Niedostatki metod kwestionariuszowych w filozofii eksperymentalnej

Bartosz Maćkiewicz

doi:10.14394/filnau.2022.0029

Autor

Bartosz Maćkiewicz Uniwersytet Warszawski, Wydział Filozofii https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9460-5742

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14394/filnau.2022.0029

Słowa kluczowe:

experimental philosophy, questionnaire methodology, metaphilosophy

Abstrakt

Surveys are the most widely used research tool in experimental philosophy. In this paper, I analyze two types of criticism of the questionnaire method put forward in the literature. The first type is metaphilosophical. It asserts that the surveys used by experimental philosophers are based on a flawed and unproductive method of cases. The second type is methodological. It argues that currently used questionnaires are unfit to measure philosophically relevant phenomena. I show that these objections can be met by a) improving questionnaires used in research practice and b) expanding the methodological repertoire of experimental philosophy.

Bibliografia

Abrusán M., Szendroi K. (2013), Experimenting with the King of France: Topics, Verifiability and Definite Descriptions, „Semantics and Pragmatics” 6(10), 1-43. https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.6.10

Adams F., Steadman A. (2004), Intentional Action in Ordinary Language: Core Concept or Pragmatic Understanding?, „Analysis” 64(2), 173-181. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8284.2004.00480.x

Alexander J., Weinberg J. M. (2014), The Challenge of Sticking with Intuitions Through Thick and Thin [w:] Intuitions, A. R. Booth, D. P. Rowbottom (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 187-212. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199609192.003.0011

Alsmith A. J., Longo M. R. (2019), Using VR Technologies to Investigate the Flexibility of Human Self-conception [w:] Methodological Advances in Experimental Philosophy, E. Fischer, M. Curtis (eds.), London: Bloomsbury, 153-174. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350069022.ch-006

Alston W. (1995), How to Think about Reliability, „Philosophical Topics” 23(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.5840/philtopics199523122

Andow J. (2016a), Thin, Fine and with Sensitivity: A Metamethodology of Intuitions, „Review of Philosophy and Psychology” 7(1), 105-125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-015-0247-2

Andow J. (2016b), Qualitative Tools and Experimental Philosophy, „Philosophical Psychology” 29(8), 1128-1141. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2016.1224826

Arico A., Fiala B., Goldberg R. F., Nichols S. (2011), The Folk Psychology of Consciousness, „Mind and Language” 26(3), 327-352. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2011.01420.x

Bara B. G., Ciaramidaro A., Walter H., Adenzato M. (2011), Intentional Minds: A Philosophical Analysis of Intention Tested through fMRI Experiments Involving People with Schizophrenia, People with Autism, and Healthy Individuals, „Frontiers in Human Neuroscience” 5, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2011.00007

Bengson J. (2013), Experimental Attacks on Intuitions and Answers, „Philosophy and Phenomenological Research” 86(3), 495-532. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2012.00578.x

Blascovich J., Loomis J., Beall A. C., Swinth K. R., Hoyt C. L., Bailenson J. N. (2002), Immersive Virtual Environment Technology as a Methodological Tool for Social Psychology, „Psychological Inquiry” 13(2), 103-124. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1302_01

Bluhm R. (2013), Don’t Ask, Look! Linguistic Corpora as a Tool for Conceptual Analysis [w:] Was dürfen wir glauben? Was sollen wir tun? Sektionsbeiträge des achten internationalen Kongresses der Gesellschaft für Analytische Philosophie, M. Hoeltje, T. Spitzley, W. Spohn (Hrsg.), Duisburg–Essen: DuEPublico, 7-15.

Bluhm R. (2016), Corpus Analysis in Philosophy [w:] Evidence, Experiment and Argument in Linguistics and the Philosophy of Language, M. Hinton (ed.), Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 91-109.

Campbell D. T., Fiske D. W. (1959), Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix, „Psychological Bulletin” 56(2), 81-105. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016

Cappelen H. (2012), Philosophy without Intuitions, Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199644865.001.0001

Cook T. D., Campbell D. T. (1979), Quasi-Experimentation: Design & Analysis Issues for Field Settings, Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Cronbach L. J. (1950), Further Evidence on Response Sets and Test Design, „Educational and Psychological Measurement” 10(1): 3-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316445001000101

Cullen S. (2010), Survey-Driven Romanticism, „Review of Philosophy and Psychology” 1(2), 275-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-009-0016-1

Davidson D. (1987), Knowing One’s Own Mind, „Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association” 60(3), 441-458. https://doi.org/10.2307/3131782

