as random, typical (or stratified), sample by quota, etc.
But in what way to apply one or another type - this question is always creative: it is necessary or not in each individual case to divide the pre-general set of classes, but only then make a random sample from them, this task is to decide this task again in relation to this study. , to this object, to these characteristics of the general population. The allocation of classes (types) inside the general population is strictly dictated by the meaningful description of the object of the study: when it comes to behavior and activity of people of people, it is very important to accurately determine which parameters of behavior types can be highlighted here.
The most difficult problem, however, it turns out the problem of representativeness arising in a specific form and in a socio-psychological experiment. But, before highlighting it, it is necessary to give the overall characteristics of those methods that are used in socio-psychological studies.
The overall characteristics of the methods of socio-psychological research. The entire set of methods can be divided into two large groups: research methods and methods of impact. The latter refer to the specific area of \u200b\u200bsocial psychology, to the so-called "impact psychology" and will be discussed in the chapter on practical applications of social psychology. Here are analyzed by research methods in which, in turn, the methods of collecting information and methods of its processing are distinguished. There are many other classifications of social and psychological research methods. For example, three groups of methods are distinguished: 1) the methods of empirical research, 2) modeling methods, 3) management-educational methods (Svenzitsky, 1977. P. 8). At the same time, all those about which will be discussed and in this chapter will go to the first group. As for the second and third groups of methods designated in the given classification, they do not have any special specificity in social psychology (which recognize at least relative to modeling, and the authors of the classification). Data processing methods are often simply not highlighted in a special block, since most of them are also not specific to socio-psychological research, but use some general scientific techniques. This can be agreed, but nevertheless, for a complete idea of \u200b\u200ball methodological armaments, social psychology should be mentioned on the existence of this second group of methods.
Among the methods of collecting information, it is necessary to name: observation, study of documents (in particular, content analysis), various types of surveys (questionnaires, interviews), various types of tests (including the most common sociometric test), finally, experiment (as laboratory, so and natural). It is hardly advisable in the general course, and even at its beginning it is in detail each of these methods. It is more logical to indicate cases of their use in the presentation of certain meaningful problems of social psychology, then such a statement will be much clearer. Now it is necessary to give only the most overall characteristics of each method and, most importantly, to designate those moments where they are found in their application. In most cases, these methods are identical to those used in sociology (poisons, 1995).
Observation is the "old" method of social psychology and is sometimes contrasting the experiment as an imperfect method. At the same time, not all the possibilities of the observation method today are exhausted in social psychology: in case of obtaining data on open behavior, the actions of individuals the observation method plays a very important role. The main problem that comes to using the observation method is how to ensure fixation of some specific characteristics classes so that the "reading" of the observation protocol was clear to another researcher, could be interpreted in terms of hypothesis. In ordinary language, this question can be formulated as: what to watch? How to fix the observed?
There are many different proposals for organizing the so-called monitoring of observation data, i.e. Selects in advance of some classes, for example, personal interactions in the group, followed by fixing the number, the frequency of the manifestation of these interactions, etc. Below will be described in detail by one of these attempts taken by R. Beiles. The question of the allocation of classes of observed phenomena is essentially the question of the observation units, as is known, and in other sections of psychology. In a social and psychological study, it can be resolved only separately for each specific case, subject to the research subject. Another fundamental question is a time interval that can be considered sufficient to fix any units of observation. Although there are many different procedures in order to ensure fixation of these units at certain intervals and their coding, the question cannot be fully solved. As can be seen, the observation method is not as primitive, as it seems at first glance, and undoubtedly can successfully be applied in a number of socio-psychological research.
Studying documents is of great importance, since with the help of this method, it is possible to analyze the products of human activity. Sometimes it is unreasonably opposed by the method of studying documents, for example, the method of polls as the "objective" method "subjective" method. It is unlikely that this opposition is appropriate: after all, in the documents, the source of information is a person, therefore, all the problems that arise are in force. Of course, the measure of "subjectivity" of the document is different depending on whether the official or purely personal document is being studied, but it is always present. A special problem arises here and due to the fact that the document interprets is a researcher, i.e. Also, a person with his own, inherent individual psychological characteristics. The most important role in studying the document plays, for example, the ability to understand text. The problem of understanding is a special problem of psychology, but here it turns on in the process of applying the technique, therefore, can not be taken into account.
