Psychology has always been distinguished by a large number of original methods of influencing an individual in certain conditions, interacting with a person or working with a person's state of mind. Various technologies have been developed to facilitate the existence of the individual in society, as well as to develop the empirical skills of each person. The higher the level of such skills, the more stable the psychological state, as well as the higher the degree of well-being of the individual.
Quite a large part of the experiments are carried out in the context of cross-sectional research in psychology. This method is especially popular not only because of the involvement of rather large groups of people of different ages, but also because of the accurate results that are obtained as a result of scientific experiments. With the passage of time and the development of psychology, which is an interdisciplinary branch of scientific knowledge, the method of longitudinal and transverse sections is becoming more and more in demand, as society is gradually moving into the sphere ofuniversal humanism. In addition, the mental and psychological he alth of each individual is considered the main value of the new generation.
Cross section method
This method, developed in the late sixties of the last century, is still one of the most effective and efficient methods of interviewing groups of different ages. A distinctive feature of the methodology is that the empirical survey itself is conducted only once, however, it covers several groups of people belonging to different age categories, which allows researchers to see the social and age pattern of human reactions to a particular theoretical statement. The age of the subjects usually becomes a reference point and a common variable for the entire study, and the characteristics studied are recognized as dependent on the common denominator of the results.
Mode Maker
The "forefather" of the cross-sectional method in psychology can be deservedly considered the French scientist, political scientist and sociologist Rene Zazzo, who not only proposed the very essence of the method, but also conducted the first seminar on bringing the idea to life. Of course, Rene did not take this technology from scratch. He thoroughly studied the works of his predecessors, who, in turn, referred to the theorists of the past, who believed that the future of modern psychology lay in its collective manifestation, and not in the theory of radical individualism.
Zazzo from the very beginning of work on a new way of research preferred to interact with people of different ages,to achieve maximum accuracy of results. All practical developments, generalized results, as well as theoretical additions regarding the method of cross sections, the scientist presented at the XVIII International Psychological Congress in 1966. The report of the sociologist was published in the official journal of the Congress and caused a great resonance in scientific circles. However, in practical sociology, the method took root far from immediately. The fact is that the psychological science of that time was focused on the psychology of individualism, designed to move in the direction of comprehending the spiritual reflexes of an individual, and the method of cross sections offered to obtain the results of collective thinking and social reaction. However, despite some pressure from conservative scientific circles, Zazzo still achieved quite significant success in the practical consolidation of his theoretical positions.
Key Scientists
Inspired by the success of their overseas colleagues, some scientists decide to practice the comparative method of cross sections in their homeland. So, a few years later, Zazzo's experiments are successfully repeated by a scientific tandem consisting of American academicians L. Schonfeldt and V. Ovens, who decided to give a broader interpretation of the method invented by the brilliant Frenchman and add several more age phases to the experiment, including youth, as well as two stages of maturity. This has resulted in more accurate results for each of the surveys. Also, researchers could trace the dynamicschanges in human character based on the variability of opinions expressed by people of different age categories.
Their example was followed by outstanding domestic psychologists and sociologists, who are members of the working group of the legendary academician V. M. Bekhterev, who not only began to conduct systematic genetic and psychological research in Russia, but also became the first sociologist cross-sectional method in psychology in relation to very young children.
It was at the center of this wonderful teacher that an integrated approach was implemented to study a certain group of children for several months. Bekhterev did not suspect that with his trial experiments he laid the foundation for a completely new method of research, called longitudinal. In fact, this is the same method of cross sections, however, the timing of the experiment in this case is extended for a longer time.
In 1928, the academician published a joint work with his assistant N. M. Shchelovanov, in which the main provisions of the new research method were outlined, as well as the basic criteria for the method, which Bekhterev called "long", since the study took quite long term compared to other types of similar experiments.
In modern psychology, the longitudinal method is actively used in working with groups of elderly people. In this case, it gives particularly accurate results, on the basis of which it is possible to draw serious conclusions, and not justtheoretical assumptions. There are cases when the combination of the above method with the psychographic method of differential psychology became the most highly effective. It was this technique that was used in his practical research by the outstanding psychologist V. Stern, who believed that the synthetic nature of psychography would have a positive effect on the impartiality of the results of the experiment, and also emphasize the differences between the ideological and conscious attitudes of generations.
The Essence of the Way
The cross-sectional method involves the interaction of the researcher with people of different age categories, grouped by age. All of them are asked exactly the same questions and are given similar tasks that they must complete within the same period of time. Based on the results of a theoretical survey and practical tasks, researchers form a general picture of the generation's consciousness, identifying attitudes, prejudices, and a system of principles characteristic of each age group, on the basis of which the necessary conclusions are drawn.
An example of the method of cross sections is the experiment of the outstanding Soviet psychologist Bekhterev, who interviewed a certain group of children for a long time, observing the change in their social position on a particular issue. Ultimately, a complete picture of ideas about the life of children in a single age group was formed, on the basis of which it was possible to judge the worldview of children from similar social groups, but only if its representativesby sex, age and social status were similar to the children surveyed.
Problems of the method
The essence of the cross-sectional method is primarily manifested in the fact that it is designed for a large number of people, and not for individual work with a specific person. It is one of the few effective methods of quickly obtaining information from several individuals at once, which leads to a more fruitful work of a scientist who constantly receives new information and observes the whole picture at once, along with all its changes.
Practical experiments
Since the end of the sixties of the last century, experiments have been actively carried out on the use of the method of age cross sections. The method was most widely used in the United States of America, whose sociological science from the very beginning was focused on identifying universal human needs. It is worth noting that the correct attitude towards the latter could neutralize racial and ethnic conflicts in a large country.
Risk factors
The reasons why the results of the experiment can be canceled include:
- Different living conditions of persons in age groups;
- Significant difference in the age of matched groups;
- Different social statuses of respondents;
- The inexperience of the scientist conducting the experiment.
Scope of application
An example of the cross-sectional method can be found in works devoted to psychology,sociology and cultural studies. Usually, it is in scientific disciplines, one way or another connected with the study of society and its internal processes, that one can find examples of the activities of scientists with this particular research method.
Dignity
The positive aspects of the method include its rather high accuracy, of course, subject to all the conditions in the preparation of the subjects. Also, the method is characterized by simplicity and ease of use, the ability to immediately display the whole picture of the results of the current period. Large social groups in such a study provide a significant number of opinions, which are gradually formed into a single thesis belonging to that same community. Thus, one can roughly understand the position of the entire age group as a whole, simply by transferring the results to people living in real life who have a similar type and living conditions.
Flaws
A significant disadvantage of the comparative method (the method of cross sections) can be a significant age difference between groups. For example, the method gives accurate results if three communities are polled, the difference between the ages of which is no more than five years. If a scientist takes a group of fifteen-year-old teenagers and sixty-year-old people, then the method may give not entirely correct, unpredictable results, and drawing conclusions based on which is rather dangerous.
Also, the quality and purity of the experiment is influenced by the social environment of the subjects. One should not trust the data obtained in the course of experiments with groups of individuals from variousfamilies with different levels of social well-being. In this case, the answers to the questions will be too scattered to bring them to a common denominator.
Reviews
In most works of domestic and foreign psychologists, this method receives mostly positive or neutral assessments, since there are no objective reasons for criticizing the method. The results are influenced by the inexperience of the laboratory assistant or insufficiently high-quality training of the subjects.
