Empirical methods of psychological research. Methods and means of empirical research
Scientific knowledge can be divided into two levels: theoretical and empirical. The first is based on inferences, the second - on experiments and interaction with the object under study. Despite their different natures, these methods are equally important for the development of science.
Empirical research
The basis of empirical knowledge is the direct practical interaction of the researcher and the object he is studying. It consists of experiments and observations. Empirical and theoretical knowledge are opposites - in the case of theoretical research, a person makes do with only his own ideas about the subject. As a rule, this method is the province of the humanities.
Empirical research cannot do without instruments and instrumental installations. These are means associated with organizing observations and experiments, but in addition to them there are also conceptual means. They are used as a special scientific language. It has a complex organization. Empirical and theoretical knowledge are focused on the study of phenomena and the dependencies that arise between them. By conducting experiments, a person can identify an objective law. This is also facilitated by the study of phenomena and their correlation.
Empirical methods of cognition
According to the scientific concept, empirical and theoretical knowledge consists of several methods. This is a set of steps necessary to solve a certain problem (in this case we are talking about identifying previously unknown patterns). The first empirical method is observation. It is a purposeful study of objects, which primarily relies on various senses (perceptions, sensations, ideas).
At its initial stage, observation gives an idea of the external characteristics of the object of knowledge. However, the ultimate goal of this is to determine the deeper and more intrinsic properties of an object. A common misconception is the idea that scientific observation is passive - far from it.
Observation
Empirical observation is detailed in nature. It can be either direct or mediated by various technical devices and instruments (for example, a camera, telescope, microscope, etc.). As science develops, observation becomes more complex and complex. This method has several exceptional qualities: objectivity, certainty and unambiguous design. When using instruments, deciphering their readings plays an additional role.
In the social and human sciences, empirical and theoretical knowledge takes root heterogeneously. Observation in these disciplines is particularly difficult. It becomes dependent on the personality of the researcher, his principles and life attitudes, as well as the degree of interest in the subject.
Observation cannot be carried out without a certain concept or idea. It must be based on a certain hypothesis and record certain facts (in this case, only related and representative facts will be indicative).
Theoretical and empirical studies differ in detail. For example, observation has its own specific functions that are not typical for other methods of cognition. First of all, it is providing a person with information, without which further research and hypotheses are impossible. Observation is the fuel on which thinking runs. Without new facts and impressions there will be no new knowledge. In addition, it is through observation that one can compare and verify the truth of the results of preliminary theoretical studies.
Experiment
Different theoretical and empirical methods of cognition also differ in the degree of their intervention in the process being studied. A person can observe it strictly from the outside, or he can analyze its properties from his own experience. This function is performed by one of the empirical methods of cognition - experiment. In terms of importance and contribution to the final result of research, it is in no way inferior to observation.
An experiment is not only a purposeful and active human intervention in the course of the process under study, but also its change, as well as its reproduction in specially prepared conditions. This method of cognition requires much more effort than observation. During the experiment, the object of study is isolated from any outside influence. A clean and unpolluted environment is created. The experimental conditions are completely specified and controlled. Therefore, this method, on the one hand, corresponds to the natural laws of nature, and on the other hand, it is distinguished by an artificial essence determined by man.
Experiment structure
All theoretical and empirical methods have a certain ideological load. The experiment, which is carried out in several stages, is no exception. First of all, planning and step-by-step construction take place (the goal, means, type, etc. are determined). Then comes the stage of carrying out the experiment. Moreover, it occurs under perfect human control. At the end of the active phase, it is time to interpret the results.
Both empirical and theoretical knowledge differ in a certain structure. In order for an experiment to take place, the experimenters themselves, the object of the experiment, instruments and other necessary equipment, a methodology and a hypothesis are required, which is confirmed or refuted.
Devices and installations
Every year scientific research becomes more and more complex. They require increasingly modern technology, which allows them to study what is inaccessible to simple human senses. If previously scientists were limited to their own vision and hearing, now they have at their disposal unprecedented experimental facilities.
When using the device, it may have a negative impact on the object being studied. For this reason, the result of an experiment sometimes diverges from its original goals. Some researchers are trying to achieve such results on purpose. In science, this process is called randomization. If the experiment takes on a random nature, then its consequences become an additional object of analysis. The possibility of randomization is another feature that distinguishes empirical and theoretical knowledge.
Comparison, description and measurement
Comparison is the third empirical method of knowledge. This operation allows you to identify differences and similarities between objects. Empirical and theoretical analysis cannot be carried out without deep knowledge of the subject. In turn, many facts begin to play with new colors after the researcher compares them with another texture known to him. Comparison of objects is carried out within the framework of features that are significant for a particular experiment. Moreover, objects that are compared based on one trait may be incomparable based on their other characteristics. This empirical technique is based on analogy. It underlies what is important to science
Methods of empirical and theoretical knowledge can be combined with each other. But research is almost never complete without description. This cognitive operation records the results of previous experience. Scientific notation systems are used for description: graphs, diagrams, drawings, diagrams, tables, etc.
The last empirical method of knowledge is measurement. This is carried out through special means. Measurement is necessary to determine the numerical value of the desired measured quantity. Such an operation must be carried out in accordance with strict algorithms and rules accepted in science.
Theoretical knowledge
In science, theoretical and empirical knowledge have different fundamental supports. In the first case, this is the detached use of rational methods and logical procedures, and in the second, direct interaction with the object. Theoretical knowledge uses intellectual abstractions. One of its most important methods is formalization - the display of knowledge in a symbolic and iconic form.
At the first stage of expressing thinking, familiar human language is used. It is characterized by complexity and constant variability, which is why it cannot be a universal scientific tool. The next stage of formalization is associated with the creation of formalized (artificial) languages. They have a specific purpose - a strict and precise expression of knowledge that cannot be achieved through natural speech. Such a symbol system can take the format of formulas. It is very popular in mathematics and others where you cannot do without numbers.
With the help of symbolism, a person eliminates ambiguous understanding of the recording, makes it shorter and clearer for further use. Not a single study, and therefore all scientific knowledge, can do without speed and simplicity in the use of its tools. Empirical and theoretical study equally need formalization, but it is at the theoretical level that it takes on extremely important and fundamental significance.
An artificial language, created within a narrow scientific framework, becomes a universal means of exchanging thoughts and communicating among specialists. This is the fundamental task of methodology and logic. These sciences are necessary to transmit information in an understandable, systematized form, free from the shortcomings of natural language.
The meaning of formalization
Formalization allows you to clarify, analyze, clarify and define concepts. The empirical and theoretical levels of knowledge cannot do without them, therefore the system of artificial symbols has always played and will play a large role in science. Everyday and colloquial concepts seem obvious and clear. However, due to their ambiguity and uncertainty, they are not suitable for scientific research.
Formalization is especially important when analyzing alleged evidence. The sequence of formulas based on specialized rules is distinguished by the accuracy and rigor necessary for science. In addition, formalization is necessary for programming, algorithmization and computerization of knowledge.
