Janelle Hoatson

Psychology has been frequently subjected to the criticism that it is an unreflexive science — that it fails to acknowledge the reflexive properties of human action which influence psychologists themselves as well as their subjects. However, even avowedly unreflexive actions may involve reflexivity, and in this paper I suggest that the practices of psychology include reflexive ones. Psychology has an established tradition of silence about the self-awareness and sell-consciousness of its actors, whether those actors are experimenters, theorists, or participants (subjects) in research, yet this silence has been established and maintained through sophisticated exercises in self-regard — through sustained reflexive work. Historical analysis reveals some of the ways in which psychologists recognized and then neglected, covered over, or denied reflexivity. Study of those instances where psychologists have engaged in self-conscious reflection or have attended to the sell-consciousness of research subjects indicates both the dangers of reflexivity to governing investigative practices and the resilience which psychology has built against reflexive work. Canonized procedures for scientific work reproduce selves of experimenters and subjects alike, selves who acknowledge only part of their reflexive engagements. Historians of psychology have a special opportunity (and obligation) to explore the reflexive dynamics of investigative practices, and, hence, to theorize about scientists, along with their actions and interactions, just as we theorize about science, its products, and its evolution.



6 Responses to “Janelle Hoatson”

  1. Spencer Elliott Says:

    I didnt really understand this but I think that it is talking about how your body should be the same on both sides. because it is talking about psychology and I’m pretty sure that has something to do with the body.

  2. Anna Allberry Says:

    I have no idea what this means. I don’t really know what it had to do with geometry either.

  3. Emma Lee Says:

    I am completely lost. I have no clue what this has to do with geometry.

  4. Luke Volz Says:

    I have no idea what all this means. I got lost completely. There is too many big words.

  5. Cameron Bargell Says:

    Well i have no clue because this just lost me but nice effort

  6. Abby Hess Says:

    Errrr, this didn’t really make any sense to me. I don’t see where geometry ties in at all. I think it’s talking more of reflexive as in reflex, actions that cause something else to happen. Not so much the reflexive property in geometry.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: