Belzen Jacob A, Hood Ralph W
University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Psychol. 2006 Jan;140(1):5-28. doi: 10.3200/JRLP.140.1.5-28.
Recent evaluations have identified the psychology of religion as a field in crisis and have called for a new multilevel interdisciplinary paradigm. However, a critical meta-perspective on methods reveals a broad range of methodologies, each appropriate for particular levels of complexity in the psychology of religion. No single methodology is appropriate for every level, nor can higher levels of complexity be explained by data from lower levels. The authors identify the different types of research practiced in the psychology of religion and critically discuss philosophical presuppositions involved in two major methodological traditions, the empiricist-analytical and the hermeneutical, often identified as quantitative and qualitative traditions, respectively.
近期的评估已将宗教心理学认定为一个处于危机中的领域，并呼吁建立一种新的多层次跨学科范式。然而，对方法的批判性元视角揭示了广泛的方法论，每种方法论都适用于宗教心理学中特定层次的复杂性。没有一种单一的方法论适用于每个层次，较低层次的数据也无法解释更高层次的复杂性。作者们识别了宗教心理学中所采用的不同类型的研究，并批判性地讨论了两种主要方法论传统中所涉及的哲学预设，这两种传统通常分别被视为定量和定性传统，即经验主义 - 分析传统和诠释学传统。