Axiomatic method
Another method of theoretical research is the axiomatic method. It is a convenient way of deductively expressing scientific hypotheses. Theoretical and empirical sciences cannot be imagined without terms. Very often they arise due to the construction of axioms. For example, in Euclidean geometry at one time the fundamental terms of angle, straight line, point, plane, etc. were formulated.
Within the framework of theoretical knowledge, scientists formulate axioms - postulates that do not require proof and are the initial statements for further theory construction. An example of this is the idea that the whole is always greater than the part. Using axioms, a system for deriving new terms is constructed. Following the rules of theoretical knowledge, a scientist can obtain unique theorems from a limited number of postulates. At the same time, it is much more effectively used for teaching and classification than for discovering new patterns.
Hypothetico-deductive method
Although theoretical and empirical scientific methods are different, they are often used together. An example of such an application is using it to build new systems of closely intertwined hypotheses. Based on them, new statements concerning empirical, experimentally proven facts are derived. The method of drawing a conclusion from archaic hypotheses is called deduction. This term is familiar to many thanks to the novels about Sherlock Holmes. Indeed, the popular literary character often uses the deductive method in his investigations, with the help of which he builds a coherent picture of the crime from many disparate facts.
The same system operates in science. This method of theoretical knowledge has its own clear structure. First of all, you become familiar with the invoice. Then assumptions are made about the patterns and causes of the phenomenon being studied. For this, all kinds of logical techniques are used. Guesses are evaluated according to their probability (the most probable one is selected from this heap). All hypotheses are tested for consistency with logic and compatibility with basic scientific principles (for example, the laws of physics). Consequences are derived from the assumption, which are then verified through experiment. The hypothetico-deductive method is not so much a method of new discovery as a method of substantiating scientific knowledge. This theoretical tool was used by such great minds as Newton and Galileo.
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/
Introduction
1. Methods of empirical research
1.1 Scientific facts of empirical research
1.2 Procedures for transition to empirical dependencies and facts
1.3 Characteristics of empirical research methods
1.3.1 Surveillance
1.3.2 Survey methods
1.3.3 Experiment
1.4 Obtaining information empirically
1.5 Methods that involve working with obtained empirical information
Conclusion
Bibliography
Introduction
Any empirical study begins with the researcher recording the severity of the property (or properties) of interest to him in the object or objects of research, usually using numbers. Thus, it is necessary to distinguish between objects of research (in social sciences these are most often people, subjects), their properties (what interests the researcher constitutes the subject of study) and signs that reflect the severity of properties on a numerical scale.
Typically, the process of empirical research includes the following stages: determining the subject and object of the study, setting its goals and objectives, planning the study and putting forward working hypotheses and methods; conducting research aimed at collecting empirical material; processing of empirical data; discussion and interpretation of data; formulation of conclusions that confirm or refute hypotheses. It is necessary to decide already in the initial stages of planning a study what the sample size will be, what methods of collecting information will be used and, finally, what types of processing will be applied to the data obtained.
Target This work consists of a detailed examination of empirical research methods.
Job objectives:
1. Scientific facts of empirical research.
2. Procedures for transition to empirical dependencies and facts.
3. Characteristics of empirical research methods.
4. Observation.
5. Survey methods.
6. Experiment.
7. Obtaining information using the empirical method.
8. Methods that involve working with the obtained empirical information.
1. Methods of empirical research
1.1 Scientific facts of empirical research
Any scientific research begins with the collection, systematization and synthesis of facts. The concept of “fact” has the following basic meanings: Malin A.S., Mukhin V.I. Systems research. - M.: State University Higher School of Economics, 2008. P. 55
1. A certain fragment of reality, objective events, results related either to objective reality (“facts of reality”) or to the sphere of consciousness and cognition (“facts of consciousness”).
2. Knowledge about any event, phenomenon, the reliability of which has been proven, i.e. synonym for truth.
3. A sentence that captures empirical knowledge, i.e. obtained through observations and experiments.
The second and third of these meanings are summarized in the concept of “scientific fact”. The latter becomes such when it is an element of the logical structure of a specific system of scientific knowledge and is included in this system. This fact has always been emphasized by outstanding scientists. “We must admit,” noted N. Bohr, “that not a single experimental fact can be formulated apart from a certain system of concepts.” Louis de Broglie wrote that “the result of an experiment never has the character of a simple fact that only needs to be stated. The presentation of this result always contains some degree of interpretation, therefore, theoretical ideas are always mixed with the fact.” Grishenko I. M. Fundamentals of scientific research. - K.: KNEU, 2006. P. 115
In understanding the nature of fact in modern scientific methodology, two extreme trends stand out: factualism and theoreticism. If the first emphasizes the independence and autonomy of facts in relation to various theories, then the second, on the contrary, argues that facts are completely dependent on theory and when theories change, the entire factual basis of science changes. The correct solution to the problem is that a scientific fact, having a theoretical load, is relatively independent of theory, since it is fundamentally determined by material reality.
The paradox of the theoretical loading of facts is resolved as follows. The formation of a fact involves knowledge that is tested independently of theory, and facts provide an incentive for the formation of new theoretical knowledge. The latter, in turn (if they are reliable) can again participate in the formation of new facts, etc.
In scientific knowledge, facts play a dual role: firstly, the totality of facts forms the empirical basis for putting forward hypotheses and building theories; secondly, facts are decisive in confirming theories (if they correspond to the totality of facts) or refuting them (if there is no correspondence). The discrepancy between individual or several facts and a theory does not mean that the latter should be immediately rejected. Only when all attempts to eliminate the contradiction between theory and facts are unsuccessful do they come to the conclusion that the theory is false and abandon it. In any science we must proceed from the facts given to us, which must be accepted, regardless of whether we like them or not.
Speaking about the most important role of facts in the development of science, V.I. Vernadsky wrote: “Scientific facts constitute the main content of scientific knowledge and scientific work. They, if correctly established, are indisputable and generally binding. Along with them, systems of certain scientific facts can be distinguished, the main form of which is empirical generalizations.” Grishenko I. M. Fundamentals of scientific research. - K.: KNEU, 2006. P. 121
So, a scientific fact is a fragment of knowledge certified by science and social practice, reflecting the properties of the material and spiritual world.
Facts are the fundamental foundation of science that distinguishes science from philosophy and religion. Neither philosophy nor religion creates such facts and generalizations.
It is unacceptable to “snatch” individual facts, but it is necessary to strive to cover as much as possible all the facts (without a single exception). Facts must be taken in a holistic system, in their interrelation.
However, one should not “chase” an infinite number of facts, but, having collected a certain number of them, it is necessary in any case to include the collected system of facts in some kind of conceptual system in order to give them meaning and significance.
A scientist does not blindly search for facts, but is always guided by certain goals, objectives, ideas, etc. Thus, empirical experience - especially in modern science - is never blind: it is planned, constructed by theory, and facts are always theoretically loaded in one way or another. Therefore, the starting point, the beginning of science is, strictly speaking, not the objects themselves, not bare facts (even in their totality), but theoretical schemes, “conceptual frameworks of reality.”
