In considering the science of psychology, one needs to look at the major developments regarding psychology in the twenty-first century. It is apparent that modern psychology incorporates diverse scientific methodologies and applied technologies to provide solutions to conflicts in law and understanding the human/animal behavior. As a result, in the modern society, psychology can be regarded to as the science of behavior.
It then follows that since the early 2000 to 2010, most behavioral scientists base their investigations on the natural and social sciences in order to improve on the current literature base relative to behavior and other social conflicts. In some cases, psychologists have shown more similarities with biologists and sociologists compared to their psychological counterparts (Gallagher & Nelson, 2003, p. vii).
Thus, in the contemporary society, psychology entails the study of animal behavior, human behavior, and organizational behavior.
These dimensions of psychological studies are used to categorize psychological scientists into various groups of psychological practitioners who employ different scientific methods to achieve different purposes under a wide range of settings including law, language, social contracts, and human perception (Gallagher & Nelson, 2003, p. 1).
In the preceding discussions, the fundamental concepts of research methodology in psychology are highlighted through explaining the scientific method, distinguishing between quantitative and qualitative data, and finally describing the process of scientific theory construction and testing.
The scientific method
The scientific method encompasses various techniques applied in investigations aimed at acquiring insights into new phenomena, obtaining new knowledge or updating previous knowledge (Gauch, 2003, p. 1). In other words, the scientific method entails a step-wise approach in asking and answering scientific questions particularly through experimenting or observing.
Here, the different steps in the scientific method include; Ask a question, Do background research, Construct a hypothesis, Test the hypothesis through performing experiments, Analyze the data obtained from the experiment before making conclusions, and Communicate the results (Gauch, 2003, pp. 1-10).
When the above steps are correctly designed and executed, then a scientist is assured of solving various scientific problems related to cause-effect relationships. Here, it is worth noting that, for scientists to understand nature there is the need to design experiments that introduce changes to a particular item (variable) in order to see what variations the change causes in a predictable manner.
However, it is equally important to note that besides the scientific method being a series of steps, a scientist may find it necessary to repeat certain steps as new information and ideas arise along the way. Overall, the scientific method ensures that any scientific inquiry remains objective, unbiased, reproducible, and reliable (Gauch, 2003, p. 10).
Quantitative versus Qualitative data
To achieve the objectives of the scientific method, a scientist is expected to generate either qualitative or quantitative data, or sometimes both, in order to come up with a conclusive investigation. Many researchers note that the two categories of data are different in that qualitative data entails words and descriptions. Moreover, qualitative data is only being observed rather than being measured.
Further, qualitative data relies on various aspects of quality including colors, textures, beauty, smells, appearance, and tastes. On the other hand, quantitative data is mainly characterized by numbers, and it can be measured. Additionally, quantitative data relies on aspects of quantity including age, length, temperature, height, time, volume, and area among others (Gauch, 2003, p. 12).
Another important difference between the two types of data is that quantitative data is generated through deductive research while qualitative data originates from inductive research. Here, it is notable that inductive research needs no hypothesis to begin an investigation while on the other hand; deductive research must construct a hypothesis before beginning an investigation.
Additionally, considering that the method of generating qualitative and quantitative data is qualitative and quantitative research respectively, it is important to note that in qualitative research, the researcher obtains the desired information by being immersed in the experiment.
Conversely, in quantitative research, the researcher assumes the responsibility of objectively observing the experiment without influencing or participating in it (Gauch, 2003, p. 12; Weiten, 2007, p. 35).
Scientific theory construction and testing
A theory is an abstract idea represented in the form of a set of laws, definitions, propositions, and axioms or descriptions of causal processes (Weiten, 2007, p. 35). The process of theory construction follows two major strategies, which include research-then-theory (whereby the theory is derived from empirical research) and theory-then-research (whereby the theory is invented prior to being tested through empirical research).
Sometimes, theory construction follows a third strategy, which is a combination of the first two strategies.
Therefore, through the Research-Then-Theory (the Baconian approach) strategy, the essential steps followed in theory construction include; selecting a certain phenomenon and describing its characteristics, measuring as many characteristics underlying the phenomenon as possible in different situations, and analyzing the data obtained from the measurements to determine various systematic patterns in the data that can warrant further investigations.
Finally, the Baconian approach demands that after data analysis, the systematic patterns should be formalized by arranging them into theoretical statements underlying specific laws of nature (Weiten, 2007).
And in the Theory-Then-Research strategy, a researcher is expected to construct a theory using axioms or descriptions of causal processes prior to selecting a specific statement underlying the theory in order to compare it with the results of empirical research.
Subsequently, the researcher should design an appropriate study to test the degree of correspondence between the theoretical statement and empirical research. On the other hand, the researcher needs to make necessary changes to either the theory or the study design in case there is no correspondence between the theoretical statements and the results of the empirical research.
Finally, lack of correspondence in the foregoing step may force the researcher to go back to step two or select alternative statements for further testing. Alternatively, the researcher may wish to determine the limitations of the theory in the event that there is no correspondence between the statements and empirical data (Weiten, 2007, p. 36).
Due to the inherent advantages and equally important disadvantages regarding the above mentioned theory construction strategies; a third approach utilizes the first two strategies in a composite approach that occurs in three stages. These stages include the exploratory stage, which entails the researcher exploring a phenomenon to come up with researchable ideas.
Secondly, the descriptive stage entails developing descriptions of systematic patterns, empirical generalizations, and inter-subjective descriptions that can guide the process of theory construction.
Thirdly, the explanatory stage entails the final stage whereby a researcher draws an explicit theory from the generalizations obtained in step two. In the long-run, the whole process entails a continuous cycle of events from theory construction to testing, and finally to reformulation (Weiten, 2007, p. 37).
Having looked into the process of constructing a theory, it is worth mentioning that any scientific theory must be worth testing. But considering the complex nature of some theories, studies recommend that to test a theory, it must be broken down into hypotheses (Weiten, 2007, p. 38).
As a result, when the results of the empirical data support the hypotheses derived from a particular theory, there is evidence to suggest with a certain degree of confidence that the theory is correct.
However, if the results contradict the hypotheses, chances are high that the theory is poorly formulated, and therefore it needs to be discarded or reformulated. Overall, the whole process of scientific investigation requires gradual and iterative processes, which must be subjected to revision at some stages of the experiment.
References
Gallagher, M., & Nelson, R.J. (2003). A handbook of psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc. Web.
Gauch, G.H. (2003). Scientific method in practice. New York: Cambridge University Press. Web.
Weiten, W. (2007). Psychology: Themes and variations (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education. Web.