To overcome this new type of "subjectivity" (interpretation of the document by the researcher), a special reception is introduced, called "Content Analysis" (literally: "Content Analysis") (Bogomolova, Stefenenko, 1992). This is a special, more or less formalized document analysis method, when special "units" stand out in the text, and then the frequency of their use is calculated. The content analysis method makes sense to apply only in cases where the researcher is dealing with a large array of information, so it has to analyze numerous texts. Almost this method is applied in social psychology in research in the field of mass communications. A number of difficulties are not removed, of course, and the use of the content analysis technique; For example, the process of selection of text units, naturally, largely depends on the theoretical position of the researcher, and on his personal competence, the level of its creative possibilities. As with the use of many other methods in social psychology, here the causes of success or failure depend on the art of the researcher.
Polls - a very common reception in social and psychological studies, causing perhaps the greatest number of complaints. Usually, critical comments are expressed in bewilderment on how it is possible to trust the information obtained from the immediate responses of the subjects, essentially from their self-reports. The accusations of this kind are based or on a misunderstanding, or on absolute incompetence in the field of surveys. Among the numerous types of polls, the greatest distribution is obtained in social psychology interviews and questionnaires (especially in research of large groups).
The main methodological problems that arise when applying these methods are concluded in the design of the questionnaire. The first requirement here is the logic of building it, providing that the questionnaire deliver exactly the information that is required on the hypothesis, and that this information is as reliable as possible. There are numerous rules for building each issue, their location in a certain order, grouping into separate blocks, etc. The literature describes in detail (lectures on the method of specific social research. M., 1972) Typical errors arising from the illiterate design of the questionnaire. All this is to ensure that the questionnaire does not require the answers "in the forehead" so that it is clear to the author only under the condition of a certain intent, which is not set out in the questionnaire, but in the study program, in the hypothesis constructed by the researcher. The design of the questionnaire is the most difficult job, it cannot be fulfilled hastily, because every bad questionnaire serves only compromising the method.
A separate big problem is an interview, since the interaction of the interviewer and the respondent takes place here (that is, a person who answers the questions), which in itself is some socio-psychological phenomenon. During the interview, all the ways described in social psychology are manifested by one person on another, all laws of perception of each other, the norms of their communication. Each of these characteristics can influence the quality of information, can bring another kind of "subjectivity", which was concluded above. But it should be borne in mind that all these problems are not new to social psychology, about each of them a certain "antidote" have been developed, and the task is only that with due seriousity refer to mastering these methods. As opposed to a common unprofessional look that polls are the most "easy" method, we can safely say that a good survey is the most difficult method of social and psychological research.
Tests are not a specific socio-psychological method, they are widely used in various fields of psychology. When they talk about the use of tests in social psychology, they mean most often personal tests, less often - group tests. But this type of tests, as is known, is also applied in general-solicific studies of the individual, no particular specifics of the application of this method in a social and psychological study are not: all methodological standards for the use of tests taken in general psychologyare fair and here.
As you know, the test is a special kind of test, during which the subject performs or a specially designed task, or answers questions that differ from questionnaires or interviews. Questions in tests are indirect. The meaning of subsequent processing is that with the "key" to relate the received responses with certain parameters, for example, personality characteristics, if it comes to personal tests. Most of such tests are developed in pathopsychology, where their use makes sense only in combination with clinical observation methods. At certain boundaries, tests provide important information on the characteristics of the pathology of the personality. Usually consider the greatest weakness of personal tests, then their quality is that they grab only some one side of the person. This disadvantage is partially overcome in complex tests, such as a kettel test or MMPI test. However, the use of these methods is not in the context of pathology, but in the conditions of the norm (with the case of social psychology) requires many methodological adjustments.
The most important question that rises here is the question of how important the tasks and questions offered to her; In a social and psychological study - how much can be correlated with the test measurements of the various characteristics of the personality of its activities in the group, etc. The most common mistake is the illusion that it is worth conducting massive testing of personalities in some group, as all the problems of this group and personalities, its components will become clear. In social psychology, tests can be applied as a subsidiary study. These data must be compared with the data obtained using other methods. In addition, the use of tests wears a local character also because they mainly concern only one section of social psychology - personal problems. The tests that are important to the diagnosis of the group are not so much. As an example, a sociometric test, which will be considered specifically in the section dedicated to a small group can be called.
The experiment acts as one of the main research methods in social psychology. The controversy around the possibilities and boundedness of the experimental method in this area is one of the most acute controversy for methodological problems at present (Zhukov, Grzhegorzhevskaya, 1977). In social psychology, two main types of experiment are distinguished: laboratory and natural. For both species, there are some general rules expressing the essence of the method, namely: arbitrary administration by an experimenter of independent variables and control over them, as well as changes in dependent variables. The general is also the requirement for the allocation of control and experimental groups so that the measurement results can be comparable to some standard. However, along with these common requirements Laboratory and natural experiments possess their own rules. Especially debated for social psychology is the question of the laboratory experiment.
