Premium
Disciplinarity and the application of social research
Author(s) -
Potter Jonathan.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
british journal of social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.855
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 2044-8309
pISSN - 0144-6665
DOI - 10.1348/014466610x535946
Subject(s) - psychology , object (grammar) , naturalism , focus (optics) , discipline , social psychology , qualitative research , cognition , naturalistic observation , social cognition , epistemology , sociology , discursive psychology , empirical research , social science , discourse analysis , linguistics , physics , neuroscience , optics , philosophy
This response to Corcoran (2010) and Abell and Walton (2010) is organized around four key issues. (1) Disciplinarity : against a focus on the standard disciplinary boundaries of social psychology, and the conventional qualitative/quantitative division, it highlights metatheoretical, theoretical, and empirical disagreement over the object of analysis. (2) Social cognition : doubts about a suggested overlap between the concerns and methods of social cognition and discursive psychology are outlined. (3) Naturalistic data : the virtues of working with records of people living their lives outside of the narrow situations got up by social researchers are reiterated. (4) Application : the applied success of discursive psychological research is illustrated.