Abstract
Science and technology are central to almost all domains of human activity. The study of science and technology is evident in subdisciplines such as philosophy of science, philosophy of technology, sociology of knowledge, and history of science and technology, and in interdisciplines such as Science and Technology Studies. To date, psychology has been marginal in this space. We argue that this is in part owing to psychology viewing itself as a science (and not an object of study). It is also a result of previous attempts toward developing a psychology of science and technology explicitly adopting a narrow epistemological stance that is at odds with the broader epistemic foundation of Science and Technology Studies and related fields.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Adorno, T., & Horkheimer, M. (2002). Dialectic of enlightenment. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press (Originally published 1944).
Andersen, H. (2016). Collaboration, interdisciplinarity, and the epistemology of contemporary science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A,56, 1–10.
Bachelard, G. (2002). The formation of the scientific mind: A contribution to a psychoanalysis of objective knowledge. Manchester, UK: Clinamen Press.
Bacon, F. (1937). Novum organum (R. F. Jones, Ed.). New York: Odyssey Press (Originally published 1620).
Barad, K. (1996). Meeting the universe halfway: Realism and social constructivism without contradiction. In L. H. Nelson & J. Nelson (Eds.), Feminism, science and the philosophy of science (pp. 161–194). Dordrecht: Springer.
Blackman, L., Cromby, J., Hook, D., Papadopoulos, D., & Walkerdine, V. (2008). Creating subjectivities. Subjectivity,22(1), 1–27.
Bloor, D. (1975). A philosophical approach to science. Social Studies of Science,5(4), 507–517.
Brentano, F. (1995). Psychology from an empirical standpoint (A. Rancurello, D. B. Terrell, & L. McAlister, Trans.). London: Routledge (Originally published 1874).
Bruner, J. S., & Postman, L. (1949). On the perception of incongruity: A paradigm. Journal of Personality,18(2), 206–223.
Burman, E. (2016). Deconstructing developmental psychology. London: Routledge.
Campbell, D. T. (1989). Fragments of the fragile history of psychological epistemology and theory of science. In B. Gholson, W. R. Shadish, Jr., R. A. Neimeyer, & A. C. Houts (Eds.), Psychology of science: Contributions to metascience (pp. 21–46). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Choynowski, M. (1948, September). Life of science. Synthese,6(5–6), 248–251.
Costall, A., & Dreier, O. (Eds.). (2006). Doing things with things: The design and use of everyday objects. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Craik, K. (1943). The nature of explanation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Danziger, K. (1994). Constructing the subject: Historical origins of psychological research. Cambridge University Press.
Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry. New York: Henry Holt.
Douglas, H. (2009). Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Dreier, O. (2008). Psychotherapy in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dreier, O. (2016). Conduct of everyday life: Implications for critical psychology. In E. Schraube & C. Højholt (Eds.), Psychology and the conduct of everyday life (pp. 15–33). London: Routledge.
Eagly, A. H. (1987). John M. MacEachran memorial lecture series; 1985. Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Eiduson, B. T. (1962). Scientists: Their psychological world. Oxford, UK: Basic Books.
Fancher, R. E. (1983). Alphonse de Candolle, Francis Galton, and the early history of the nature-nurture controversy. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences,19(4), 341–352.
Fanon, F. (1967). Black skin, white masks. New York: Grove Press (Originally published 1952).
Fechner, G. (1860). Elemente der Psychophysik. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.
Feist, G. J. (2006). The psychology of science and the origins of the scientific mind. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Feist, G. J., & Gorman, M. E. (1998). The psychology of science: Review and integration of a nascent discipline. Review of General Psychology,2(1), 3–47.
Feist, G. J., & Gorman, M. E. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of the psychology of science. New York: Springer Publishing.
Feyerabend, P. (1975). Against method. London: Verso Books.
Foucault, M. (1966). Les Mots et les Choses. Paris: Éditions Gallimard.
Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Vintage Books.
Fox-Keller, E. (1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Fuller, S. (2002). Social epistemology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Gentner, D., & Stephens, A. L. (1983). Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gergen, K. J. (1973). Social psychology as history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26(2), 309–320.
Gergen, K. J. (2000). The saturated self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life. New York: Basic Books.
Giere, R. N. (Ed.). (1992). Cognitive models of science (Vol. 15). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Gooding, D. (1985). In nature’s school: Faraday as a natural philosopher. In D. Gooding & F. James (Eds.), Faraday rediscovered (pp. 105–135). London: Macmillan.
Gordo-López, Á. J., & Parker, I. (Eds.). (1999). Cyberpsychology. London: Routledge.
Gorman, M., & Carlson, W. (1990). Interpreting invention as a cognitive process: The case of Alexander Graham Bell, Thomas Edison, and the telephone. Science, Technology and Human Values,15, 131–164.