According to K. Popper, the belief that we can begin scientific research with “pure observations” without having “something resembling a theory” is absurd. Therefore, some conceptual perspective is absolutely necessary. Mishin V.M. Systems research. - M.: UNITY-DANA, 2008. P. 127
This is how we “make” our experience. It is the theorist who shows the way to the experimenter, and theory dominates the experimental work from its original plan to its finishing touches in the laboratory. Accordingly, there cannot be a “pure language of observation,” since all languages are “permeated with theories.”
Empirical facts form the empirical basis on which scientific theories are based.
Facts are recorded in the language of science in statements like: “the strength of the current in a circuit depends on the resistance of the conductor”; “a supernova exploded in the constellation Virgo”; “more than half of those surveyed in the city are dissatisfied with the ecology of the urban environment,” etc.
The internal structure of the empirical level is formed by at least two sublevels: a) direct observations and experiments, the result of which are observational data; b) cognitive procedures through which the transition from observational data to empirical dependencies and facts is carried out.
It is possible to highlight the problem: how is the transition from observational data to empirical facts carried out and what guarantees the objective status of a scientific fact? This issue is still far from its final solution.
In an attempt to clarify this issue, let us turn to understanding the observation method. Let us note that scientific observation is of an active nature, implying not just passive contemplation of the processes under study, but their special preliminary organization, ensuring control over their progress.
The activity-based nature of empirical research at the level of observations is most clearly manifested in situations where observation is carried out during a real experiment. By tradition, experiment is contrasted with observation outside the experiment. Note that the core of empirical research is an experiment - testing the phenomena being studied under controlled and controlled conditions. Mikhailov S. Empirical sociological research. - M., 2006. P. 129
The difference between experimentation and observation is that the experimental conditions are controlled, while in observation the processes are left to the natural course of events. Without denying the specificity of these two types of cognitive activity, one should pay attention to their common generic characteristics.
To do this, it is advisable to first consider in more detail what is the peculiarity of experimental research as a practical activity. Experimental activity is a specific form of natural interaction, and fragments of nature interacting in an experiment always appear as objects with functionally distinct properties.
In developed forms of experimentation, objects of this kind are produced artificially. These include, first of all, instrument installations with the help of which experimental research is carried out. For example, in modern nuclear physics these can be installations that prepare beams of particles stabilized according to certain parameters (energy, pulse, polarization); targets bombarded by these beams; devices that record the results of the interaction of the beam with the target. For our purposes, it is important to understand that the very manufacture, verification and use of such installations are similar to the operations of functional isolation of properties in natural objects with which the researcher operates. Lomonosov B.P., Mishin V.M. Systems research. - M.: ZAO “Inform-Knowledge”, 2008. P. 224
From such positions, it is quite legitimate to consider natural objects included in the experimental situation as “quasi-instrumental” devices, regardless of whether they were obtained artificially or naturally arose in nature, regardless of human activity.
In light of the above, the specificity of the experiment, which distinguishes it from interactions in nature “in itself,” can be characterized in such a way that in an experiment, interacting fragments of nature always act as instrumental subsystems. The activity of “endowing” natural objects with the functions of devices can be called the creation of an instrument situation.
The object of research is always represented not by a separate element (thing) within the instrumental situation, but by its entire structure.
The corresponding object of study can only be identified through the structure of the relationships involved in the experiment of natural fragments.
Scientific observations are always purposeful and carried out as systematic observations, and in systematic observations the subject necessarily constructs an instrumental situation. As for random observations, they are clearly not enough for research. Random observations can become an impetus for discovery if and only if they turn into systematic observations.
Despite the differences between experiment and observation, they appear as forms of a practically active relationship between the subject and the object. Now it remains to prove that systematic observations presuppose the construction of an instrumental situation. To do this, we will specifically consider such observations where real experimentation with the objects under study is obviously impossible. These include, for example, observations in astronomy.
1.2 Procedures for transition to empirical dependencies and facts
The transition from observational data to empirical dependencies and scientific fact presupposes the elimination of subjective aspects contained in them (associated with possible observer errors, random interference distorting the course of the phenomena under study, instrument errors) and obtaining reliable objective knowledge about the phenomena.
Such a transition involves rather complex cognitive procedures. To obtain an empirical fact, it is necessary to carry out at least two types of operations. Firstly, rational processing of observation data and the search for stable, invariant content in them. To form a fact, it is necessary to compare many observations with each other, identify repeating features in them and eliminate random disturbances and errors associated with observer errors. If a measurement is made during an observation, the observation data is recorded in the form of numbers. Then, to obtain an empirical fact, a certain statistical processing of measurement results is required, a search for average statistical values in the set of these data.
If instrument installations were used during the observation process, then, along with the observation protocols, a control test report of the devices is always drawn up, in which their possible systematic errors are recorded. When statistically processing observation data, these errors are also taken into account; they are eliminated from observations in the process of searching for their invariant content. Mikhailov S. Empirical sociological research. - M., 2006. P. 105
The search for an invariant as a condition for the formation of an empirical fact is characteristic not only of natural science, but also of socio-historical knowledge. For example, a historian establishing the chronology of past events always strives to identify and compare a multitude of independent historical evidence, which for him acts as observational data.
Secondly, to establish a fact, it is necessary to interpret the invariant content revealed in observations. In the process of such interpretation, previously acquired theoretical knowledge is widely used.
1.3 Characteristics of empirical research methods
Theoretical thinking is informed by empirical research. Empirical methods are methods that provide the possibility of direct knowledge of reality. The methods of empirical research are: observation, conversation, interviewing, questioning, testing, experiment.
fact observation empirical information
1.3.1 Surveillance
The most common empirical method is observation. This is the direct perception of phenomena and processes in various conditions without interfering with their course. The following types of observations are distinguished:
· open and hidden depending on the position of the observer;
· periodic, longitudinal (long-term) and single from the point of view of chronological organization of observation;
· passive and active depending on the creation of special conditions;
· random and systematic depending on regularity;
· included and not included from the point of view of the observer’s participation in the process under study. Ludchenko A. A, Fundamentals of scientific research. - K.: Zannaya, 2007. P. 144
With open observation, the subject knows that he is being observed; covert observation means that the observer remains unnoticed.
Observation as a scientific method is organized, requires a specific goal and a clear plan, recording the results in a special diary. The observation plan involves indicating the object, purpose and objectives, time and place of observation, duration and expected result. Thus, the researcher answers the questions: what to observe, why, when and for how long, what can be expected.
The advantages of observation include:
· variety of information collected;
· preservation of natural operating conditions;
· use of technical means (video, audio);
· It is not necessary to obtain the preliminary consent of the subjects.
The disadvantages include:
· subjectivity of information;
· inability to control the situation or interfere in the process;
· significant time investment.
1.3.2 Survey methods
A survey is a sociological method of collecting primary information, based on direct or indirect interaction between the researcher and respondents. In direct interaction, the survey acts as a conversation or interview, and in indirect interaction, it acts as a questionnaire. The source of information in this case is the verbal or written judgment of the respondent (the person who is questioned during a conversation, questionnaire, or interview is called a respondent).
