Research Methods in the Behavioral Sciences

The book argues that research methods in the behavioral sciences cannot be assessed in isolation from the theoretical problems they are meant to address. A sample survey, field study, field experiment, and laboratory experiment each have distinct strengths and weaknesses relative to particular substantive questions . This rejects the implicit assumption that methods are interchangeable tools and that one can simply select whichever technique is most convenient. The volume's five-part structure—research settings, sampling, data collection, data analysis, and application of findings—is designed to demonstrate that methodological choices are consequential for what can be learned about social and psychological processes .

Festinger's chapter in this collection is on laboratory experiments, not on the cognitive dissonance or social comparison theories for which he is primarily known . The chapter reflects his methodological thinking during the same period he was designing the dissonance experiments that would make his reputation. Unlike his monographs, which argue for specific theoretical claims, this chapter addresses the general logic of experimental design in social psychology—how to construct laboratory situations that test theoretical propositions about human behavior rather than merely demonstrating phenomena. It is a rare window into Festinger's thinking about method as distinct from his thinking about substance, and it historicizes the experimental tradition he helped establish.

The volume assembles sixteen contributing authors beyond Festinger and Katz, including Robert C. Angell, Angus Campbell, Dorwin Cartwright, Leon Festinger, Daniel Katz, Leslie Kish, Rensis Likert, Theodore Newcomb, and others . This roster reflects the institutional and intellectual networks of mid-century American social psychology: the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research (Likert, Kish, Campbell), Harvard's Laboratory of Social Relations (Newcomb), and MIT's Research Center for Group Dynamics (Cartwright, Festinger). The book thus functions as a snapshot of who was defining methodological standards in behavioral science during the early 1950s, with the chapters reflecting the distinctive approaches of these research centers rather than a single unified school of thought.

Reviewers recognized the volume as a serious contribution to methodological thinking rather than a practical manual. The Journal of Consulting Psychology described it as no cookbook, but instead a vigorous attempt to clarify the logic of research problems, noting that it would reward serious consideration by psychologists of different theoretical persuasions . William B. Michael and Julian C. Stanley, writing in Educational and Psychological Measurement, noted that the volume's general-to-specific approach transcended particular research content and methodology so admirably that almost all workers in the behavioral sciences would be rewarded for reading it . A review in the American Sociological Review praised the balance of the chapters and singled out Katz's treatment of field studies and Kish's chapter on sampling for particular commendation .

The title and format lead some readers to expect a handbook of techniques—a collection of recipes for conducting research. The book itself explicitly disclaims this framing. The Journal of Consulting Psychology review emphasized that it is not a cookbook of investigative techniques . Instead, each chapter analyzes the methodological logic of a particular research setting in relation to theoretical problems. Katz's chapter on field studies, for example, does not primarily teach how to conduct fieldwork but rather analyzes what kinds of theoretical questions field settings can and cannot answer. This distinction matters because the book's value lies in developing methodological judgment, not in providing procedural instructions. Readers seeking step-by-step guidance would be better served by later methodological texts.

The volume historicizes the moment when laboratory experimentation was consolidating its status as the prestige method in social psychology, even as its editors acknowledged the value of other research settings. Festinger's own chapter on laboratory experiments is the fourth in a sequence that moves from the sample survey through field studies to field experiments, placing the laboratory at the end of a continuum of increasing control . This structure implicitly argues that the laboratory is one setting among others, not the default. The book thus captures a transitional moment: the experimental paradigm that would dominate the field for decades was being codified, but the alternative traditions of survey research and field observation still had prominent advocates within the same volume.