Guthrie, R. V. (2004). Even the rat was white: A historical view of psychology (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Haraway, D. (1985). A manifesto for cyborgs: Science, technology and socialist feminism in the 1980s. Socialist Review,80, 65–108.
Harding, S. (1986). The science question in feminism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Harré, R. (1979). Social being: A theory for social psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Heidbreder, E. (1933). Seven psychologies. London, UK: Century/Random House UK.
Holzkamp, K. (2013). Psychology: Social self-understanding on the reasons for action in the conduct of everyday life. In E. Schraube & U. Osterkamp (Eds.), Psychology from the standpoint of the subject: Selected writings of Klaus Holzkamp (A. Boreham & U. Osterkamp, Trans.) (pp. 233–341). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Holzkamp, K. (2016). Conduct of everyday life as a basic concept of critical psychology. In E. Schraube & C. Højholt (Eds.), Psychology and the conduct of everyday life (pp. 65–98). London: Routledge.
Houts, A. C. (1989). Contributions of the psychology of science to metascience: A call for explorers. In B. Gholson, W. R. Shadish, Jr., R. A. Neimeyer, & A. C. Houts (Eds.), Psychology of science: Contributions to metascience (pp. 47–88). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Husserl, E. (1954). The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology (D. Carr, Trans.). Evanston: Northwestern University Press (Originally published 1936).
Ichikawa, J. J. (2012). Experimentalist pressure against traditional methodology. Philosophical Psychology,25(5), 743–765.
James, W. (1987). Pragmatism. In William James: Writings 1902–1910 (pp. 479–624). New York: Library of America (Originally published 1907).
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs (Vols. 1–2). New York: Norton.
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pergamon.
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Koch, S., & Leary, D. E. (Eds.). (1992). A century of psychology as science. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Köhler, W. (1938). The place of value in a world of facts. Oxford, UK: Liveright.
Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. (1993a). The pasteurisation of France. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. (1993b). We have never been modern. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ.: Princeton University Press.
Law, J., & Mol, A. (1995). Notes on materiality and sociality. The Sociological Review,43(2), 274–294.
Leahey, T. H. (2017). A history of psychology: From antiquity to modernity. New York: Routledge.
Leonelli, S. (2016a). Data centric biology: A philosophical study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Leonelli, S. (2016b). Locating ethics in data science: Responsibility and accountability in global and distributed knowledge production systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences,374(2083), 20160122.
Lombrozo, T., Knobe, J., & Nichols, S. (Eds.). (2014). Oxford studies in experimental philosophy (Vol. 1). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mach, E. (1896). Contributions to the analysis of the sensations (C. M. Williams, Trans.). Chicago: Open Court.
Malone, K., & Barbarino, G. (2009). Narrations of race in STEM settings: Identity formation and its discontents. Science Education,93(3), 48–510.
Maslow, A. (1966). The psychology of science: A reconnaissance. New York: Harper & Row.
Mill, J. S. (1843). A system of logic, ratiocinative and inductive: Being a connected view of the principles of evidence and the methods of scientific investigation (Vol. 1). London: John W. Parker.
Mitroff, I. (1974). The subjective side of science: Philosophical inquiry into the psychology of the Apollo moon scientists. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Morawski, J. G. (Ed.). (1988). The rise of experimentation in American psychology. New Haven, CT, US: Yale University Press.
Nersessian, N. J. (1984). Faraday to Einstein: Constructing meaning in scientific theories. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff/Kluwer.
Nersessian, N. J. (1992). How do scientists think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In R. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science (pp. 3–44). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
O’Doherty, K., & Einsiedel, E. (Eds.). (2013). Public engagement and emerging technologies. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Osbeck, L., & Nersessian, N. (2015). Prolegomena to an empirical philosophy of science. In S. Wagenknecht, N. J. Nersessian, & H. Andersen (Eds.), Empirical philosophy of science: Introducing qualitative methods into philosophy of science (pp. 13–35). Cham: Springer International.
Papadopoulos, D. (2003). The ordinary superstition of subjectivity: Liberalism and technostructural violence. Theory & Psychology,13(1), 73–93.
Parker, I. (2014). Managing neo-liberalism and the strong state in higher education: Psychology today. Qualitative Research in Psychology,11(3), 250–264.
Peirce, C. S. (1878). How to make our ideas clear. Popular Science Monthly, 12(January), 286–302.
Pickren, W., & Rutherford, A. (2010). A history of modern psychology in context. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Polanyi, M. (1964). Science, faith, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press (Originally published 1946).
Polanyi, M. (1974). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press (Originally published 1958).
Popper, K. (2002). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Routledge (Originally published 1959).
Proctor, R. W., & Capaldi, E. J. (Eds.). (2012). Psychology of science: Implicit and explicit processes. New York: Oxford University Press.
