“On the bridge” or “on the shore”? The importance of “positionality statement” in inter-paradigm coordination among psychological approaches

The paper is a debatable response to the collective monograph “Scientific Approaches in Modern Domestic Psychology”. The general idea of volume composition and introductory chapter is interpreted as the basis for a novel methodology of systemic inter-paradigm communication and coordination. It is hypothesized that the authors imply a category of subject in their metaphor of “bridges between paradigms” in the sense that this category serves as a potential link between various approaches in contemporary psychology. The article discusses the call for reflection on how a researcher’s personality contributes to scientific activity, both by giving personal meaning to this activity and by structuring the design of a study. This call manifests itself in the form of a “positionality statement”, which is of high relevance due to the organizational diversity of modern psychology. It is contended that the “internal methodology” is a defining feature of a scientist’s personality. Furthermore, the reflection on the author’s methodological attitudes does not serve as an obstacle to inter-paradigmatic dialogue, but rather enhances the ability for scientific empathy. Three variants of inter-paradigmatic interaction are proposed in order to foster the development of distinct research approaches. The “concentration” line of development seeks to maintain the distinctive characteristics across all levels of the methodological framework. This leads to an enhanced replication of the “branded” achievements of the approach in new material. The “generalizing” line of development involves incorporating the achievements of other approaches. These “external” achievements are transferred to “internal” ones in the status of analogues (i.e., having diverse origins but leading to identical consequences). Finally, the line of development, conventionally called “ecumenical”, consists in integrating historically different approaches into broader methodological clusters. These clusters use the unity of general scientific principles and philosophical sources, which leads to their mutual strengthening.