In psychological and pedagogical research, a survey can be equally used in two directions: to obtain information about the external aspects of the activities of teachers, professors or schoolchildren (actions, opinions, interests, etc.) and to obtain more in-depth information about the internal mechanisms of the formation of these actions , opinions, interests.
The methods of this group are relatively simple in organization and universal as a means of obtaining a wide range of data.
A conversation is a dialogue between a researcher and a subject according to a pre-developed program. Conversation is a method of collecting information based on verbal communication. The effectiveness of this method directly depends on the correct formulation of questions, a comfortable psychological environment, justification and communication of the motives for the study, and the researcher’s ability to interest the interlocutor. Open and hidden phonograms of conversation are practiced. Filipenko A. S. Fundamentals of scientific research. K.: Akademvidav, 2008. P. 286
Conversation is usually used at different stages of research, both to obtain primary information and to clarify conclusions obtained by other methods, such as observation.
In cases where the direction of the conversation and the nature of the questions are strictly defined, when the researcher only asks questions and the respondent answers them, this will be another type of survey - an interview. It consists of collecting information obtained in the form of answers to questions posed. Often interview questionnaires are structured like questionnaires.
Unlike a conversation, the interviewer is only interested in the opinion and assessment of the subject. If the conversation is usually not limited in time and sometimes hardly fits into the originally planned course, then in the interview the researcher himself sets the plan and pace of the conversation and strictly adheres to the list of issues discussed. In this case, the researcher only records the respondent’s statements, maintaining a neutral position.
Conversations and interviews require great flexibility and sensitivity from the researcher, the ability to listen to the interlocutor and at the same time lead her along a given path, understand the emotional states of the subjects, respond to their changes, pay attention to external manifestations of the emotional state, such as gestures, facial expressions, posture, intonation. It is important to provide convenient forms for recording the information received during the conversation and interview.
The weakness of conversations and interviews is the possibility of instilling in respondents the position of the researcher and the difficulty of covering a wide range of people with the survey.
Questioning is a written survey, as a result of which information is obtained about the typicality of the phenomena and processes being studied using specially designed questionnaires. In the process of questioning, it is possible to cover a large number of respondents and identify mass phenomena, based on the analysis of which facts are established. There are three types of questionnaires. Open questionnaire - consists of questions without accompanying ready-made answers. The closed-type questionnaire offers ready-to-choose answers. A mixed questionnaire contains elements of both. Mikhailov S. Empirical sociological research. - M., 2006. P. 221
The weaknesses of the questionnaires are their standard nature, the lack of live contact with the respondents, which does not always provide sufficiently comprehensive and frank answers.
When using a survey, an unambiguous, clear, precise formulation of the question is very important. You cannot ask suggestive questions. It is not always useful to ask questions head-on. Indirect questions are preferable, revealing assessments, attitudes, and opinions of interest to the researcher through information about other objects.
Testing is a test fixed in time, designed to establish the quantitative and qualitative individual psychological characteristics of a person. This research method uses standardized questions and tasks - tests that allow you to determine the level of development of knowledge, abilities, skills, personal characteristics, as well as determine their compliance with certain standards or compare with the development of the quality under study in the subject in an earlier period. Testing assumes that the subject performs a certain activity: this can be solving problems, drawing, telling a story based on a picture, etc.
The following main types of tests are distinguished: Grishenko I. M. Fundamentals of scientific research. - K.: KNEU, 2006. P. 195
1) Achievement tests are used to identify educational or professional knowledge, skills and abilities, including solving problems that have educational or professional content. All cases of test examinations can serve as an example.
2) Ability tests are a specially selected standardized set of tasks designed to measure the level of development of certain abilities (memory, thinking, intelligence, professional, etc.).
3) Personality tests allow you to measure various aspects of an individual’s personality: attitudes, values, relationships, emotional, motivational and interpersonal properties, typical forms of behavior.
There are certain rules for conducting surveys, questionnaires, testing and interpreting the results obtained. These rules are quite clearly worked out:
1. Informing the subject about the purposes of the survey.
2. Familiarization of the subject with instructions for completing tasks.
3. Providing a situation for the subjects to perform tasks calmly and independently.
4. Maintaining a neutral attitude towards the subjects, avoiding hints and help.
5. Preventing the dissemination of information obtained as a result of testing, ensuring its confidentiality.
7. Familiarizing the subject with the diagnostic results, providing him or the responsible person with the relevant information, taking into account the principle “Do no harm!”
1.3.3 Experiment
Experiment - based on the study of the object under study in artificially created conditions for it.
When considering these methods, it should be taken into account that in the list they are arranged according to the degree of increase in the researcher’s activity. Of course, observation and measurement are included in all types of experiments, but they should also be considered as independent methods, widely represented in all sciences.
An experiment (from Latin experimentum - test, experience) in the scientific method is a method of studying a certain phenomenon under controlled conditions. Differs from observation by active interaction with the object being studied. Typically, an experiment is carried out as part of a scientific research and serves to test a hypothesis and establish causal relationships between phenomena. Experiment is the cornerstone of the empirical approach to knowledge. Popper's criterion puts forward the possibility of setting up an experiment as the main difference between a scientific theory and a pseudoscientific one.
1.4 Obtaining information empirically
Techniques for obtaining quantitative information are represented by two types of operations - counting and measurement in accordance with the objective differences between discrete and continuous. As a method of obtaining accurate quantitative information in the counting operation, numerical parameters consisting of discrete elements are determined, and a one-to-one correspondence is established between the elements of the set that makes up the group and the numerical signs with which the count is carried out. The numbers themselves reflect objectively existing quantitative relationships.
It should be realized that numerical forms and signs perform a variety of functions in both scientific and everyday knowledge, not all of which are related to measurement: Stechenko D. I., Chmir O. S. Methodology of scientific research. K.: VD “Professional”, 2009. P. 192
· are means of naming, unique labels or convenient identifying marks;
· are a counting instrument;
· act as a sign to designate a specific place in an ordered system of degrees of a certain property;
· are a means of establishing equality of intervals or differences;
· are signs expressing quantitative relationships between qualities, i.e., means of expressing quantities.
When considering various scales based on the use of numbers, it is necessary to distinguish between these functions, which are alternately performed either by a special symbolic form of numbers, or by numbers acting as semantic values of the corresponding numerical forms. From this point of view, it is obvious that naming scales, examples of which are the numbering of athletes in teams, cars in the State Traffic Inspectorate, bus and tram routes, etc., are neither measurement nor even inventory, since here numerical forms perform the function of naming, but not bills.
The method of measurement in the social sciences and humanities remains a serious problem. These are, first of all, the difficulties of collecting quantitative information about many social, socio-psychological phenomena, for which in many cases there are no objective, instrumental means of measurement.
Methods for isolating discrete elements and the objective analysis itself are also difficult, not only due to the characteristics of the object, but also due to the interference of non-scientific value factors - prejudices of everyday consciousness, religious worldview, ideological or corporate prohibitions, etc.