Discussion problems of the application of methods of socio-psychological research. In modern literature, two problems are discussed in this regard: what is the ecological validity of the laboratory experiment, i.e. The ability to distribute the data obtained to "real life", and in which the danger of data displacement due to the special selection of the subjects. As a more fundamental methodological question, the question of whether the real fabric of social relations is not lost in the laboratory experiment, the most "social", which is the most important context in a socio-psychological study. Regarding the first of the issues there are various points of view. Many authors agree with the named limitations of laboratory screshments, others believe that from the laboratory experiment and do not require environmental validity, that its results do not need to be transferred to the "real life", i.e. That in the experiment you should only check the individual provisions of the theory, and for the analysis of real situations you need to interpret these provisions of the theory. Third, such as, for example, D. Campbell, offer a special class of "quasi-expires" in social psychology (Campbell, 1980). Their difference is the implementation of experiments not by the full, dictated logic of the scientific research scheme, but in a kind of "truncated" form. Campbell scrupulously substantiates the right of the researcher to such a form of an experiment, constantly appealing to the specifics of the subject of research in social psychology. At the same time, according to Campbell, it is necessary to take into account numerous "threats" of the inner and external validity of the experiment in this area of \u200b\u200bknowledge and be able to overcome them. The main idea is that in a socio-psychological study, in general, in particular, in particular, a organic combination of quantitative and high-quality analysis is necessary. This kind of considerations can, of course, be taken into account, but do not remove all the problems.
Another limitation of the laboratory experiment discussed in the literature is associated with a specific solution to the problem of representativeness. Usually, for a laboratory experiment, it is not considered to comply with the principle of representativeness, i.e. Accurate accounting of the object class on which the results can be distributed. However, with regard to social psychology, this kind of displacement arises here, which cannot be taken into account. In order to assemble a group of subjects in the laboratory, they need to "snatch" from real life. It is clear that the condition is so difficult that more often the experimenters go on a lighter path - use those subjects who are closer and affordable. Most often, they turn out to be students of psychological faculties, despite those of them who expressed their readiness, agree to participate in the experiment. But it is precisely this fact that it causes criticism (in the US, there is even a dismissive term "social psychology of sophomores", ironically fixing the prevailing contingent of the subjects - students of psychological faculties), since in social psychology age, the professional status of the subjects plays a very serious role and the title bias can I strongly distort the results. In addition, and "readiness" to work with the experimenter also means a kind of sample displacement. So, in a number of experiments, the so-called "anticipating assessment" is recorded when the subject is playing out the experimenter, trying to justify its expectations. In addition, the common phenomenon in laboratory experiments in social psychology is the so-called retail effect, when the result arises due to the presence of the experimenter (described by Rosenthalet).
Compared to laboratory experiments in vivo, they have some advantages in the listed relationships, but in turn inferior to them with respect to "purity" and accuracy. If we consider the most important requirement of social psychology - to study the real social groups, the real activities of personalities in them, then a natural experiment can be considered a more promising method in this area of \u200b\u200bknowledge. As for the contradiction between the accuracy of measuring and the depth of a qualitative (meaningful) data analysis, this contradiction, indeed, exists and refers not only to the problems of the experimental method.
All described techniques have one common feature, specific precisely for socio-psychological research. With any form of obtaining information, provided that it is a source of it, there is also such a special variable as the interaction of the researcher with the subject. This interaction is brighter than everything in an interview, but in fact given for any of the methods. The fact itself, the requirement of its accounting is stated for a long time in socio-psychological literature. However, serious development, the study of this problem is still waiting for their researchers.
A number of important methodological problems arises and when characterizing a second group of methods, namely methods of material processing. This includes all the techniques of statistics (correlation analysis, factor analysis) and at the same time receiving logical and theoretical processing (construction of typologies, various ways to build explanations, etc.). This is where the newly mentioned contradiction is found. To what extent the researcher has the right to include in the interpretation of these considerations not only logic, but also of a meaningful theory? Will there be the inclusion of such moments to reduce the objectivity of the study, to bring into it that in the language of science is called the problem of values? For natural and especially accurate sciences, the problem of values \u200b\u200bdoes not have a special problem, and for sciences about a person, including for social psychology, it is precisely such.
