ABSTRACT
The notion that worldviews influence the theoretical expectations and biases of researchers is generally understood in psychological science. This chapter demonstrates the value of the dialectic for developing this kind of reflexivity by comparing a prominent worldview influence (WI) in psychological science, naturalism, with that of an alternative, frequently considered non-scientific worldview. It considers the more familiar WI in research that are outside of method, what is sometimes called the context of discovery and focuses on the less known WI research influences "inside" the logic of method, what some label as the context of justification. Psychological methods were formulated over time and involve a number of cultural and philosophical influences, including religion, positivism, and secularism. Naturalists confine their studies to the natural world, whereas theists are interested in both the supernatural and natural worlds. Physical or psychological laws are also thought to be "causal" laws for the naturalist.
