Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2025 Dec 1;59(4):89. doi: 10.1007/s12124-025-09944-1.
ABSTRACT
In this chapter, I draw inspiration from American psychologist Jim Lamiell to explore the original meanings of the terms “idiographic” and “nomothetic” as conceptualized by Wilhelm Windelband in 1894. Windelband critiqued the traditional division between natural and human sciences, proposing instead a new classification system that distinguishes scientific inquiries into idiographic and nomothetic fields. According to Windelband, scientific endeavors should be categorized based on the researcher’s goals: if the aim is to discover general, invariant laws governing physical and mental phenomena, the approach is nomothetic. In contrast, if the goal is to understand the uniqueness and depth of individual experiences, literature, or national moods-among other psychophysically neutral phenomena-the research is idiographic. This chapter demonstrates that historically, idiographic and nomothetic research were intended to complement and enrich each other. In the latter part of the paper, I contrast Windelband’s historical interpretation with modern views that often equate quantitative, statistical research (generalizations from samples to populations) with nomothetic research and single-case qualitative research with idiographic. I argue that this modern interpretation diverges from Windelband’s original concepts and suggest, in line with Lamiell, that population generalization may be more sensitive to cultural and historical contexts, thus aligning more closely with idiographic research than commonly assumed. Building on this analysis, I introduce the concept of synthography as a novel methodological framework aimed at integrating nomothetic and idiographic perspectives into a more comprehensive and culturally grounded approach to psychological inquiry.
PMID:41324849 | DOI:10.1007/s12124-025-09944-1