In or out? Causal or normative? Suppose you were to become a Psychologist studying thinking, emotion or some other broad psychological phenomenon. Do you think your preference would be to study this phenomenon by “working in”, or would you prefer to study it by “working out”? Do you think your preference would be to take a causal science approach to studying the phenomenon, or would you prefer to take a normative science approach? Explain your reasons.
I believe if I was a Psychologist I would use a mixture of both working in and working out for my research. As much as breaking down information to a cause and effect is crucial in a study, the social effects that the environment and individuals in the society have on an individual is also important. In many cases I do not like to limit myself and I wonder alot about the human mind and its effect on development, therefore I would lean towards working out a bit more.