It is known that many so-called assessments, for example, students’ knowledge, performances of participants in competitions and competitions even at the highest level, often depend on the qualifications, honesty, corporate spirit and other subjective qualities of teachers, judges, and jury members.
Apparently, this kind of assessment cannot be called a measurement in the exact sense of the word, which involves, as the science of measurement defines - metrology, comparison through a physical (technical) procedure of a given quantity with one or another value of an accepted standard - units of measurement and obtaining an accurate quantitative result.
1.5 Methods that involve working with obtained empirical information
So far we have been talking about empirical methods that are aimed at isolating and studying real objects. Let's consider the second group of methods at this level, which involve working with received empirical information - scientific facts that need to be processed, systematized, carried out primary generalization, etc.
These methods are necessary when the researcher works in the layer of existing, acquired knowledge, no longer directly addressing the events of reality, organizing the data obtained, trying to discover regular relationships - empirical laws, and make assumptions about their existence. By their nature, these are largely “purely logical” methods, unfolding according to laws adopted primarily in logic, but at the same time included in the context of the empirical level of scientific research with the task of organizing current knowledge. At the level of ordinary simplified ideas, this stage of the initial predominantly inductive generalization of knowledge is often interpreted as the very mechanism for obtaining a theory, which shows the influence of the “all-inductivist” concept of knowledge that was widespread in past centuries.
The study of scientific facts begins with their analysis. By analysis we mean a research method consisting of the mental dissection (decomposition) of a whole or generally complex phenomenon into its component, simpler elementary parts and the identification of individual aspects, properties, and connections. But analysis is not the final goal of scientific research, which seeks to reproduce the whole, to understand its internal structure, the nature of its functioning, the laws of its development. This goal is achieved by subsequent theoretical and practical synthesis.
Synthesis is a research method consisting of connecting, reproducing the connections of the analyzed parts, elements, sides, components of a complex phenomenon and comprehending the whole in its unity. Analysis and synthesis have their objective foundations in the structure and laws of the material world itself. In objective reality, there are the whole and its parts, unity and differences, continuity and discreteness, constantly occurring processes of disintegration and connection, destruction and creation. In all sciences, analytical-synthetic activity is carried out, while in natural science it can be carried out not only mentally, but also practically.
The very transition from analysis of facts to theoretical synthesis is carried out using methods that, complementing each other and combining, constitute the content of this complex process. One of these methods is induction, which in a narrow sense is traditionally understood as a method of transition from knowledge of individual facts to knowledge of the general, to empirical generalization and the establishment of a general position that turns into a law or other essential connection. The weakness of induction lies in the lack of justification for such a transition. The enumeration of facts can never be practically completed, and we are not sure that the following fact will not be contradictory. Ludchenko A. A, Fundamentals of scientific research. - K.: Zannanya, 2007. P. 277
Therefore, knowledge obtained through induction is always probabilistic. In addition, the premises of the inductive conclusion do not contain knowledge of how significant the generalizable features and properties are. Using enumeration induction, one can obtain knowledge that is not reliable, but only probable.
There are also a number of other methods of generalizing empirical material, with the help of which, as in popular induction, the knowledge obtained is of a probable nature. Such methods include the method of analogies, statistical methods, and the method of model extrapolation. They differ in the degree of validity of the transition from facts to generalizations. All these methods are often combined under the general name of inductive, and then the term induction is used in a broad sense.
In the general process of scientific knowledge, inductive and deductive methods are closely intertwined. Both methods are based on the objective dialectic of the individual and the general, phenomenon and essence, random and necessary.
Inductive methods are of greater importance in sciences that are directly based on experience, while deductive methods are of paramount importance in theoretical sciences as a tool for their logical ordering and construction, as methods of explanation and prediction. To process and generalize facts in scientific research, systematization as reduction into a single system and classification as division into classes, groups, types, etc. are widely used.
Conclusion
From all of the above we can conclude:
The word "empirical" literally means "that which is perceived by the senses." When this adjective is used in relation to methods of scientific research, it serves to designate techniques and methods associated with sensory (feeling) experience. Therefore, they say that empirical methods are based on the so-called. “hard (irrefutable) data” (“hard data”).
Moreover, empirical research firmly adheres to the scientific method as opposed to other research methodologies such as naturalistic observation, archival research, etc.
The most important and necessary premise underlying the methodology of empirical research is that it provides the possibility of its reproduction and confirmation/refutation.
The commitment of empirical research to “hard data” requires high internal consistency and stability of measurement tools (and measures) of those independent and dependent variables that are used for the purpose of scientific study.
The empirical body of information provides primary information about new knowledge and many properties of the objects under study and thus serves as the initial basis for scientific research.
Empirical methods are based, as a rule, on the use of methods and techniques of experimental research that make it possible to obtain factual information about the object. A special place among them is occupied by basic methods, which are relatively often used in practical research activities.
Bibliography
1. Grishenko I. M. Fundamentals of scientific research. - K.: KNEU, 2006.
2. Kovalchuk V.V., Moiseev A.N. Fundamentals of scientific research. - K.: Zannanya, 2005.
3. Korotkov E.M. Research of control systems. - M.: DEKA, 2000.
4. Lomonosov B.P., Mishin V.M. Systems research. - M.: JSC "Inform-Knowledge", 2008.
5. Ludchenko A. A. Fundamentals of scientific research. - K.: Zannanya, 2007.
6. Malin A.S., Mukhin V.I. Systems research. - M.: State University Higher School of Economics, 2008.
7. Mikhailov S. Empirical sociological research. - M., 2006.
8. Mishin V.M. Systems research. - M.: UNITY-DANA, 2008.
9. Stechenko D.I., Chmir O.S. Methodology of scientific research. K.: VD “Professional”, 2009.
10. Filippenko A. S. Fundamentals of scientific research. K.: Academvidav, 2008.
Posted on Allbest.ru
Similar documents
Concept of scientific fact. Scientists' opinions about the nature and characteristics of scientific facts. Internal structure and properties of an empirical fact. Methods for establishing scientific facts: observation, comparison, measurement. The doctrine of the role of scientific facts in the development of knowledge.
abstract, added 01/25/2010
Features of the empirical and theoretical levels of scientific research. Operations necessary to move from observation to empirical fact. Forms of thinking operating at a theoretical level. General logical methods and general scientific approaches.
lecture, added 04/15/2014
Philosophical methods of empirical research as the “upper level” - metaphysical, dialectical, phenomenological, hermeneutic. Three levels (“top to bottom”) in the structure of general scientific methods and techniques: general logical, theoretical and empirical.
abstract, added 04/16/2009
The intellectual ideals of a scientific discipline act as the link between its explanatory techniques, concepts, problems, and their empirical applications. The procedures and methods of a scientific discipline constitute its collective and educational aspects.
abstract, added 12/26/2008
Characteristics of inference as a logical operation. Formation, history of development of inductive and deductive logic. Use of probability theory in modern inference. The mechanism of direct and indirect conclusions, the concept of syllogism, scientific induction.
