Critical perspectives on theory and methodology in psychology

Ph.D. -course

Course description

Objectives and Content

General content

In this course, students will learn about critiques that have been levelled against theorizing and methodology in psychological science. The themes that are covered will include, but not necessarily be limited to, problems that arise from failures to properly engage in conceptual clarification, conflation of different levels of analysis (e.g., within vs. between persons), and inappropriate reification and essentialization of psychological concepts. Although examples from personality psychology, clinical psychology, and other branches of psychology will be used, the issues are broadly relevant to other fields within the social sciences as well. The students will be encouraged to apply these kinds of critical analyses within their own fields of research or to find or develop their own examples of relevant meta-theoretical and meta-methodological critiques.

Type of course

Perspective course at the Graduate School of Human Interaction and Growth

General learning objectives

Students should learn to engage in critical thinking with respect to theorizing and methodology within psychology or adjacent fields relevant to their own dissertation projects.

Learning Outcomes

Knowledge

After completion of the course, the candidate:

  • Has knowledge of existing critiques that have been levelled against theorizing and research in psychology
  • Has insights concerning the methodological implications of these critiques

Skills

After completion of the course, the candidate:

  • Is able to explain and illustrate the relevance (or lack of relevance) of these kinds of critiques to their own fields of research
  • Is able to articulate potential changes to existing practices or alternative approaches
  • Is able to explain the importance of philosophical and theoretical analysis in research

General competence

After completion of the course, the candidate:

  • Is able to engage in critical thinking with respect to theorizing and methodology in psychology or adjacent fields
  • Is able to coherently argue for or against relevant practices

ECTS Credits

2 ECTS

Level of Study

Ph.D-nivå

Semester of Instruction

UiB, Bergen
Required Previous Knowledge
Master Degree in disciplines relevant to educational sciences, psychology and public health.
Recommended Previous Knowledge
Philosophy of science, methods, and research design at the graduate level (PS901 or a corresponding course).
Access to the Course

Primarily for PhD candidates. Others may apply to participate.

External PhD candidates may participate by contacting us via email.

Teaching Methods and Extent of Organized Teaching

Lectures and seminars/excercises.

Four days of teaching activities (5-6 hours each).

In Spring 2025 the course will be held Feburary10th,11th, 13th and 14th. The course will take place at Christies gate 12, room 005 on the 10th, 11th and 14th of Feburary, at at Årstadveien 17, room 3F9 Hardbakka on the 13th.

Compulsory Assignments and Attendance
Active participation in seminars/exercises. 80% attendance is required. Submitting the examination paper is required.
Forms of Assessment
To pass the course, a passing grade on the examination paper is required, along with active participation in seminars/exercises.
Grading Scale
Pass or fail.
Assessment Semester
Same as the teaching semester.
Reading List

The literature will consist mainly of articles. The following list includes sample articles but is not complete or final.

Brick, C., Hood, B., Ekroll, V., & de-Wit, L. (2022). Illusory essences: A bias holding back theorizing in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17(2), 491-506. doi.org/10.1177/1745691621991838

Bringmann, L. F., Elmer, T., & Eronen, M. I. (2022). Back to basics: The importance of conceptual clarification in psychological science. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 31(4), 340-346. doi.org/10.1177/09637214221096485

Boag, S. (2015). Explanation in personality psychology: ¿Verbal magic¿ and the five-factor model. Philosophical Psychology, 24(2), 223-243. doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2010.548319

Dupré, J. (2006). Scientific classification. Theory, Culture, and Society, 23(2-3), 30-32. doi.org/10.1177/026327640602300201

Fiske, A. P. (2020). The lexical fallacy in emotion research: Mistaking vernacular words for psychological entities. Psychological Review, 127(1), 95¿113. doi.org/10.1037/rev0000174

Hacking, I. (1999). The social construction of what? Harvard University Press (chapters 1 and 4, pp. 1-35, 100-124)

Kukla, A. (1989). Nonempirical issues in psychology. American Psychologist, 44(5), 785¿794. doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.5.785

Lamiell, J. T. (2000). A periodic table of personality elements? The ¿Big Five¿ and trait ¿psychology¿ in critical perspective. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 20(1), 1-24. doi.org/10.1037/h0091211

Lundh, L-G. (2023). Person, population, mechanism. Three main branches of psychological science. Journal for Person-Oriented Research, 9(2), 75-92. doi.org/10.17505/jpor.2023.25814

Magnusson, D. (1992). Back to the phenomena: Theory, methods, and statistics in psychological research. European Journal of Personality, 6(1), 1-14. doi.org/10.1002/per.2410060102

Nilsson, A. (2024). Antidemocratic tendencies on the left, the right, and beyond: A critical review of the theory and measurement of left¿wing authoritarianism. Political Psychology. doi.org/10.1111/pops.12951

Smedslund, J. (1991). The pseudoempirical in psychology and the case for psychologic. Psychological Inquiry, 2(4), 325¿338. doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0204_1

Stone, C. A. (2019). A defense and definition of construct validity in psychology. Philosophy of Science, 86(5), 1250-1261. doi.org/10.1086/705567

Uher (2021). Psychometrics is not measurement: Unraveling a fundamental misconception in quantitative psychology and the complex network of its underlying fallacies. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 41, 58-84. doi.org/10.1037/teo0000176

Course Evaluation
Survey
Examination Support Material
AI-generated text cannot be used in the examination paper.
Programme Committee
The psychological Faculty, University of Bergen.