The present article explores problems of descriptive reporting, relativism, and the lack of systematic follow-up of qualitative research. Such issues are discussed in relation to components of phenomenologically based research reports, with emphasis on the articulation of the research approach, and steps to facilitate validation. The value of a descriptive science derived from phenomenological principles is discussed as forming a common ground for initial qualitative inquiry, while providing a critically reflective base upon which rational consensus can be developed. I suggest (...) that the values of follow-up, tentativeness, and humility in research reporting, and a rational framework of critical validation, constitute a common core of science. In addition, phenomenological tenets are discussed as providing a corrective to the uncritical search for absolutes, or the "anything counts" conception of relativistic movements. (shrink)

By analyzing descriptions of illusory and nonillusory figures, Richer called into question the common assumption that illusory and nonillusory perceptions were experientially the same and differed only in terms of their accuracy. The present study attempted to replicate Richer's work with a focus on identifying within the subjects' descriptions any orienting attitudes corresponding to these two forms of perception. Nineteen student volunteers were asked to describe two illusory figures and a nonillusory control of similar complexity. The descriptions revealed consistent differences (...) between the two forms. However, the Hering and Zollner figures were not always described in illusory terms, and surprisingly, several subjects described the control as if it were illusory. Further, perceptual accuracy was not guaranteed by nonillusory experience. Subjects described the figures from within one of three different orienting attitudes-atomizing, representational, and geometrical-organizing. The latter attitude appeared necessary for the phenomena of illusory perception and experience. Though the present findings confirmed Richer's distinction between illusory and nonillusory experience, they also indicate the need for further differentiation- illusory perception versus illusory experience. Finally, the findings also supported Luria's and Segall, Campbell, and Herskovits's position on the importance of particular cultural and educational experiences and codes in relation to perceptual illusions. (shrink)