course work, added 03/08/2010
Scientific knowledge and its structure. The term "knowledge". Subject and object of knowledge. Concept of method. General logical methods of cognition. Empirical and theoretical methods of scientific research. Feeling. Perception. Performance. Thinking.
test, added 02/08/2007
Methods of cognition as a complex system, their classification. The role of the dialectical method of cognition for modern science. Implementation and application of the principles of dialectics. General scientific methods of empirical knowledge. The need for a unified system of units of measurement.
abstract, added 12/12/2016
Inference as a complex form of thinking. The essence of the theory of inference. The importance of studying induction. Classification of inferences according to the direction of logical consequence. Conclusion of a new judgment. Direct inferences through attitudes of judgment.
abstract, added 02/10/2009
History of the development of scientific knowledge. General classification of scientific research methods. Structure and content of the research process. Application of logical laws and rules of argumentation. Registration of the results of research work.
course of lectures, added 02/16/2011
The essence and features of scientific research. Structural components and properties of theoretical knowledge. Interaction of empirical and theoretical levels of research. Successive stages of scientific research. Master's research plan.
There is no generally accepted classification of general scientific methods and techniques; it is carried out for a variety of reasons. It seems to us that the most successful approach is one in which three levels are distinguished in the structure of general scientific methods and techniques (“from top to bottom”): general logical, theoretical and empirical. The main empirical methods include:
1. Observation - purposeful study of objects, based mainly on data from the senses (sensation, perception, ideas). In the course of observation, we gain knowledge not only about the external aspects of the object of knowledge, but - as the ultimate goal - about its essential properties and relationships. The concepts of “methods” and “techniques” are often used as synonyms, but they often differ when methods refer to more complex cognitive procedures that include a whole set of different research techniques. Observation must be direct and indirect with various instruments and technical devices (microscope, telescope, photo and film camera, etc.). With the development of science, observation becomes more complex and indirect.
Basic requirements for scientific observation: unambiguous design; the presence of a system of methods and techniques; objectivity, i.e. the possibility of control through either repeated observation or using other methods (for example, experiment). Observation is usually included as part of the experimental procedure. An important aspect of observation is the interpretation of its results - deciphering instrument readings, a curve on an oscilloscope, an electrocardiogram, etc. The educational result of observation is a description - recording, using natural and artificial language, initial information about the object being studied: diagrams, graphs, diagrams, tables, drawings etc. Observation is closely related to measurement; it is the process of finding the ratio of a given quantity to another homogeneous quantity taken as a unit of measurement. The measurement result is expressed as a number. Observation is particularly difficult in the social sciences and humanities, where its results largely depend on the personality of the observer, his life attitudes and principles, and his interested attitude towards the subject being studied. During observation, the researcher is always guided by a certain idea, concept or hypothesis. He does not simply register any facts, but deliberately selects those that either confirm or refute his ideas. In this case, it is very important to select the most representative, that is, the most representative group of facts in their interrelation. Interpretation of observation is also always carried out with the help of certain theoretical principles.
2. Experiment - active and purposeful intervention in the course of the process under study, a corresponding change in the object or its reproduction in specially created and controlled conditions. However, in an experiment, an object is either reproduced artificially or placed in a certain way specified conditions that meet the goals of the study. During the experiment, the object being studied is isolated from the influence of secondary circumstances that obscure its essence and is presented in its “pure form.” In this case, specific experimental conditions are not only set, but also controlled, modernized, and reproduced many times. Every scientific experiment is always guided by some idea, concept, hypothesis. Without an idea in your head, said I. P. Pavlov, you will not see a fact. Experimental data is always “theoretically loaded” in one way or another - from its setting to the interpretation of its results.
Main features of the experiment:
a) a more active (than during observation) attitude towards the object, up to its change and transformation;
b) repeated reproducibility of the studied object at the request of the researcher;
c) the possibility of detecting properties of phenomena that are not observed in natural conditions;
d) the possibility of considering a phenomenon in its “pure form” by isolating it from circumstances that complicate and mask its course or by changing, varying the experimental conditions;
e) the ability to control the “behavior” of the research object and verify the results.
The main stages of the experiment:
planning and construction (its purpose, type, means, methods of implementation, etc.);
control;
interpretation of results.
An experiment has two interrelated functions: experimental testing of hypotheses and theories, as well as the formation of new scientific concepts.
Taking into account the dependence on these functions, experiments are distinguished: research (search), testing (control), reproducing, isolating, etc.
Based on the nature of the objects, experiments are distinguished between physical, chemical, biological, social, etc.
Of great importance in modern science is the decisive experiment, the purpose of which is to refute one and confirm the other of two (or several) competing concepts. This distinction is relative: an experiment designed to be confirmatory may turn out to be disconfirming in its results, and vice versa. But in any case, the experiment consists of posing specific questions to nature, the answers to which should provide information about its laws. One of the simple types of scientific experiment is a qualitative experiment, which aims to establish the presence or absence of a phenomenon assumed by a hypothesis or theory. A more complex quantitative experiment is one that reveals the quantitative certainty of any property of the phenomenon being studied.
A thought experiment, a system of mental procedures carried out on idealized objects, has become widespread in modern science. A thought experiment is a theoretical model of real experimental situations. Here the scientist operates not with real objects and the conditions of their existence, but with their conceptual images.
Social experiments are increasingly developing, which contribute to the introduction of new forms of social organization and optimization of social management. The object of a social experiment, in the role of a certain group of people, is one of the participants in the experiment whose interests have to be taken into account, and the researcher himself is included in the situation he is studying.
3. Comparison is a cognitive operation that underlies judgments about the similarity or difference of objects. Using comparison, the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of objects are revealed.
To compare is to compare one thing with another in order to identify their relationship. The simplest and most important type of relationship revealed through comparison is the relationship of identity and difference. It should be borne in mind that comparison makes sense only in the totality of “homogeneous” objects that form a class. Comparison of objects in a class is carried out according to characteristics that are essential for this consideration, while objects that are compared on one basis are incomparable on another. Comparison is the basis of such a logical technique as analogy (see below), and serves as the starting point of the comparative-historical method. This is the method by which, through comparison, the general and special in historical and other phenomena are revealed, knowledge of the various stages of development of the same phenomenon or different coexisting phenomena is achieved. This method allows us to identify and compare levels in the development of the phenomenon under study, the changes that have occurred, and determine development trends.
Scientific methods of empirical research - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Scientific methods of empirical research" 2017, 2018.
Methods of empirical research (empirically research methods )
The word "experiential" literally means "that which is perceived by the senses." When this adjective is used in relation to scientific research methods, it serves to designate techniques and methods associated with sensory (feeling) experience. Therefore, they say that empirical methods are based on the so-called. “hard (irrefutable) data” ( « hard data» ). In addition, empirical research. firmly adheres to the scientific method as opposed to other research methodologies such as naturalistic observation, archival research, etc. The most important and necessary premise underlying the methodology of empirical research. is that it provides the possibility of its reproduction and confirmation/refutation. Bias of empirical research. to “hard data” requires high internal consistency and stability of the means of measurement (and measures) of those independent and dependent variables that are used for the purpose of scientific study. Internal consistency is key. stability condition; measurement tools cannot be highly or even sufficiently reliable unless these tools, which supply raw data for subsequent analysis, produce high intercorrelations. Failure to meet this requirement introduces error variance into the system and results in ambiguous or misleading results.
