Shows that cultural psychology can coexist with mainstream psychology, and proposes research methods suited to it: experiments, social representations, discourse analysis, and analysis of activity.
Methodology in Cultural Psychology
문화심리학적 연구방법론
QUESTION
Where does cultural psychology stand relative to cross-cultural and indigenous psychology, what are its epistemological features and branches, and which research methods fit it (transformed experiments, social representations, discourse and narrative analysis, analysis of social activity, and cultural-psychological comparison)?
FINDINGS
When comparing cultures, the authors argue for a qualitative “cultural-psychological comparison” — first understanding each culture on its own terms, then comparing — rather than quantitative cross-cultural methods.
비교문화%ross-cultural) 방법보다는 질적 접근을 취占는 문화심리학적 비교연구법…a cultural-psychological comparative method (comparative culture studies) that takes a qualitative approach, rather than the cross-cultural methodp1이에 반해서 문화심리학적 문화비교는 각 문화 내에서 현상In contrast, culture-psychological comparison [first understands] phenomena within each culturep17이들 이해를 바탕으로 문화를 서로 비교 하는 관점을 취해야 한다should take the perspective of comparing cultures on the basis of these understandingsp18They note active indigenous-psychology efforts in Korea to build a psychology of Koreans by turning jeong, chemyeon (체면), pinggye (핑계), nunchi (눈치), simjeong (심정), and han (한) into psychological concepts.
국내에서 정, 체면, 핑계, 눈치, 심정, 한(한)을 심리학적 개념화하여, 이들로 한국인의 심리학을 구성하려는 노In Korea, efforts to conceptualize jeong, chemyeon, pinggye, nunchi, simjeong, and han psychologically, and to build a psychology of Koreans from them…p4Citing experiments by the “Culture and Cognition” team showing East Asians (including Koreans) think holistically and Americans analytically, they argue this shakes mainstream psychology’s assumption that cognitive processes are universal.
들은 총체적(ho恤tic) 사고를, 미국인들은 분석적(analy- tic) 사고를 하는 차이를 보이는데…[East Asians] show holistic thinking, while Americans show analytic thinking…p8미시건 대학의 교수를 중심으로 구성된 <문화와 인지> 연구팀the <Culture and Cognition> research team, centered on professors at the University of Michiganp8한국인(혹은 일본인, 중국인)과 미국인들에게 잘 통제된 실험과제를 제시하여 사고과정을 분석하면when well-controlled experimental tasks are given to Koreans (or Japanese, Chinese) and Americans and their thought processes are analyzedp8'인지과정은 문화보편적'이라는 가 정이 잘못되었을 기능성을 던져주고 있기 때문이다because it raises the possibility that the assumption that 'cognitive processes are culturally universal' is wrongp8They criticize the “Western independent self vs. Eastern interdependent self” theory as a counter-concept built on the Western self, and introduce work proposing an “entity self” for the West and a “phenomenal self” for Korea instead.
현상적 자기(phenomenal self)라는 개념을 제시하며, 문 화심리학적 분석의 차이를 보여주었다…presented the concept of the phenomenal self, showing the difference made by cultural-psychological analysis.p11일견 공평한 대응개념으로 구성된 이 이론도 기실은 자기라는 현상 의 문화보편적 출현을 전제하괴 서구의 독립적 자기에 대한 대응개념으로서 상호의존적 자기를 상정한 것이다This theory, though seemingly built of even-handed counterpart concepts, in fact presupposes the universal emergence of the self and posits the interdependent self as a counter-concept to the Western independent selfp11자기 개념의 문화심리학적 검토를 한 연구(최상진 • 김 기범, 1羽는 서구-실물성 자기(enutiy self)a study that examined the self-concept from a cultural-psychological view (Choi & Kim) [proposed] the West–entity selfp11Because cultural psychology studies different things with a different epistemology, its methods must differ too — so judging its quality by experimental psychology’s “precise vs. crude” yardstick is a mistake.