Reichenbach, H. (1938). Experience and prediction: An analysis of the foundations and the structure of knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Robinson, D. N. (1995). An intellectual history of psychology. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Roe, A. (1953). A psychological study of eminent psychologists and anthropologists, and a comparison with biological and physical scientists. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied,67(2), 1–55.
Rorty, R. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Rosen, L. D., Cheever, N. A., & Carrier, L. M. (2015). The Wiley handbook of psychology, technology, and society. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
Schachtner, C. (2013). Digital media evoking interactive games in virtual space. Subjectivity,6(1), 33–54.
Schaffer, S. (1988). Astronomers mark time: Discipline and the personal equation. Science in Context,2(1), 115–145.
Schraube, E. (2009). Technology as materialized action and its ambivalences. Theory & Psychology,19(2), 296–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354309103543.
Schraube, E. (2013). First-person perspective and sociomaterial decentering: Studying technology from the standpoint of the subject. Subjectivity,6(1), 12–32. https://doi.org/10.1057/sub.2012.28.
Schraube, E., & Højholt, C. (Eds.). (2016). Psychology and the conduct of everyday life. London: Routledge.
Schraube, E., & Marvakis, A. (2016). Frozen fluidity: Digital technologies and the transformation of students learning and conduct of everyday life. In E. Schraube & C. Højholt (Eds.), Psychology and the conduct of everyday life (pp. 205–225). London: Routledge.
Simon, H. (1966). The psychology of scientific problem solving. In R. Tweney, M. Doherty, & C. Mynatt (Eds.), On scientific thinking (pp. 48–54). New York: Columbia University Press.
Simonton, D. K. (1988). Scientific genius: A psychology of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sinclair, B. (2004). Technology and the African-American experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Macmillan.
Skinner, B. F. (1974). About behaviorism. New York: Alfred Knopf.
Slaney, K. (2017). Validating psychological constructs: Historical, philosophical, and practical dimensions. New York: Springer.
Søndergaard, D. M. (2013). Virtual materiality, potentiality and subjectivity: How do we conceptualize real-virtual interaction embodied and enacted in computer gaming, imagery and night dreams? Subjectivity,6(1), 55–78.
Sørensen, E. (2009). The materiality of learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sørensen, E., & Schraube, E. (Eds.). (2013). Special issue: “Materiality”. Subjectivity, 6(1), 1–129.
Taylor, C. W., & Barron, F. (Eds.). (1963). Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development. Oxford, UK: Wiley.
Teo, T. (2015). Critical psychology: A geography of intellectual engagement and resistance. American Psychologist,70(3), 243.
Teo, T. (2017). From psychological science to the psychological humanities: Building a general theory of subjectivity. Review of General Psychology,21(4), 281–291.
Tissaw, M. A. (2007). Making sense of neonatal imitation. Theory & Psychology,17(2), 217–242.
Turkle, S. (1984). The second self: Computers and the human spirit. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Turkle, S. (Ed.). (2008). The inner history of devices. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Turkle, S. (2015). Reclaiming conversation: The power of talk in a digital age. New York: Penguin Press.
Tweney, R. D. (1989). A framework for the cognitive psychology of science. In B. Gholson, W. R. Shadish Jr., R. A. Neimeyer, & A. C. Houts (Eds.), Psychology of science: Contributions to metascience (pp. 342–366). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tweney, R. D., Doherty, M. E., & Mynatt, C. R. (Eds.). (1981). On scientific thinking. New York: Columbia University Press.
Valsiner, J. (2014). An invitation to cultural psychology. London: Sage.
von Helmholtz, H. (1995). The recent progress of the theory of vision. In D. Cahan (Ed.), Science and culture: Popular and philosophical essays (pp. 127–203). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press (Originally published 1868).
Vygotzky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wagenknecht, S., Nersessian, N. J., & Andersen, H. (Eds.). (2015). Empirical philosophy of science: Introducing qualitative methods into philosophy of science (vol. 2). Springer. Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18600-9.
Watson, D. L. (1938). Scientists are human. London: Watts & Co.
Wertheimer, M. (1981). Einstein: The thinking that led to the theory of relativity. In R. Tweney, M. Doherty, & C. Mynatt (Eds.), On scientific thinking (pp. 192–211). New York: Columbia University Press.
Whewell, W. (1847). The philosophy of the inductive sciences (2 Vols.). London: John W. Parker.
Winner, L. (1989). The whale and the reactor: A search for limits in an age of high technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations (G. E. M. Anscombe & R. Rhees, Eds., G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
O’Doherty, K.C., Osbeck, L.M., Schraube, E., Yen, J. (2019). Introduction: Psychological Studies of Science and Technology. In: O’Doherty, K.C., Osbeck, L.M., Schraube, E., Yen, J. (eds) Psychological Studies of Science and Technology. Palgrave Studies in the Theory and History of Psychology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25308-0_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25308-0_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-25307-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-25308-0
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)