Premium
A critique of the clinical‐personological approach to idiographic personality study
Author(s) -
Stones M. J.
Publication year - 1978
Publication title -
journal of clinical psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.124
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1097-4679
pISSN - 0021-9762
DOI - 10.1002/1097-4679(197807)34:3<614::aid-jclp2270340306>3.0.co;2-s
Subject(s) - nomothetic and idiographic , psychology , reliability (semiconductor) , construct (python library) , personality , psychosocial , inference , cognitive psychology , criticism , social psychology , applied psychology , psychotherapist , artificial intelligence , computer science , power (physics) , physics , quantum mechanics , programming language , art , literature
Idiographic research occupies an accepted position in personological study and clinical psychology. This review critically examines one such method of investigatio, the clinical‐personological approach, which relies on inductive inference and attempts to provide description at the level of the “whole person.” The data base is essentially clinical, psychosocial and psychometric, and information integration is achieved through “convergent validation.” The approach was criticized on three grounds: (a) level of description is only at a single level, i. e., the general; (b) the data base is limited to grosser system attributes and is typically of low reliability and validity; and (c) inductive inference formulation is unduly susceptible to influence by chance factors, and attempts to validate the hypothesis are rare. Of the alternative approaches, Persoal Construct Theory appears a promising avenue, but is also open to criticism.