TY - JOUR
AU1 - Giorgi, Amedeo
AU2 - 
AB - The Role of Observation and Control in Laboratory Amedeo Giorgi ~ and Field Research Settings Saybrook Institute Introduction Most of mainstream psychology today still entertains as an ideal the desirability of doing laboratory research. To be sure, much research is done outside the laboratory, but it is usually prefaced with special justifications or rationalizations because field work is seen as a com promise to be accepted rather than a desideratum. The primary rea son for this seems to be the fact that the myth of the “laboratory as science par excellence” has been accepted by psychology. Even in those cases where necessity has forced psychologists to use other methods, the criteria of the “idealized lab” haunt them. For ex ample, Ickes (1983, p. 19), after describing how the constraints of traditional methods forced him to take a naturalistic turn, con cludes “it is possible to combine many of the best features of labora tory and field-observational research within a single basic paradigm for the study of unstructured dyadic interaction.” My question is: Why is it even desirable to try to introduce some of the criteria of laboratory methods into field research? Are not the situations so different that a 
TI - The Role of Observation and Control in Laboratory and Field Research Settings
JF - Phenomenology + Pedagogy
DO - 10.29173/pandp15027
DA - 1944-12-31
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/unpaywall/the-role-of-observation-and-control-in-laboratory-and-field-research-coFy00M0ec
DP - DeepDyve
ER -