Search

In this paper, we take a closer look at Danish psychology students' Master's thesis projects. We do this by analysing 4,100 descriptions of all Master's theses in Danish psychology study programs between 2014 and 2019. Via a sentiment analysis of the data material, we identify and categorize the different theses and attempt to identify their methodological focus. Initially, we describe the characteristics of the Danish Master's thesis and discuss why an analysis of different theoretical and methodological orientations within the theses is relevant. The results we draw out in this article point to what we term a methodological discrepancy between psychological research published in journals and Danish psychology students' Master's thesis projects. The sentiment analysis also shows that Danish Master's theses in many cases refer to one or more specific (meta)theoretical orientations in their problem statements. The paper discusses whether students' (meta)theoretical orientation(s) can be interpreted as a sign of sound theoretical literacy among students or, conversely, if theory rather is applied in a routine-like manner in Master's thesis projects. It is further discussed whether the methodological discrepancy is seen because of the more intuitive nature of qualitative methods, or if it caused by what could be termed a dustbowl (qualitative) empiricism. The article is concluded with a discussion on the social normativity of psychological research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article I discuss the muddled implementation of Prolonged Grief Disorder in a Danish context. I do this by drawing on my fieldwork, which has been ongoing during the last couple of years. I begin by describing how my initial research design suffered a breakdown that mirrored the breakdown in the implementation of the Prolonged Grief Disorder diagnoses. This breakdown became defining for my work and through the application of what I call gonzo sociology I was able to critically engage in the field of grief research in Denmark. I describe what gonzo research is, and then, following this, I tell the story of how I stumbled into the field of grief research in Denmark and the process of realization I went through. The article is thus structured as a narrative that relays both how I came to embrace gonzo research as a form of methodology, but also the story of what my encounters in the field showed me. I do this because I cannot separate the story of how I went about it from what I came to discover—methods, theory and results are intertwined. Gonzo research aims at going into the field and participating, co-creating the discoveries and pushing the boundaries for research, both in its way of doing research and in its way of reporting said research. Thus, the form of the article is alternative and balances between journalistic endeavor, academic research and autoethnography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]