Hurlburt Russell T, Heavey Christopher L
University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Department of Psychology, 4505 Maryland Pkwy, Box 455030, Las Vegas, NV 89154-5030, USA.
Conscious Cogn. 2015 Jan;31:148-59. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2014.11.002. Epub 2014 Dec 8.
We argue that inquiring about directly apprehended ("pristine") inner experience requires four overlapping methodological characteristics: effectively limiting investigation to specific, clearly identified moments; effectively limiting investigation to pristine experience; bracketing presuppositions; and iteratively acquiring skills. We compare and contrast Descriptive Experience Sampling (DES), other (non-DES) experience sampling methods, and questionnaires and conclude that whereas non-DES sampling methods and questionnaires appear to inquire about pristine inner experience, they fall short on all four methodological counts and therefore might be better understood as investigating an ill-defined mixture of presuppositions, judgments about experience, and pristine experience itself. Typical experience sampling studies and questionnaires can be valid and useful, but their validity and utility does not (or at least does not necessarily) arise from their phenomenological fidelity.
我们认为，探究直接领悟到的（“原初的”）内在体验需要四个相互重叠的方法学特征：有效地将调查限制在特定的、明确界定的时刻；有效地将调查限制在原初体验；搁置预设；以及反复获取技能。我们比较并对比了描述性体验抽样法（DES）、其他（非DES）体验抽样方法和问卷调查，并得出结论，虽然非DES抽样方法和问卷调查似乎是在探究原初的内在体验，但它们在所有四个方法学方面都存在不足，因此或许可以更好地理解为是在研究预设、对体验的判断和原初体验本身的一种不明确的混合体。典型的体验抽样研究和问卷调查可能是有效且有用的，但它们的有效性和实用性并非（或至少不一定）源于其现象学上的忠实性。
