Criticizing the critic: comments on Jahoda's (2012) critique of Discursive Social Psychology

Tony Anderson, Sally Wiggins

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

Abstract

Jahoda (2012) criticizes discursive social psychology (DSP) on several different grounds; specifically, he argues that DSP has opaque methodological procedures, is of questionable scientific merit, involves over-interpretation of its data, and implicitly claims its findings to be universal rather than contextually specific. We challenge these criticisms by arguing that observational studies of the kind typical within DSP research have a perfectly valid place within a scientific social psychology, that the interpretations made by DSP researchers should be seen in the context of a temporally extended research process in which they are subject to criticism and potential replication, and that Jahoda is himself guilty of over-interpretation by inferring claims of universality when such an inference is not warranted by the data (i.e. the qualitative content of the sample of research papers considered by Jahoda).
LanguageEnglish
Number of pages7
JournalJournal for the Theory of Social Behaviour
Early online date28 Jul 2013
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Social Psychology
Research
Observational Studies
Research Personnel
Discursive

Keywords

  • discursive psychology
  • science
  • reflexivity
  • universality

Cite this

@article{ab1b1ae205074e77900aa3aa867a3d9f,
title = "Criticizing the critic: comments on Jahoda's (2012) critique of Discursive Social Psychology",
abstract = "Jahoda (2012) criticizes discursive social psychology (DSP) on several different grounds; specifically, he argues that DSP has opaque methodological procedures, is of questionable scientific merit, involves over-interpretation of its data, and implicitly claims its findings to be universal rather than contextually specific. We challenge these criticisms by arguing that observational studies of the kind typical within DSP research have a perfectly valid place within a scientific social psychology, that the interpretations made by DSP researchers should be seen in the context of a temporally extended research process in which they are subject to criticism and potential replication, and that Jahoda is himself guilty of over-interpretation by inferring claims of universality when such an inference is not warranted by the data (i.e. the qualitative content of the sample of research papers considered by Jahoda).",
keywords = "discursive psychology, science, reflexivity, universality",
author = "Tony Anderson and Sally Wiggins",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1111/jtsb.12031",
language = "English",
journal = "Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour",
issn = "0021-8308",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Criticizing the critic

T2 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour

AU - Anderson, Tony

AU - Wiggins, Sally

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Jahoda (2012) criticizes discursive social psychology (DSP) on several different grounds; specifically, he argues that DSP has opaque methodological procedures, is of questionable scientific merit, involves over-interpretation of its data, and implicitly claims its findings to be universal rather than contextually specific. We challenge these criticisms by arguing that observational studies of the kind typical within DSP research have a perfectly valid place within a scientific social psychology, that the interpretations made by DSP researchers should be seen in the context of a temporally extended research process in which they are subject to criticism and potential replication, and that Jahoda is himself guilty of over-interpretation by inferring claims of universality when such an inference is not warranted by the data (i.e. the qualitative content of the sample of research papers considered by Jahoda).

AB - Jahoda (2012) criticizes discursive social psychology (DSP) on several different grounds; specifically, he argues that DSP has opaque methodological procedures, is of questionable scientific merit, involves over-interpretation of its data, and implicitly claims its findings to be universal rather than contextually specific. We challenge these criticisms by arguing that observational studies of the kind typical within DSP research have a perfectly valid place within a scientific social psychology, that the interpretations made by DSP researchers should be seen in the context of a temporally extended research process in which they are subject to criticism and potential replication, and that Jahoda is himself guilty of over-interpretation by inferring claims of universality when such an inference is not warranted by the data (i.e. the qualitative content of the sample of research papers considered by Jahoda).

KW - discursive psychology

KW - science

KW - reflexivity

KW - universality

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84880680768&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/jtsb.12031

DO - 10.1111/jtsb.12031

M3 - Comment/debate

JO - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour

JF - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour

SN - 0021-8308

ER -