Reflexivity and the psychologist

• Published in: History of the human sciences Vol. 18; no. 4; pp. 77 - 105
• Main Author: Morawski, Jill G.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi SAGE Publications 01.11.2005; Sage Publications Ltd
• Subjects: Clinical psychology; Experimental psychology; Experiments; History; Humanities; Laboratories; Natural Sciences; Psychoanalysis; Psychologists; Race; Reflexivity; Resistance; Social status; Unconsciousness; reflexivity; psychology; race; experimentation; psychoanalysis
• ISSN: 0952-6951; 1461-720X
• DOI: 10.1177/0952695105058472

Psychologists tend to examine their activities in experimentation with the same objective scientific attitude as they routinely assume in the experimental situation. A few psychologists have stepped outside this closed expistemic practice to undertake reflexive analysis of the psychologist in the laboratory. Three cases of such critical reflexive analysis are considered to better understand the strategies and consequences of confronting what Steve Woolgar has called ‘the horrors of reflexivity’. Reflexive work of William James, Horace Mann Bond, and Saul Rosenzweig are examined: working in the early years of modern experimental psychology these scientists identified limitations in the dominant natural science model of experimentation. Attending to the scientist's own cognitions, social status, and unconscious processes respectively, James, Bond, and Rosenzweig criticized this natural science model and presented methodological and epistemic alternatives. The relative neglect of their constructive observations underscores the resistance to addressing psychology's reflexive dimensions.