Abstract
Theory Reduction in the Social Sciences. The example of balance theories. A central topic both in philosophy of science as well as in the empirical sciences is the reconstruction of the relations between theories. In the past comparisons of theories by means of traditional linguistic methods have proved to be extremely difficult and complicated. In this article the reconstruction of intertheoretical relations based on model-theoretical terms is propagated, as formulated within the structuralist view of theories. The efficiency of a model theoretical based comparison of theories is demonstrated by two theory elements from the social science research program of balance theories: The basic element by Heider and the transitivity theory by Holland and Leinhardt. First of all both theory elements are introduced informally and reconstructed in the structuralist format. On the basis of these reconstructions can be shown, that the Heider theory can be formally reduced to the Holland-Leinhardt theory and that the theory younger in history means an improvement. However, an integration of all balance theoretical elements into a theory net is not possible.
Similar content being viewed by others
LITERATUR
Abelson, R.P. und Rosenberg, M.J.: 1958, Symbolic Psycho-Logic: A Model of Attitudinal Cognition, Behavioral Science 3, 1–13.
Balzer, W.: 1982, Empirische Theorien: Modelle – Strukturen – Beispiele. Die Grundzüge der modernen Wissenschaftstheorie, Vieweg, Braunschweig.
Balzer, W., Moulines, C.U. und Sneed, J.D.: 1987, An Architectonic for Science. The Structuralist Program, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Cartwright, D. und Harary, F.: 1956, Structural Balance: A Generalisation of Heider's Theory, Psychological Review 63, 277–293.
Davis, J.A.: 1963, Structural Balance, Mechanical Solidarity, and Interpersonal Relations, American Journal of Sociology 68, 444–462.
Davis, J.A.: 1967, Clustering and Structural Balance in Graphs, Human Relations 20, 181–187.
Davis, J.A.: 1970, Clustering and Hierarchy in Interpersonal Relations: Testing two Graph Theoretical Models on 742 Sociogramms, American Sociological Review 35, 27–33.
Davis, J.A. und Leinhardt, S.: 1972, The Structure of Positive Interpersonal Relations in Small Groups, in: Berger, J. (Ed.), Sociological Theories in Progress (Vol. 2), Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, pp. 218–253.
Frey, D.: 1987, Kognitive Theorien, in: Frey, D. und Greif, S. (Hrsg.), Sozialpsychologie (2.Aufl.), Psychologie Verlags Union, München, S. 51–67.
Gollob, H.F.: 1974, The subject-verb-object approach to social cognition, Psychological Review 81, 286–321.
Hallinan, M.T.: 1974, A Structural Model of Sentiment Relations, American Journal of Sociology 80(2), 364–378.
Hallinan, M.T. und Felmlee, D.: 1975, An Analysis of Intransitivity in Sociometric Data, Sociometry 38, 195–212.
Heider, F.: 1946, Attitudes and Cognitive Organization, Journal of Psychology 21, 107–112.
Heider, F.: 1977, Psychologie der interpersonalen Beziehung, Klett, Stuttgart (Original erschienen 1958: The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations).
Holland, P.W. und Leinhardt, S.: 1970, A Method for Detecting Structure in Sociometric Data, American Journal of Sociology 70, 492–513.
Holland, P.W. und Leinhardt, S.: 1971, Transitivity in Structural Models of Small Groups, Comparative Group Studies 2, 107–124.
Holland, P.W. und Leinhardt, S.: 1975, Structural Sociometry. Papier präsentiert auf dem Advanced Research Symposium on Social Networks, Mathematical Social Science Board, Hanover, New Hampshire (September).
Irle, M.: 1975, Lehrbuch der Sozialpsychologie, Hogrefe, Göttingen.
Jordan, N.: 1953, Behavioral Forces that are a Function of Attitude and Cognitive Organization, Human Relations 6, 273–287.
Koukkanen, M.: 1992, The Continuity Problem of Scientific Theories: An Example of Social-Psychological Balance Theorizing, in: Westmeyer, H. (Ed.), The Structuralist Program in Psychology, Huber, Bern.
Lakatos, I.: 1982, Die Methodologie der wissenschaftlichen Forschungsprogramme. Vieweg, Braunschweig.
Landy, D. und Aronson, E.: 1969, The Influence of the Character of the Criminal and his Victim on the Decisions of Simulated Jurors, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 5, 141–152.
Lerner, M.J. und Simmons, C.H.: 1966, Observer's Reaction to the “Innocent Victim”: Compasion of Rejection?, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4, 203–210.
Manhart, K.: 1994, Strukturalistische Theorienkonzeption in den Sozialwissenschaften. Das Beispiel der Theorie vom transitiven Graphen, Zeitschrift für Soziologie 2, 111–128.
Manhart, K.: 1995, KIModelle in den Sozialwissenschaften. Logische Struktur und wissensbasierte Systeme von Balancetheorien, Oldenbourg, München.
Mohazab, F. und Feger, H.: 1985, An Extension ofHeiderian Balance Theory for Quantified Data, European Journal of Social Psychology 15, 147–165.
Morrissette, J.: 1958, An Experimental Study of the Theory of Structural Balance, Human Relations 11, 239–254.
Osgood, C.E. und Tannenbaum, P.H.: 1955, The Principle of Congruity in the Prediction of Attitude Change, Psychological Review 62, 42–55.
Sneed, J.D.: 1971, The Logical Structure of Mathematical Physics, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Stahlberg, D. und Frey, D.: 1987, Konsistenztheorien, in: Frey, D. und Greif, S. (Hrsg.), Sozialpsychologie (2.Aufl), Psychologie Verlags Union, München, S. 214–221.
Stegmüller, W.: 1980, Neue Wege der Wissenschaftsphilosophie, Springer, Berlin.
Stegmüller, W.: 1986, Theorie undErfahrung.DieEntwicklung des neueren Strukturalismus seit 1973, Springer, Berlin.
Sukale, M.: 1971, Zur Axiomatisierung der Balancetheorie. Eine wissenschaftstheoretische Fallstudie, Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie 2, 40–57.
Westermann, R.: 1987, Strukturalistische Theorienkonzeption und empirische Forschung in der Psychologie. Eine Fallstudie, Springer, Berlin.
Witte, E.H.: 1989, Sozialpsychologie. Ein Lehrbuch, Psychologie Verlags Union, München.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Manhart, K. Theorienreduktion in den Sozialwissenschaften. Eine Fallstudie am Beispiel der Balancetheorien. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 29, 301–326 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008278000826
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008278000826