Idiographic-Nomothetic debate

• Idiographic approach - research focuses on individuals when studying behaviour, emphasises that behaviour is unique and best understood in terms of subjective experience therefore uses qualitative data
• Nomothetic approach - studying as many people as possible to ensure findings can be generalised, behaviour is objective and should be predictable and controlled
• The idiographic approach provides a complete, holistic account of the individual

  • it can shed light on existing laws or even challenge the status quo
  • e.g. KF case study shows that the STM is not as simple as the multi-store model of memory claims, provoking further research to be carried out on the STM
  • gives us the ability to falsify existing theories - this is valuable in advancing our psychological knowledge
  • the ability to study individuals in depth allows researcher to build a rapport with individuals - they are more likely to be more honest
  • so the idiographic approach can further our knowledge and understanding in a way the nomothetic approach cannot
• The idiographic approach may not always represent the general population

  • generalisations cannot be made without further examples showing evidence of the same thing, unlike the nomothetic approach
  • Freud drew conclusions from a single case study on Little Hans
  • used this to create the oedipus complex
  • findings were based on a very subjective interpretation of the data

  = idiographic findings can be very unscientific, unrepresentative and lack practical application
• Nomothetic approach is largely scientific

  • use of large-scale lab studies under standardised conditions - easy replication
  • ensures findings can be reliable and easy to generalise
  • Pavlov's experiment on a large sample of dogs in a controlled lab
  • findings were used to create a general law about behaviourism and classical conditioning -> generalised to the population
  • gives psychology scientific credibility, moving closer to being held in the same regard as the natural sciences - behaviourism was critical in establishing psychology as a science
• The nomothetic approach can be criticised for being de-humanising, overlooking the nuance of human experience

  • Milgram found 65% of people continued to 450V in a lab environment, however this changed when the conditions were changed
  • doesn't give reasons why people obey in real life - factors like personality
  • scientific, quantitative lab studies are controlled -> producing broad statistical results that overlook the richness of individual experience