In modern scientific literature, the controversy around the problems of values \u200b\u200bfinds its permission in the formulation of two samples of scientific knowledge - "censential" and "humanistic" - and clarifying relations between them. The science of science was created in the philosophy of neopotivism. The main idea, which was based on the basis of building such an image, was to require the most stringent and developed natural sciences, primarily physics. Science should be based on a strict foundation of the facts, apply strict measurement methods, use operational concepts (i.e., concepts, with respect to which operations for measuring those signs that are expressed in the concept), have perfect techniques for verification of hypotheses. None value judgments may not be included in the process of scientific research, nor in the interpretation of its results, since such inclusion reduces the quality of knowledge, it opens up access to extremely subjective conclusions. Accordingly, the role of scientist in society was also interpreted by the role of science. She was identified with the role of an impartial observer, but not a participant in the events of the world studied. At best, the engineer's roles are fulfilled or, more precisely, a technique that develops specific recommendations, but is removed from solving fundamental issues, for example, regarding the direction of using the results of its research.
Already on the very early stages The origin of such views was given serious objections against such a point of view. Especially they concerned the science of man, about society, about individual public phenomena. Such an objection was formulated, in particular, in the philosophy of neocantianism, where the thesis was discussed about the principal difference of "Nature Sciences" and "Sciences of Culture". At a level, more close to specific psychology, this problem was set by V. Dieltem when creating a "understanding psychology", where the principle of understanding was put forward at an equal stage with the principle of explanation protected by positivists. Thus, the controversy has a long history. Today, this second direction identifies itself with the "humanistic" tradition and is largely supported by the philosophical ideas of the Frankfurt school.
The objection of the position of science, humanistic orientation insists that the specifics of the science of man requires the inclusion of value judgments in a scientific research fabric, which also applies to social psychology. A scientist, formulating the problem, aware of the purpose of his research, focuses on certain values \u200b\u200bof the Company, which he recognizes or rejects; Next - the values \u200b\u200btaken by them allow you to comprehend the focus of the use of its recommendations; Finally, the values \u200b\u200bare definitely "present" and in the interpretation of the material, and this fact does not "reduce the quality of knowledge, but, on the contrary, makes interpretations meaningful because it allows you to fully take into account the social context in which the events studied by scientists take place. The philosophical development of this problem is complemented at present and attention to it from social psychology. One of the points of criticism of the American tradition on the part of European authors (especially S. Muscovy) is consistent with the call to account for the value orientation of social and psychological research (Muscovy, 1984. P. 216).
The problem of values \u200b\u200bis not abstract, but quite relevant problem For social psychology. The care of the selection, development and application of concrete techniques can not bring success to a social and psychological study if the problem is lost in general, i.e. In the "social context". Of course, the main task is to find ways with which this social context can be seized in each specific study. But this is the second question. It is important to see this problem, to understand that the value judgments are inevitably present in the research of sciences, such social psychology, and it is necessary not to hide from this problem, but consciously control their own social position, the choice of certain values. At the level of each individual research, the question may stand like this: before the start of the study, before the choice of the technique it is necessary to consider for itself the main canvas of the study, consider, for what, for what purpose, the study is being taken, from which the researcher comes from. It is in this context that in recent years is acutely discussed in social psychology, as well as in sociology (poisons, 1995), the question of qualitative research methods.
The means of implementing all these requirements is to build a social and psychological research program. In the presence of the methodological difficulties mentioned above, it is important in each study to clearly designate, explicate the solid tasks, the choice of an object, formulate a problem that is investigated, to clarify the concepts used, as well as systemically designate the entire set of methods used. This will largely contribute to the "methodological equipment" of the study. It is using the program that can be traced how each study is included in the "social context". The current stage of the development of social psychology puts the task of building a kind of "standard" of a social and psychological study in contrast to this standard, which was built in tradition, preferably formed on the basis of non-constitutional philosophy. This standard should include all the requirements that today are presented to the science of it methodological reflection. It is the construction of a program that can contribute to improving research, transform them in each individual case from a simple "data collection" (even perfect methods) into a genuine scientific analysis of the object being studied.
Literature
Bogomolova N.N., Stephenko T.G. Content analysis. M., 1992.
Zhukov Yu.M., Grzhhegorzhevskaya I.A. Experiment in social psychology: problems and prospects // Methodology and methods of social psychology. M., 1977.
Campwell D. model of experiments in social psychology and applied research. Per. from English M., 1980.
Lectures on the method of specific social studies .. M., 1972.
Leontyev A.N. Activities. Consciousness. Personality. M., 1975.
Panto R., Gravitz M. Methods social Sciences / Lane With Fr. M., 1972.
Sagansenko G.N. Sociological information. L., 1977.
Svencitsky A., Semenov V.E. Socio-psychological research // Methods of social psychology. L., 1977.
Muscovy S. Society and Theory in Social Psychology // Modern Foreign Social Psychology. Texts. M., 1984.
Poys V.A. Sociological research. Methodology, program, methods. Samara, 1995.