Introspection in psychology - the pros and cons of the method

The birth of the method of investigating the actions and psycho-emotional background of a person during their commission refers to the XVII century. At its sources stood such famous philosophers R. Descartes, D. Locke and others who tried to understand the possibilities of a man who independently analyzes his actions and internal sensations connected with them.

What is introspection?

Although this is an incomprehensible term used in psychology and meaning "look inside," introspection is familiar to most of us. There is no person who does not try to understand his actions in this or that situation, analyzing its consequences. And few people suspect that at this moment he is plunged into a state that is simply considered an ability for introspection.

Thus, introspection is one of the methods of deep self-knowledge, when one can independently analyze:

Introspection in Psychology

The ability to introspection is a great gift; not all are in possession of it, and even those to whom it is given do not always use it skillfully, turning it into self-interest, when during the analysis of events only attention is paid to one's own negative thoughts and feelings. It can reach samoyedstva, when in all that has happened the subject accuses only himself. Unlike these destructive actions, introspection in psychology is an analysis that allows an objective assessment of behavior and emotional state without self-condemnation and remorse.

Introspection - the pros and cons

The method of introspection in psychology, like any method of research, can contain positive and negative aspects, because the psychological portrait of each is unique, and it is impossible to give out recommendations suitable to absolutely everyone. Nevertheless, the introspection method used to monitor the human condition revealed more characteristic features of it. Among the positive are:

As for the negative aspects of the method, the researchers here only call it one: a biased attitude toward oneself in the widest possible range. It extends from the evaluation: "I forgive myself, my beloved," to: "It's all my fault, because I'm bad (loser, selfish, etc.)." Paying tribute to internal assessments that are valuable to the individual, experts do not consider them scientific.

Introspection and introspection

Between the method of introspection and introspection it is sometimes put an equal sign, implying that the learning aspects for them are the same: an internal emotional reaction to various events, where the evaluation is given by the subject, who is usually called a "naive observer". But experts believe that introspection and introspection have significant differences:

Reflection and introspection are differences. Interaction between introspection and reflexion is interesting as two methods that broaden the horizons of studies of the emotionally mental state of an individual. Most experts agree that both are important: introspection and reflection; the difference is that the former "answers" for the soul, analyzing its reaction to the actions performed, and the second - for the body, giving information about his actions.

Types of introspection in psychology

The history of the origin of the method gave birth to certain types of introspection, discovered by scientists from different European philosophical and psychological schools. Among them are:

In a number of scientific publications, another introspective experiment is singled out, by means of which it is possible to repeatedly check the emotional reaction of a person to the actions of a recurring character. In doing so, it provides independent psychological characteristics of observations. Until the beginning of the twentieth century, introspection was considered the only effective method of studying the emotional state of a person.