Denzin N. K. (2007), Triangulation [w:] The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology, G. Ritzer (ed.), John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405165518.wbeost050

Devitt M., Porot N. (2018), The Reference of Proper Names: Testing Usage and Intuitions, „Cognitive Science” 42(5), 1552-1585. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12609

Dongen, N. van, Colombo M., Romero F., Sprenger J. (2020), Intuitions about the Reference of Proper Names: A Meta-Analysis, „Review of Philosophy and Psychology”, 1-30. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ez96q

Fischer E., Engelhardt P. E. (2016), Intuitions’ Linguistic Sources: Stereotypes, Intuitions and Illusions, „Mind and Language” 31(1), 67-103. https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12095

Fischer E., Engelhardt P. E. (2017), Diagnostic Experimental Philosophy, „Teorema: Revista Internacional de Filosofía” 36(3), 117-137.

Francis K. B., Howard C., Howard I. S., Gummerum M., Ganis G., Anderson G., Terbeck S. (2016), Virtual Morality: Transitioning from Moral Judgment to Moral Action?, „PloS one” 11(10), e0164374. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164374

Goldman A. I. (1979), What Is Justified Belief? [w:] Justification and Knowledge, G. S. Pappas (ed.), 1-23, Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9493-5_1

Goldman A. I. (1988), Strong and Weak Justification, „Philosophical Perspectives” 2, 51-69. https://doi.org/10.2307/2214068

Haberstroh S., Oyserman D., Schwarz N., Kühnen U., Ji L. J. (2002), Is the Interdependent Self More Sensitive to Question Context Than the Independent Self? Self-Construal and the Observation of Conversational Norms, „Journal of Experimental Social Psychology” 38(3), 323-329. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2001.1513

Heesen R., Bright L. K., Zucker A. (2019), Vindicating Methodological Triangulation, „Synthese” 196(8), 3067-3081. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1294-7

Hofstede G. (1984), Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values, Newbury Park–London–New Delhi: Sage.

Johnson T., Kulesa P., Cho Y. I., Shavitt S. (2005), The Relation Between Culture and Response Styles: Evidence from 19 Countries, „Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology” 36(2), 264-277. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022104272905

Karabanov A., Bosch P., König P. (2007), „Eye Tracking as a Tool to Investigate the Comprehension of Referential Expressions” [w:] Linguistics in Search of its Evidential Base, S. Featherston, W. Sternefeld (eds.), Berlin–New York: De Gruyter Mouton, 207-226. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198621.207

Kauppinen A. (2007), The Rise and Fall of Experimental Philosophy, „Philosophical Explorations” 10(2), 95-118. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199927418.003.0001

Knobe J. (2003), Intentional Action and Side Effects in Ordinary Language, „Analysis” 63(3), 190-194. https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/63.3.190

Knobe J., Prinz J. (2008), Intuitions about Consciousness: Experimental Studies, „Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences” 7(1), 67-83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-007-9066-y

Kripke S. A. (1980), Naming and Necessity, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kuś K., Maćkiewicz B. (2016), Z rozmysłem, ale nie specjalnie. O językowej wrażliwości filozofii eksperymentalnej, „Filozofia Nauki” 24(3) [95], 73-101.

Lehrer K. (1990), Theory of Knowledge, Boulder: Westview Press.

Loomis J. M., Blascovich J. J., Beall A. C. (1999), Immersive Virtual Environment Technology as a Basic Research Tool in Psychology, „Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers” 31(4), 557-564. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03200735

Löwe B., Van Kerkhove B. (2019), Methodological Triangulation in Empirical Philosophy [w:] Advances in Experimental Philosophy of Logic and Mathematics, A. Aberdein, M. Inglis (eds.), London: Bloomsbury Methuen Drama, 15-38. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350039049.0005

Ludwig K. (2007), The Epistemology of Thought Experiments: First Person Versus Third Person Approaches, „Midwest Studies in Philosophy” 31(1), 128-159. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3402517

Machery E. (2011), Thought Experiments and Philosophical Knowledge, „Metaphilosophy” 42(3), 191-214. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9973.2011.01700.x

Machery E. (2017), Philosophy within Its Proper Bounds, Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198807520.001.0001

Machery E., Mallon R., Nichols S., Stich S. P. (2004), Semantics, Cross-Cultural Style, „Cognition” 92(3), B1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.003

Maćkiewicz B. (2021), „Korpusy w filozofii eksperymentalnej” [w:] Efekt Knobe’a w świetle rozważań językoznawczych i metodologicznych. Studium teoretyczne i eksperymentalne efektu Knobe’a i problemu Butlera, K. Kuś, B. Maćkiewicz, K. Paprzycka-Hausman (red.), Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Semper, 123-136.

