Critically Assess the Social Constructionist Critique of Experimental Methods in Psychology.

In todays modern psychology, the concept of Social Constructionism and Experimental Psychology can be seen as two complement models that are used to understand human behaviour. However, it is also a fact that, these two models remained unnecessary separated from one another in last few decades. It can be seen that, the field of Psychology is mainly dominated by people with experimental nature who believes that their own methods are capable enough to collect knowledge and produce effective results about human behaviour. They assume that experimentation is the main method for psychology.(Gergen, 1973).

Social constructionists, on the other hand, believes that every method offers an epistemologically privileged view of reality as the constructionist approach is less associated the idea of own set of methods.(Gergen,1973). It has also been seen that, Social constructionists have criticised researchers with experimental approach on both methodological and ideological grounds. Although the differences are found in both the approaches, it is also argued that the complementary of social constructionism and experimental psychology have connection to each other. Further, it is also assumed that analysis of their joined potential could enormously contribute to the field of psychology to conduct indepth researches in future.(Gergen, 1973).

The intellectual concepts of experimental psychology and social constructionism are initially introduced by some researchers including Hegel, Marx, Weber, Dewey and Mead are considered to share similar origin. However, it is also a fact that both the worlds of social constructionism and experimental psychology are both from the same origin which is also endorsed by the earlier opinions. In addition, the modern and existing research in psychology is found to be agreed with the opinions of earlier researchers who focused on the different ways or environments in which children start their journey of intellectual life within the framework of reality and social interaction.( Hegel & Marx, 1990)

This approach also presents a developmental foundation in which people are viewed as active storage of social environments that are changing in nature. At this point, the view of social constructionists and experimental researchers is found to be similar as they believe that the cognitive perspective in social psychology can be seen as the constructive nature of social cognition (Markus and Zajonc, 1985). These efforts of researchers produced a common concern
focusing on the subjective and social outcome of cultural forms, which allows researchers to
use social as well as psychological theories in order to address the social and cognitive outcomes. Gergen’s (1973) argued distinguished research is considered as a major input of criticism in this area in which he places both the concepts of social constructionism and experimental psychology in a side by side comparison. His key findings included that researchers of psychology were mainly involved in conducting research on the historically contingent social and cultural practices. Researchers, due to this approach, were mainly focusing on the influences on groups and individuals and remained unable to discover universal truths about human behaviour. Focusing on the social constructionist approach, the philosophical principles of scepticism, idealism, and relativism further investigated the role of behavioral data that serve as a whiteboard for researchers to write their theoretical message. Gergen (1973) also considered the issues associated with reflexivity and enlightenment that allowed him to establish a fact that psychology produces knowledge which impacts the phenomenal characteristics.

In general, advancement of social constructionists against experimental psychology is primarily identified by three important critiques on experimental methodology.
In his first critique, Gergen (1999) argues that experimentalists do not use objective methods to differentiate facts and fiction in order to develop precise theories of the reasons and consequences of social behaviour. On the other hand, a social constructionist does not accept that scientific method can be used to set up a “Mirror of Nature.” (Gergen, 1999).

Secondly, social constructionists are also not satisfied with the way in which experimentalists implement their ideologies in relation to individual methodological as well as universal theoretical approaches. Example of this can be seen in Gergen (1999)’s work, where he explains “the process of world construction takes place ‘in the head,” and he observes that “for social constructionists what we take to be real is an outcome of social relationships”. (Gergen, 1999).

Third main critique in view of social constructionists is that, experimentalists assume themselves as investigators, and every kind of knowledge that is constructed by experimental social psychologists is to be limited to certain historical, cultural, and ideological contexts. Furthermore, critiques can also be seen in the political aspect, which says that experimentalists are not only epistemologically wrong about the capacity to develop universally applicable theories of the abstract individual, but they are also generally on the side (Riger, 1992).

It is also claimed that experimentalists remained unable to identify the limitations in their theories and believed that human nature based on the status quo where structure should not be changed. Gergen (1999) also emphasises “the socio cognitive position which is generally favored by experimental psychologists never fully escapes its Western roots and thus operates subtle as a form of Western imperialism”. It has been seen that, social constructionists believe that experimental psychologists are unable to understand their actual responsibilities and misrepresent in order to progress their ideologies.(Gergen, 1999).

Taking the above critiques into account, experimentalists could develop a sustainable framework to differentiate facts and fiction which would help them to have a deeper understanding of social behaviour. In addition, realising the critiques would also enable experimentalists to develop a unified theoretical framework as well as improve their ideological implementation process. The above critiques could also contribute to establish a broader framework to produce knowledge minimizing the status.(Gergen, 1999).

Conclusion

From the above analysis, it can be concluded that both the experimentalists and social constructionist share the same origin and are determined to accomplish one agenda that encourages people to become active to build representations of their social environments. Since both the social constructionism and experimentalism have some commonalities, social constructionists should make efforts to receive gains from the theories and experiments of experimental psychologists. (Gergen, 1999).

The researchers, on the other hand, can also get benefits by studying relevant contents of social constructionism perspective and improve weaknesses in their so far work. By working together, both the disciplines of psychology would be able to minimize their differences and could develop creative, sustained progress as well as strength a mutual agenda of analyzing the human behaviour.(Gergen, 1999).

References:

Gergen, K. J. (1973). Social Psychology as History. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 26.

Gergen, K. J (1999). An Invitation to Social Construction.

Markus, H., & Zajonc, R. B. (1985). The Cognitive Perspective in Social Psychology.

In G, Lindsey, & E. Aronson (1999). (Eds). The Handbook of Social Psychology. (3rd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 127-230).

Riger, S. (1992). Epistemological Debates, Feminist Voices. American Psychologist, Vol. 47,
730 – 740.

Last Completed Projects