| Beschreibung: |
Is it necessary to think about “postmodern” psychology? Does "postmodernism" help overcome current challenges, such as the replication crisis, or does it rather exacerbate these problems given its association with relativism and arbitrariness? Psychology is changing as the many debates about validity and replicability, or the movements aimed at tackling these problems like the Open Science Framework show. We argue that these developments are symptoms of – wanted or unwanted – movements away from “modern” towards a “postmodern” science. Our contributions examine possible consequences of these developments on epistemological and methodological levels. Barbara Hanfstingl introduces “modernism” and “the postmodern turn” in science. Peter Holtz discusses incommensurateness between "modern" scientific methods and a "postmodern" worldview and proposes a more compatible solution from an evolutionary perspective. Joachim Krueger argues why psychology should apply both “modern” and “postmodern” scientific strategies. Peter Edelsbrunner critically discusses the concept of direct replication. Matthias Borgstede applies a model-theoretic perspective to formally integrate qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Jana Uher focuses on measurement-theoretical problems of rating methods and introduces two basic methodological principles needed for establishing transparency and replicability of measurement in empirical sciences. Ulrich Dettweiler presents a Bayesian approach that allows to integrate subjectivity into research processes. Timo Gnambs introduces a machine learning procedure enabling the prediction of longitudinal nonresponse data. Martin Voracek provides an overview of the rationale and applicability of multiverse and specification-curve approaches to primary data analysis and meta-analysis. Kenneth Gergen discusses these contributions and reflects on developments in psychology over the last two decades. |