험심리학의 정밀 - 조잡성 범주를 적용하여 문화심리학 적 연구의 질을 평가하는 것은 잘못된 것임을 지적하였…pointed out that it is wrong to evaluate the quality of cultural-psychological research by applying experimental psychology’s categories of precision versus crudeness.p16필자들은 탐구대상의 성격이 다르과 인식론이 다 르기 때문에 적절한 방법론도 다를 수밖에 없으며The authors [argue] that because the nature of the object of inquiry and the epistemology differ, the appropriate methodology must also differp16IN DAILY LIFE
In depth
This paper, more closely — every sentence carries an original quote and page number.
Background
Experimental psychology tried to understand humans in a cultural “vacuum,” and the recent turn toward culture in psychology is, in the authors’ view, an effort to fill that gap.
실험심리학은 인간을 문화적 진공(vac mnn) 상태에서 이해하려 들었괴 이 진공을 메우려는 노력이 최근에 문화에 대한 관심으로Experimental psychology tried to understand humans in a state of cultural vacuum, and efforts to fill this vacuum [appear] recently as interest in culture…p1Yet mainstream psychologists have avoided cultural psychology as lacking scientific precision and unfit for seeking universal theories. The authors hold that the two fields are wrongly seen as opposed, and wrote this paper to show they are mutually supportive.
과학적 정밀성의 부족과 보편적 이론의 추구에 부적합하다'는 이유로 전통심리학자l)들이 연구대상으로 삼기를 꺼려왔…for the reason that it “lacks scientific precision and is unfit for pursuing universal theory,” traditional psychologists have been reluctant to make it an object of research.p2문화심리학은 전통심리학과 상극의 관계로 잘못 인식되어져cultural psychology has been wrongly perceived as being at odds with traditional psychologyp1필자들은 두 분야가 상생의 관계에 있음을 보이기 위해서in order to show that the two fields are in a mutually beneficial relationship, the authorsp1Method
A theoretical paper that discusses and organizes the strands of research in this field and discusses research methods.
문화심리학의 방법을 크게 l)문화적 자극과 관련해서 일어나는 경험 및 해석을 분-의하는 실험적 접근…[we divide] the methods of cultural psychology broadly into 1) an experimental approach analyzing the experiences and interpretations that arise in relation to cultural stimuli…p12필자들은 본고에서 혼란스러운 이 분야의 연구 갈래를 논의 및 정리하면서, 연구방법에 대한 논의를 제시하고 자 한다In this paper the authors discuss and organize the confusing strands of research in this field and present a discussion of research methodsp2우선 문화 심리학의 부팅을 비교문화심리학과 토착심리학과의 관계 속에서 논하였괴first discussed the rise of cultural psychology in relation to cross-cultural psychology and indigenous psychologyp1구체적으로 문화심리학적 실험법, 사회표상론을 이용한 뿨, 일상언어에서 나타나 는 담,kdiscourse)와 언술(narrative)의 분석, 사회적 활동의 분석을 문화심리학의 연구방법으로 논하였다specifically discussed, as research methods for cultural psychology, cultural-psychological experiments, methods using social representation theory, analysis of discourse and narrative in everyday language, and analysis of social activityp1Detailed findings
Of the three branches, cross-cultural psychology shares the same epistemology (basic assumptions about how knowledge is gained) as experimental psychology.
이 분야의 연구가 지닌 인식론적 특성은 실험심리학의 그것과 같다The epistemological features of research in this field are the same as those of experimental psychology.p3Indigenous psychology is aware that psychological principles are products of Western culture, and seeks a “decolonization of the mind.”
심리학 원리의 서구문화적 특성을 의식하고 “미음의 탈식민지화"Conscious of the Western-cultural character of psychological principles, [it pursues] the “decolonization of the mind.”p3What sets cultural psychology apart from indigenous psychology is that it takes both the insider’s and the outsider’s perspective.
