Literature DB >> 25046701

Feminism and psychology: critiques of methods and epistemology.

Alice H Eagly1, Stephanie Riger2.   

Abstract

Starting in the 1960s, many of the critiques of psychological science offered by feminist psychologists focused on its methods and epistemology. This article evaluates the current state of psychological science in relation to this feminist critique. The analysis relies on sources that include the PsycINFO database, the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2010), and popular psychology methods textbooks. After situating the feminist critique within the late-20th-century shift of science from positivism to postpositivism, the inquiry examines feminists' claims of androcentric bias in (a) the underrepresentation of women as researchers and research participants and (b) researchers' practices in comparing women and men and describing their research findings. In most of these matters, psychology manifests considerable change in directions advocated by feminists. However, change is less apparent in relation to some feminists' criticisms of psychology's reliance on laboratory experimentation and quantitative methods. In fact, the analyses documented the rarity in high-citation journals of qualitative research that does not include quantification. Finally, the analysis frames feminist methodological critiques by a consideration of feminist epistemologies that challenge psychology's dominant postpositivism. Scrutiny of methods textbooks and journal content suggests that within psychological science, especially as practiced in the United States, these alternative epistemologies have not yet gained substantial influence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25046701     DOI: 10.1037/a0037372

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Psychol        ISSN: 0003-066X


  6 in total

Review 1.  Genetic and epigenetic factors underlying sex differences in the regulation of gene expression in the brain.

Authors:  Vikram S Ratnu; Michael R Emami; Timothy W Bredy
Journal:  J Neurosci Res       Date:  2017-01-02       Impact factor: 4.164

Review 2.  Is It Important to Consider Sex and Gender in Neurocognitive Studies?

Authors:  Adrianna Mendrek
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2015-06-02       Impact factor: 4.157

3.  "Having to Shift Everything We've Learned to the Side": Expanding Research Methods Taught in Psychology to Incorporate Qualitative Methods.

Authors:  Lynne D Roberts; Emily Castell
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-05-10

4.  Bias against research on gender bias.

Authors:  Aleksandra Cislak; Magdalena Formanowicz; Tamar Saguy
Journal:  Scientometrics       Date:  2018-02-17       Impact factor: 3.238

5.  "Broad" Impact: Perceptions of Sex/Gender-Related Psychology Journals.

Authors:  Elizabeth R Brown; Jessi L Smith; Doralyn Rossmann
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-03-03

Review 6.  Crisis Ahead? Why Human-Robot Interaction User Studies May Have Replicability Problems and Directions for Improvement.

Authors:  Benedikt Leichtmann; Verena Nitsch; Martina Mara
Journal:  Front Robot AI       Date:  2022-03-11
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.