Sampling techniques
M. e. And. depend on the availability of adequate and effective sampling research techniques that provide reliable and valid data, which could be reasonably and without loss of meaning extended to populations, of which these representative or at least closely approximating samples were extracted. Although most statistical methods used to analyze empirical data involve essentially random selection and/or random assignment of subjects to experiments. conditions (groups), randomness per se is not the main issue. Rather, it lies in the undesirability of using primes as test subjects. or exclusively those who constitute extremely limited or refined samples, as in the case of an invitation to participate in a study. volunteer college students, which is widely practiced in psychology and other social sciences. and behavioral sciences. This approach negates the benefits of empirical research. before other research methodologies.
Measurement accuracy
M. e. And. in general - and in psychology in particular - are inevitably associated with the use of multiple measures. In psychology, such measures are used, ch. arr., observed or perceived patterns of behavior, self-reports, etc. psychol. phenomena. It is critical that these measures are sufficiently precise, while also being clearly interpretable and valid. Otherwise, as in the situation with inadequate sampling methods, the advantages of empirical research methodologies. will be negated by erroneous and/or misleading results. When using psychometrics, the researcher is faced with at least two serious problems: a) the crudeness of even the most sophisticated and reliable instruments available for making measurements of the independent and dependent variables, and b) the fact that any psychol. the measurement is not direct, but indirect. No psychol. the property cannot be measured directly; only its intended manifestation in behavior can be measured. For example, such a property as “aggressiveness” can only be indirectly judged by the degree of its manifestation or recognition by the individual, measured using a special scale or other psychol. an instrument or technique designed to measure varying degrees of “aggressiveness” as defined and understood by the developers of the measurement instrument.
Data obtained as a result of psychological measurements. variables represent only the observed values of these variables ( X 0). "True" values ( Xi) always remain unknown. They can only be estimated, and this estimate depends on the magnitude of the error ( X e) present in any given X 0 . In all psychol. measurements, the observed value represents a certain region rather than a point (as can happen, for example, in physics or thermodynamics): X 0 = Xi+ Xe. Therefore, for empirical research. it seems extremely important that the values X 0 of all variables turned out to be close to Xi. This can only be achieved through the use of highly reliable measuring instruments and procedures, which are used or implemented by experienced and qualified scientists or specialists.
Control in the experiment
In empirical research. There are 3 types of variables that influence the course of an experiment: a) independent variables, b) dependent variables and c) intermediate, or extraneous, variables. The first 2 types of variables are included in the experiment. plan by the researcher himself; variables of the third type are not introduced by the researcher, but are always present in the experiment - and they should be controlled. Independent variables are related to or reflect environmental conditions that can be manipulated in an experiment; dependent variables relate to or reflect behavioral outcomes. The purpose of the experiment is to vary environmental conditions (independent variables) and observe the behavioral events that occur (dependent variables), while simultaneously controlling (or eliminating the effects) of the influence of any other (extraneous) variables on them.
Control of variables in an experiment, which requires empirical research, can be achieved either with the help of experiments. plan, or using statistical methods.
Experimental plans
As a rule, in empirical research. 3 main ones are used. kind of experimental. designs: a) hypothesis testing designs, b) evaluation designs, and c) quasi-experimental designs. Hypothesis testing plans address the question of whether independent variables influence dependent variables. The statistical tests of significance used in these experiments are typically two-sided; conclusions are formulated in terms of the presence or absence of an effect of environmental manipulation on behavioral outcomes and changes in behavior.
Estimation plans are similar to hypothesis testing plans in that they appeal to quantitative descriptions of variables, but go beyond simple null hypothesis testing, limited to Sec. arr., using two-sided tests of statistical significance. They are used to examine the subsequent question of how independent variables influence observed outcomes. These experiments focus on quantitative and qualitative descriptions of the nature of the relationships among independent variables. Correlation methods are usually used as statistical procedures for data analysis in these experiments. Basic the emphasis is on determining confidence limits and standard errors, and the main goal is estimation, with max. as accurately as possible, the true values of the dependent variables for all observed values of the independent variables.
Quasi-experimental designs are similar to hypothesis testing designs, except that in such designs the independent variables are either not available for manipulation or are not manipulated in the experiment. These types of plans are quite widely used in empirical research. in psychology and other social sciences. and behavioral sciences, especially for solving applied problems. They belong to the category of research procedures, which go beyond naturalistic observation, but do not reach the more complex and important levels of the other two basic principles. types of experimental plans.
The role of statistical analysis
Psychol. research, empirical or not, is based on Ch. arr. on data obtained from samples. Therefore M. e. And. need to be supplemented by statistical analysis of these sample data so that valid conclusions can be formulated about the results of hypothesis testing.
Empirical testing of hypotheses
The most valuable experiment. plan for conducting empirical research. in psychology and related sciences is a design for testing hypotheses. Therefore, here we should give a definition of “hypothesis”, linked to the methodology of empirical research. An exceptionally precise and concise definition is given by Brown and Ghiselli.
A hypothesis is a statement about factual and conceptual elements and their relationships that goes beyond known facts and accumulated experience in order to achieve better understanding. It is an assumption or a lucky guess containing a condition that has not yet been actually demonstrated, but which deserves investigation.
Empirical confirmation of several. interrelated hypotheses leads to the formulation of a theory. Theories that are invariably confirmed by empirical results of repeated studies. - especially if they are accurately described using mat. equations - inevitably acquire the status of a scientific law. In psychology, however, scientific law is an elusive concept. Most psychol. theories are based on empirical testing of hypotheses, but today there is no psychol. theories that would reach the level of scientific law.
see also Trust Boundaries, Control Groups
Experiment (Latin experimentum - test, trial, experience) is the most important method of empirical research and implementation of experimental activities, during which the experimental scientist influences the object under study with the help of special material means (experimental installations, devices, instruments) and for the purpose obtaining extremely important information about the properties of these objects.
In accordance with the diverse types of experiment, the experimental method is specifically manifested in research, testing, full-scale, model, mental, reproducing, creative, qualitative, quantitative, laboratory, industrial, physical, biological, technical, social, etc.
Posted on ref.rf
types of experiments.
Also, a specifically experimental method is manifested when experiments perform a number of functions in science and education. The most essential function of an experiment in scientific research is the experimental testing of hypotheses and theories. In the process of verification experiments, using the experimental method, the truth of scientific constructions is proven, hypotheses are confirmed or refuted. G. Galileo was at the origins of the formation of the verification experiment. For the first time, he began to systematically test his hypotheses using experiment, thereby he decisively broke with the natural philosophical and scholastic traditions of previous physics.