Martí G. (2009), Against Semantic Multi-Culturalism, „Analysis” 69(1), 42-48. https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/ann007

Martí G. (2013), Empirical Data and the Theory of Reference [w:] Reference and Referring: Topics in Contemporary Philosophy, W. P. Kabasenche, M. O’Rourke, M. H. Slater (eds.), Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 63-82.

Martí G. (2014), Reference and Experimental Semantics [w:] Current Controversies in Experimental Philosophy, E. Machery, E. O’Neill (eds.), New York: Routledge, 17-26. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203122884-2

Nederhof A. J. (1985), Methods of Coping with Social Desirability Bias: A Review, „European Journal of Social Psychology” 15(3), 263-280. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420150303

Nadelhoffer T., Nahmias E. (2007), The Past and Future of Experimental Philosophy, „Philosophical Explorations” 10(2), 123-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/13869790701305921

Nichols S., Ulatowski J. (2007), Intuitions and Individual Differences: The Knobe Effect Revisited, „Mind and Language” 22(4), 346-365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2007.00312.x

Paprzycka K. (2013), Pojęcie wiedzy [w:] Przewodnik po epistemologii, R. Ziemińska (red.), Kraków: Wydawnictwo WAM, 117-150.

Payne B. K., Gawronski B. (2010), A History of Implicit Social Cognition: Where Is It Coming from? Where Is It Now? Where Is It Going [w:] Handbook of Implicit Social Cognition: Measurement, Theory, and Applications, B. Gawronski, B. K. Payne (eds.), New York–London: The Guilford Press, 1-15.

Rose D., Danks D. (2013), In Defense of a Broad Conception of Experimental Philosophy, „Metaphilosophy” 44(4), 512-532. https://doi.org/10.1111/meta.12045

Rosenthal R. (1976), Experimenter Effects in Behavioral Research, New York: Irvington.

Rosenthal R., Rosnow R. L. (1991), Essentials of Behavioral Research: Methods and Data Analysis, McGraw-Hill Series in Psychology, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Scholl B. J. (2007), Object Persistence in Philosophy and Psychology, „Mind and Language” 22(5), 563-591. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2007.00321.x

Schwarz N. (1995), What Respondents Learn from Questionnaires: The Survey Interview and the Logic of Conversation, „International Statistical Review” 63(2), 153-168. https://doi.org/10.2307/1403610

Schwarz N. (1996), Cognition and Communication: Judgmental Biases, Research Methods, and the Logic of Conversation, Mahwah: Erlbaum.

Schwitzgebel E., Cushman F. (2012), Expertise in Moral Reasoning? Order Effects on Moral Judgment in Professional Philosophers and Non-philosophers, „Mind and Language” 27(2), 135-153. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199927418.003.0014

Schwitzgebel E., Cushman F. (2015), Philosophers’ Biased Judgments Persist despite Training, Expertise and Reflection, „Cognition” 141, 127-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.04.015

Shadish W. R., Cook T. D., Campbell D. T. (2002), Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference, Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Stefanowitsch A. (2020), Corpus Linguistics: A Guide to the Methodology, Berlin: Language Science Press. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3735822

Sytsma J., Bluhm R., Willemsen P., Reuter K. (2019), Causal Attributions and Corpus Analysis [w:] Methodological Advances in Experimental Philosophy, E. Fischer, M. Curtis (eds.), London: Bloomsbury Academic, 209-238. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350069022.ch-008

Weaver S., Turri J. (2018), Personal Identity and Persisting as Many [w:] Oxford Studies in Experimental Philosophy, vol. 2, T. Lombrozo, J. Knobe, S. Nichols (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 213-242. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198815259.003.0010

Webb E. J., Campbell D. T., Schwartz R. D., Sechrest L. (1966), Unobtrusive Measures: Nonreactive Research in the Social Sciences, Chicago: Rand McNally.

Weinberg J. M., Nichols S., Stich S. (2001), Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions, „Philosophical Topics” 29(1/2), 429-460. https://doi.org/10.5840/philtopics2001291/217

Woolfolk R. L. (2013), Experimental Philosophy: A Methodological Critique, „Metaphilosophy” 44(1-2), 79-87. https://doi.org/10.1111/meta.12016

Wysocki T. (2017), Arguments over Intuitions?, „Review of Philosophy and Psychology” 8(2), 477-499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-016-0301-8