Hi, David.  The anthropologists Ryles and Geertz (e.g.,The Interpretation of
Cultures, 1973) speak of "thick description" in the social sciences, and
this may be a good place to start.  Within psychotherapy research, my own
field of descriptive familiarity, Elliott among others (Elliott, R. (1984).
A discovery-oriented approach to significant change events in psychotherapy:
Interpersonal process recall and comprehensive process analysis (Chapter 8,
pp. 249-286). In L. N. Rice & L. S. Greenberg (Eds.), Patterns of change
Intensive analysis of psychotherapy process. New York: Guilford) has made an
argument for "discovery-oriented" research that includes description as its
first aspirational domain.  Don Polkinghorne also makes this argument very
nicely in his treatise on methodology:
Polkinghorne, D. E. (1983). Methodology for the human sciences. Albany: NY:
State University of New York Press.

Hope some of that helps,

Mark Kunkel
Univ West Georgia


-----Original Message-----
From: David Epstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 3:36 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences
Subject: in defense of descriptive data?


I'm revising an invited commentary that I cowrote for a psychopharm
journal, and I've made what I think is a self-evident point: that an
animal model of a clinical phenomenon requires good descriptive data
about the phenomenon itself.  So I've got a passage that states:

  "From both ends--preclinical and clinical--the homology between
  drug-seeking behavior in rodents and humans will need continued
  elucidation.  One obstacle to that elucidation is the point of view
  wherein terms such as _descriptive_ are used pejoratively.  We
  believe that science begins with good descriptions, and for relapse
  [to drug addiction], there is a great deal more describing to be
  done."  [I go on to suggest real-time prospective assessment of the
  precipitants and process of relapse, as Saul Shiffman has done
  with tobacco addicts.]

Can the TIPS collective brain point me toward a source that might
supplement my simple declaration that "We believe"?  Searches of
Medline, PsycInfo, and google haven't turned up anything obvious.

thanks,
David Epstein
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to