NOMOTHETIC VERSUS IDIOGRAPHIC
SPECIFICATION:Idiographic and nomothetic approaches to psychological investigation
SCIENCE MUST BE NOMOTHETIC.
Scientific endeavours should strive to be nomothetic, meaning they seek to establish general laws or principles that can be universally applied. In the context of science, nomothetic approaches aim to discover and formulate broad patterns, regularities, or laws that hold across different situations and cases. This contrasts with idiographic approaches, which focus on understanding and describing individual cases' unique and specific aspects.
The call for nomothetic science suggests a commitment to uncovering generalizable truths and principles that can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of natural phenomena. This approach is common in many scientific disciplines, particularly those that aim to formulate theories and laws with broad applicability.
COUNTER ARGUMENT: IDIOGRAPHIC METHODS
The counterargument is that Allport claims that psychology should be concerned with studying unique individuals and be idiographic: “A person’s subjective experience of the world is an important and influential factor on their behaviour. Only by seeing the world from the individual’s point of view can we understand why they act the way they do.” Moreover, it is also very rare in psychology that law is found in terms of a cause-and-effect relationship. For example, a stomach ulcer might be said to be caused by psychological stress; however, other factors such as excess stomach acid, bad diet or a physiological predisposition may cause it too. However, it has been argued that even in natural sciences, a purely nomothetic approach is impossible; thus, making the distinction between natural and human science is a false dichotomy.
WE NEED BOTH METHODS
Nomothetic and idiographic approaches are both relevant in various contexts.
For example, in the medical emergency scenario of a suspected stroke, rapid recognition and treatment of stroke signs, such as asymmetrical facial features, slurred speech, and limb weakness, are paramount for ensuring timely and effective medical intervention.
If patients were treated idiographically in the acute phase of a stroke, tailoring their treatment as if their symptoms were unique to them, significant delays in providing appropriate and evidence-based treatments, such as administering clot-busting drugs or performing other interventions, would likely result in extensive brain damage and a worsened prognosis.
In contrast, the nomothetic approach would be more applicable here. Grounded in standardized protocols, addressing a condition where the physiological manifestations exhibit consistent patterns across people is crucial, allowing for quick and potentially life-saving interventions. This approach is suitable when certain conditions display uniform and identifiable characteristics across individuals.
In contrast, when dealing with psychiatric issues, a strictly nomothetic approach, such as a one-size-fits-all magic pill, may not be suitable. Psychiatric illnesses often have diverse origins and treatment paths unique to individuals. An idiographic approach is more relevant here, as it considers the individual patient's specific circumstances, history, and symptoms. Tailoring treatments based on a nuanced understanding of the patient's unique factors is essential for effective psychiatric care.
In summary, the nomothetic approach is valuable in quickly identifying and treating certain medical emergencies with standardized protocols, as seen in stroke cases. However, a more idiographic approach is necessary in fields like psychiatry, where individualised understanding and treatment plans account for the diverse and nuanced nature of mental health conditions