In research experiments, the heuristic function of the experimental method is fully manifested, with the help of which previously unknown elements and properties are discovered in the objects under study. The value of such experimental discoveries is most clearly manifested in the formation of new hypotheses and theoretical constructions, their clarification and correction. In demonstrative experiments, the experimental method manifests its educational functions; with its help, a scientist demonstrates any phenomena for educational purposes.
The application of the experimental method in science is carried out in the process of experimental activity.
In the historical development of experimental activity, three major historical periods can be distinguished. The first period (XVII - late XIX centuries) is a period of artisanal and individual experimental activity.
In the second period of development of experimental activity (late 19th – mid-20th centuries), private capital began to be widely involved in supporting and conducting experimental research.
The third period of development of experimental activity is carried out under conditions of state regulation and planning of scientific research (mid-20th century to the present). A nationwide period has begun in the organization and conduct of experimental activities. Many research institutes were transferred to the state budget, which opened up new opportunities for expanding scientific research. Experimental activities are further developed in the context of the scientific and technological revolution.
Within the framework of the theory of scientific experiment, a number of stages of experimental activity are distinguished. The first stage – the stage of developing the concept of experimental research – involves the formulation of a problem and the development of hypotheses for its solution. An experiment is conceived on the basis of existing theoretical knowledge and its purpose is often to confirm or refute a hypothesis and scientific theory. The second stage is the stage of planning the experimental study. It includes a number of stages and operations: clarifying the purpose of the experiment, choosing planning methods, calculating forces and financial resources, determining the timing of work in general and by stages, planning the sequence and coordination of work, managing significant factors in basic situations of experimental research, etc.
The third stage is the stage of conducting experimental research. Here it is assumed: analysis of the initial state of the object before experimental intervention; experimental intervention - introducing an experimental factor, exercising control over the experimental situation and the object under study; after the experimental intervention operation, a new analysis of the state of the research object is carried out. The fourth stage is the stage of processing (statistical and theoretical) empirical data, their interpretation, explanation of the meaning of the results, combining them into a common empirical-theoretical system. At this stage, the dependence of experimental activity on theory becomes even more apparent. The ultimate goal of all this work is to give a scientifically based answer to the hypothesis about the causal relationships of phenomena, the nature and degree of their dependence on each other.
Methods of empirical research - methods of obtaining and processing empirical data, their systematization, obtaining facts and empirical laws, as well as testing hypotheses and theories.
Empirical research is usually carried out purposefully, guided by preliminary knowledge - existing theory, hypothesis, they are built on the basis of research programs and research plans. The role of theory is also great in understanding experimental data and in presenting research results. The relationship between empirical research and hypotheses and theories gives rise to the problem of “theoretical loading” of empirical facts.
In empirical research, there are several stages at which appropriate methods are applied. At the first stage of empirical research, which aims to obtain empirical data, the main methods of empirical research are used - observation and experiment. Measurement and comparison of experimental data also takes place here. Scientific observation is a purposeful, organized, systematic perception of the objects under study, associated with the solution of a specific theoretical problem. Scientific observation involves: setting a research goal, determining ways to achieve it, having a plan, exercising control, recording experimental data, etc.
Posted on ref.rf
Observation uses devices that enhance the ability to perceive. Moreover, in some cases (when studying the phenomena of the microworld), the problem arises of taking into account the “disturbing” effect of the device on the observed object.
An experiment is a controlled and controlled influence on the object being studied in order to obtain information about it. In an experiment, cognitive activity is combined with practical activity; it uses a number of material means of activity: devices and installations, instruments, devices, recording and measuring equipment. There are numerous types of experiments: research, testing, reproduction, isolating qualitative and quantitative, physical, biological, social, technical.
Comparison is a method of identifying similarities and differences between the phenomenon under study and other phenomena. Measurement is a method of identifying the quantitative characteristics of the objects under study (length, weight, speed, number of elements, temperature, etc.) In the measurement process, special measuring instruments and mathematical methods are used.
At the second stage of empirical research, the connections between the data of experience are revealed, which makes it possible to distribute them into groups, systematize and classify, that is, describe them. The scientific description of empirical data consists of their categorical characteristics, systematization and classification into types and genera. The description is made both using natural language and using the special language of science (symbols, tables, graphs, etc.) When describing empirical data, scientists use logical means such as analysis, synthesis, comparison, systematization, classification, etc.
Posted on ref.rf
Analysis is the decomposition of a whole into parts and the identification of their properties. Synthesis is the reunification of a whole from parts, grouping of experience data according to essential features. Based on essential characteristics, empirical concepts are introduced that serve as the basis for systematization and classification of experimental data. Systematization is the arrangement of objects and their properties on the basis of certain principles. Classification is the distribution of objects and their properties into groups, types, according to the chosen basis.
At the third stage of empirical research, experimental data are generalized on the basis of induction, a connection is established between empirical concepts within groups of experimental data, and knowledge about empirical patterns is developed. An ideal model that captures empirical patterns should be presented in the form of a symbolic model; it is called a phenomenological construct or an empirical theory. Induction is a logical method of moving thought from a single fact to a general position; in the process of this, an empirical law is established in this case, a kind of first-order essence is achieved. Modeling is a method of reproducing the characteristics of an object on another object (model), specially created for their study. Modeling is used at all stages of empirical research. At the third stage of empirical research, ideal and symbolic models are used to study and test the proposed empirical patterns.
Empirical research is also used when it is extremely important to confirm or refute a hypothesis and theory. For this purpose, methods of verification and falsification are used. Verification is the discovery of facts confirming a hypothesis or theory in empirical experience. Falsification is the discovery of facts in empirical experience that disprove a hypothesis or theory.
Methods of empirical research - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Methods of empirical research" 2017, 2018.
Observation ¨ comparison ¨ measurement ¨ experiment Observation Observation is a purposeful perception of an object, determined by the task of the activity. The main condition for scientific observation is objectivity, i.e. possibility of control by either repeated... .
1. Observation - a purposeful study of objects, based mainly on data from the senses (sensation, perception, ideas). In the course of observation, we gain knowledge not only about the external aspects of the object of knowledge, but - as the ultimate goal - about it... .
1. Observation - a purposeful study of objects, based mainly on data from the senses (sensation, perception, ideas). In the course of observation, we gain knowledge not only about the external aspects of the object of knowledge, but - as the ultimate goal - about it... [read more] .
Observation is a deliberate, directed perception aimed at identifying the existing properties and relationships of the object of knowledge. It can be direct and mediated by devices. An observation acquires scientific significance when it is in accordance with... .
In the logical-epistemological aspect, in the philosophy of science it is traditional to distinguish empirical and theoretical knowledge. They are often considered as two levels of scientific knowledge, which is not entirely accurate, since knowledge gained through experience not only provides the necessary...
Experiment (Latin experimentum - test, test, experience) is the most important method of empirical research and implementation of experimental activities, during which the experimental scientist influences the object under study with the help of special... .
There is no generally accepted classification of general scientific methods and techniques; it is carried out for a variety of reasons. The most successful approach seems to us, according to which three levels are distinguished in the structure of general scientific methods and techniques ("top to bottom"):... .