문화심리학은 내부자의 관점과 의부자의 관점을 모두 취한다는 것이다…is that cultural psychology takes both the insider’s and the outsider’s perspectives.p4The stimuli used in cultural-psychology experiments are not stimuli defined in physical form or along a single dimension, as in experimental psychology, but cultural stimuli “pickled and fermented” in culture.
문화심리학에서의 자극은 문화 속에 담겨져 절여지고 곰삭은 문화적 자극이다The stimulus in cultural psychology is a cultural stimulus steeped in culture, pickled and fermented.p12실험심리학에서의 자극은 일반적으로 물리 적 형태로 규정되거나 또는 심리적인 순수 단일 차원의 성격을 띤 자극으로 규정되고 조작된다stimuli in experimental psychology are generally defined in physical form, or defined and manipulated as stimuli of a pure, single psychological dimensionp12A key example: Tobin and colleagues’ study of preschools in the US, Japan, and China filmed classroom activities and showed the videos to the children, teachers, and parents who appeared in them to ask what they meant.
이 영상물을 각 영상물에 등-상하는 내부자(아동, 교사, 학부모 들에게 보여주고 이들이 보는 영상물…showed these videos to the insiders appearing in each video (children, teachers, parents), and [collected] what they saw in the videos…p13미국, 일본, 중 국의 아동교위 대한 문화비교적 연구를 들 수 있다one can cite the cross-cultural study of child education in the US, Japan, and Chinap13각 국의 유치원에서 벌어지는 활동을 비 교하고자 하는 영역에서 비디오 촬영하여activities taking place in each country's kindergartens were video-recorded in the areas to be comparedp13In a study comparing three ways of eliciting ideas about han (한, 恨), the third — having people pick one person full of han and describe their relationship with that person — drew the most concrete and vivid responses.
가장 구체적이고 생생하며 다양한 많은 반응을 보이는 방법은 세 번째 방법이었다The method that produced the most concrete, vivid, and varied responses was the third method.p15에서 세 가지 방법으로 표상을 조사하여 비교하였다examined and compared representations using three methodsp14한많은 사람을 한 사람 골라 그 사람과 지신과의 관계 를 말하도록 하고서having them pick one person full of han and describe that person's relationship with themselvesp15Words carry more than their surface meaning: someone reaching for a shelf who says “if only I were a bit taller” also conveys a request to get the item down, and something about the relationship.
선반에 손을 뻗던 사람이 “내 참, 좀더 키가 컸더라면”하고 말했다면…if a person reaching for a shelf said, “Oh my, if only I were a bit taller”…p15말과 택스트 자체는 그것이 함 축하고 있는 것을 결코 완벽히 표상하고 있지 못하며speech and text themselves never fully represent what they implyp15자기의 키가 작다는 것 외에도 상대에게 자기를 도와 선반 위의 것을 내려달 라는 것, 상대와 자기의 관계 등이 소통되고 있는 것이 다besides the fact that one is short, a request for the other to help get the thing down from the shelf and the relationship between the two are also being communicatedp15Studying Korea’s representative cultural concepts (simjeong, jeong, han, we-ness, chemyeon, nunchi, pinggye, etc.) means analyzing the contexts in which those words are expressed and used to draw out the psychology inside them.
한국인의 대표적 문화심리적 개념들(심정, 정, 한, 우리성, 체면, 눈치, 핑계, 의례성, 아줌마, 팔자, 의리 등)을 연구하는…in studying Koreans’ representative cultural-psychological concepts (simjeong, jeong, han, we-ness, chemyeon, nunchi, pinggye, ritual formality, ajumma, palja, uiri, etc.)…p15그러한 개념이 언어적으로 표현되는 과정 에서 사용되는 맥락을 분석함으로써 그러한 개념에 내 장된 심리적 요소와 경험들을 도출하고by analyzing the contexts used in the process of those concepts being expressed in language, derives the psychological elements and experiences embedded in themp15Authors’ interpretation
Cultural psychology’s criticism aims to bring forgotten parts of the human mind back into research — not to replace existing psychology.
