The methodology of Husserlian vs. contemporary phenomenological psychology: A historico-critical study

摘要

The methodology of Husserlian phenomenological psychology (HPP) and contemporary phenomenological psychology (CPP) were compared critically. A review of Husserl's works on phenomenological psychology indicated that this discipline was intended to provide an apodictic system of concepts on which to base empirical psychology. It was to be an a priori, descriptive, intuitive inquiry into the essences (i.e. necessary, universal structures) of intentional phenomena. A review of 29 contemporary methodological articles revealed that research projects by van Kaam (1958) and Giorgi (1975) in which one or more subjects were queried concerning an experience and the response of each was subjected to qualitative analysis became paradigms for the CPP. An analysis of psychological articles disclosed four types of methods in current use in phenomenological psychology. In descending order of frequency these were: (1) empirical studies; (2) hermeneutic studies; (3) traditional Husserlian studies; (4) experimental studies. Each of these types of research exemplified a continuity from HPP to CPP in the effort to describe the general structures of experiences. Compared to HPP, CPP was characterized by: (1) the inclusion of the experience of a group of subjects; (2) the use of hermeneutic rather than descriptive methods; (3) the use of empirical rather than a priori logic in generalization. (Abstract shortened by UMI.).