Affiliation:
1. Tufts University, Medford, MA, US
Abstract
In psychology, we tend to follow the general logic of falsificationism: we separate the ‘context of discovery’ (how we come up with theories) from the ‘context of justification’ (how we test them). However, when studying human interaction, separating these contexts can lead to theories with low ecological validity that do not generalize well to life outside the lab. We propose borrowing research procedures from well-established inductive methodologies in interaction research during the process of discovering new regularities and analyzing natural data without being led by theory. We introduce research procedures including the use of naturalistic study settings, analytic transcription, collections of cases, and data analysis sessions, and illustrate these with examples from a successful cross-disciplinary study. We argue that if these procedures are used systematically and transparently throughout a research cycle, they will lead to more robust and ecologically valid theories about interaction within psychology and, with some adaptation, can enhance the reproducibility of research across many other areas of psychological science.
Publisher
University of California Press
Reference99 articles.
1. Repair: The interface between interaction and cognition;Topics in Cognitive Science,2018
2. Accounting for moral judgments in academic talk: The case of a conversation, analysis data session;Text & Talk,2008
3. Communication theories and other curios;Communication Monographs,1991
4. BNC Consortium. (2007). The British National Corpus, version 3 (BNC XML Edition). Distributed by Oxford University Computing Services on behalf of the BNC Consortium. (http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/).
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献