잊혀졌던 인간정신의 중요한 부분을 연구대상으로 부각시키기 위함이지, 기존의 심리학을 대체하겠디는 것은 아니다…is to bring forgotten but important parts of the human mind forward as objects of research, not to replace existing psychology.p16Cultural psychologists should switch perspectives back and forth, like swapping between two lenses — subjective and objective.
주관적 접근과 객관적 접근의 두 가지 렌즈를 자유롭게 바꾸어 쓰듯이…as if freely switching between the two lenses of the subjective approach and the objective approach…p17관점의 전환을 순환적으로 해가며, 현재 무슨 렌즈를 착용하고 있는가shifting perspectives cyclically, [staying aware of] which lens one is currently wearingp17As in the attempt by Korean, Chinese, and Japanese scholars to analyze and compare jeong (情) independently, the concepts needed to understand differences among the three countries — long lumped together as “collectivist” — can come from East Asia’s own native concepts.
지금까지 집단주의 문화라고 획일적으로 취급되어 온 세 나라의 문화심리적 차이를 이해6는 구체적 개념이…concrete concepts for understanding the cultural-psychological differences among the three countries, which have so far been uniformly treated as collectivist cultures…p18한국, 중국, 일본의 학자들이 동아시아인들의 인간관계에서 공통적으로 중요한 개념으로 나요고 있는 정(情)에 대하 여 각기 독자적으로 문화심리학적 분석을 취한scholars from Korea, China, and Japan each independently took a cultural-psychological approach to jeong (情), a concept commonly important in East Asian relationshipsp18구체적 개념이 동아시아 문화 의 자생적 개념에서 얻어지며concrete concepts are obtained from the native concepts of East Asian culturep18Limits the authors note
The authors admit that cultural psychology’s methods are not yet developed enough to back up the paradigm shift it claims.
패러다임적 전환(전통짐리학의 패러다임에 반하는)을 뒷받침할 정도로 발달되어 있지 못한…not developed enough to support the paradigm shift (against the paradigm of traditional psychology)…p2They also admit that, at its current level, cultural psychology does not yet produce high-quality data.
현재의 수준에서는 문화심리학의 내용이 고급수준의 자료를 생산해 내는데는 미치지 못한다고 할지라도…even if, at the current level, the content of cultural psychology falls short of producing high-quality data…p12Key terms
Narrative mode of thinking Unlike logical, abstract “paradigmatic” thinking, a story-like way of thinking that is concrete and varies by situation — focused on relationships between people and the intentions behind actions.
담화적 사고(narrative mode of thinkmg)는 현실을 묘사하고 있어, 사람들간의 관계백락The narrative mode of thinking depicts reality, [concerned with] the relational context among people…p6명제 적 사고는 이론쩍이괴 형식 논리적이며, 추상적이괴 일반적인 진술로 구성된 과학적 사고propositional thinking is theoretical, formally logical, and scientific thinking made of abstract, general statementsp6상황맥락마다 달리 나타난다. 담화란 사람들의 의도와 그 변화가 개입된 이야기이다it appears differently in each situational context. Narrative is a story involving people's intentions and their changesp6Social representations The frameworks people use to make sense of the world — a body of knowledge shared within a society that helps its members communicate.
사람들이 세상사들을 이해하는(sense-makmg) 인식를로서 그 사회대에 공유되어 있어…a cognitive framework through which people make sense of the world, shared within that society…p14에 공유되어 있어, 성원들간의 소통을 촉진시키며, 집단 의 경계를 구분해주는 인지적 지식체계a cognitive knowledge system shared [in that society], which facilitates communication among members and marks group boundariesp14Cultural-psychological comparison First understanding each culture from within, then comparing cultures on the basis of that understanding.
이들 이해를 바탕으로 문화를 서로 비교하는 관점을 취해야 한다…should take the perspective of comparing cultures with each other on the basis of these understandings.p18이에 반해서 문화심리학적 문화비교는 각 문화 내에서 현상In contrast, culture-psychological comparison [first understands] phenomena within each culturep17