Thorngate's postulate of commensurate complexity: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:11, 12 November 2012

Latest revision as of 09:32, 12 November 2022

(13 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)

Line 1:

'''Thorngate's postulate of commensurate complexity''',<ref name="Weick01"/> also referred to as '''Thorngate's impostulate of theoretical simplicity'''<ref name=Weick03/> is the description of a phenomenon in [[social science]] phenomenom concerning directions and results of resarch conductedtheorizing. [[Karl E. Weick]] maintains that research in the field of social psychology can – at aany one time – achieve only two out of the three [[Metatheory|meta-theoretical]] virtues of "Generality", "Accuracy" and "Simplicity.", andOne thatof thethese third aspectaspects therefore must always be neglectedsubordinated into anythe researchothers.<ref name="DBO"/> The name of the theorempostulate is derivednamed fromfor the Canadian social psychologist Warren Thorngate of the [[University of Alberta]], whose work is quoted by Weick.<ref name="DBO"/><ref name="Thorngate76"/>

{{orphan|date=November 2012}}

Thorngate described the problem this way:

'''Thorngate's postulate of commensurate complexity'''<ref name="Weick01"/> is the description of a [[social science]] phenomenom concerning directions and results of resarch conducted. [[Karl E. Weick]] maintains that research in the field of social psychology can – at a time – achieve only two out of the three meta-theoretical virtues "Generality", "Accuracy" and "Simplicity", and that the third aspect therefore must be neglected in any research.<ref name="DBO"/> The name of the theorem is derived from the Canadian social psychologist Warren Thorngate of the [[University of Alberta]], whose work is quoted by Weick.<ref name="DBO"/><ref name="Thorngate76"/>

{{Quotation|'“In order to increase both ''generality'' and ''accuracy'', the ''complexity'' of our theories must necessarily be increased.”<ref name=Weick03/>}}

== Background ==

BackgroundThe topostulate thewas theorema isresponse to the debate ofamong sociologists – mainly between [[Kenneth J. Gergen]]<ref name="Gergen73"/> and [[Barry R. Schlenker]]<ref name="Schlenker74"/> – revolving around the meaning of sociological research. Whilst Schlenker appeared to maintain the position, that context only superficially influenced social behavior, Gergen appeared to maintain that context penetrated everything in social behavior, rendering observations as specific to the very situation observed. Thus, simplifying the discussion, the observation of social behavior would be no more than collecting historical data, since context would never be the same and the results would remain unique. In fact, sociology would be some specialized kind of historical research.<ref name="Thorngate76"/> Considering this, Thorngate writes

{{Quotation|''It is impossible for a theory of social behaviour to be simultaneously general, simple or parsimonious, and accurate.''|Warren Thorngate<ref name="Thorngate76"/>}}

Line 13 ⟶ 14:

== Weick's Interpretation ==

Weick represents this model “as a clockface with general at 12:00, accurate at 4:00, and simple at 8:00 to drive home the point that an explanation that satisfies any two characteristics is least able to satisfy the third characteristic.”<ref name=Weick03/>

Weick describes the model with a clock with the word "General" on the 12 o'clock position, "Accurate" at 4 o'clock and "Simple" at 8 o'clock. According to Weick, research operates in this continuum

According to Weick, research operates in this continuum:

* if research attempted to be accurate and simple (6-o'clock research), results would not be generaly applicable.

* if research aimedthat ataims generalto be accurate and simple (106-o'clock research), results would not be accurategenerally andapplicable.

* if research that aims to be general and accuratesimple (210-o'clock research), results would not be simpleaccurate any more.and

* if research attemptedthat aims to be accurategeneral and simpleaccurate (62-o'clock research), results would not be generalysimple any applicablemore.

Basically, Weick maintains, that there is a "trade-off" between these three virtues in such a way that only two can be achieved at any given time. Research therefore must operate in different modes to capture reality in sufficient precision and granularity.<ref name="Weick02"/> The theorempostulate therefore becomes descriptive of research and prescriptive of research methologymethodology.

== Criticism ==

Though confirming the theorempostulate in general, Fred Dickinson, Carol Blair and [[Brian L. Ott]] critizicecriticized Weicks use of the word "accurate".<ref name="DBO"/> Accuracy is hard to achieve, especially if the topic is difficult to qualify, e.&nbsp;g. in researching memory. They suggest replacing the term "accurate" with "interpretive utility".<ref name="DBO"/>

== Sources ==

Line 32 ⟶ 34:

<ref name ="Gergen76">Kenneth J. Gergen (1976) ''Social psychology, science and history''; Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin; 1976, 2. 373-383 quoted in Warren Thorngate (1976) ''"In General" vs. "It depends": Some Comments of the Gergen-Schlenker Debate''; Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2, p. 404-410.</ref>

<ref name="Schlenker74">Barry R. Schlenker (1974) ''Social Psychology and science; Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin'', 29, Seite 1-15; quoted in Warren Thorngate (1976) ''"In General" vs. "It depends": Some Comments of the Gergen-Schlenker Debate''; Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2, p. 404-410.</ref>

<ref name="Thorngate76">Warren Thorngate (1976) ''"In General" vs. "It depends": Some Comments of the Gergen-Schlenker Debate''; Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2, p. 404-410.</ref>

<ref name="Weick01">Warren Thorngate (1976) ''„In"In general“ vs. „it"it depends“: Some comments on the Gergen-Schlenker debate''; Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2, p. 404-410. quoted in Karl E. Weick (1985) ''Der Prozeß des Organisierens'' (Übers. v. Hauck, Gerhard); 4. Aufl. 27. August 2007; suhrkamp Taschenbücher Wissenschaft 1194, Frankfurt; {{ISBN : |978-3-518-28794-1}}; page 54 ff.</ref>

<ref name="Weick02"Weick03>Karl E. Weick: ''Sources(1999) of order in Underorganized Systems"Conclusion: Themes in Recend Organizational Theory.'' In:Construction Karlas E.Disciplined Weick (Hrsg.)Reflexivity: ''MakingTradeoffs Sense ofin the organization.''90s" The UniversityAcademy of Michigan/Management Blackwell PublishingReview, MaldenVol. 24, MANo. 20014 (Oct., ISBN 0-631-22317-71999), Spp. 32–57.797-806</ref>

<ref name="Weick02">Karl E. Weick (2001): ''Sources of order in Underorganized Systems: Themes in Recend Organizational Theory.'' In: Karl E. Weick (Hrsg.): ''Making Sense of the organization.'' University of Michigan/ Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA, {{ISBN|0-631-22317-7}}, S. 32–57.</ref>

</references>

[[Category:SocialPhilosophy sciencesof social science]]

[[de: Thorngates Postulat der angemessenen Komplexität]]