Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for FREE ACCESS to this landmark database

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Theory & Psychology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (4)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yanchar, S. C.
Right arrow Articles by Clay, S. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

On the Nature of a Critical Methodology

Stephen C. Yanchar

Edwin E. Gantt

Brigham Young University

Samuel L. Clay

Brigham Young University–Idaho

This article describes an expanded view of methodology— termed a critical methodology—in the wake of criticisms of the received view of scientific method. A critical methodology would involve a deemphasis on method per se, the need for methodological innovation and the continual critical examination of the assumptions that undergird methods and other research resources. It is argued that under a critical methodology, the processes of theory construction and research would be essentially processes of argument construction, where arguments can be supported with many types of evidence. Although there is no final certainty through method under this framework, progress can result from the tension between various perspectives in context.

Key Words: argument construction • counterrules • Feyerabend • historical perspective • methodological pluralism • qualitative methods • quantitative methods

Theory & Psychology, Vol. 15, No. 1, 27-50 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0959354305049743


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Health PsycholHome page
D. Hodgetts, A. Radley, K. Chamberlain, and A. Hodgetts
Health Inequalities and Homelessness: Considering Material, Spatial and Relational Dimensions
J Health Psychol, September 1, 2007; 12(5): 709 - 725.
[Abstract] [PDF]