**4. Paradigms of P1 type used in CDM**

### **4.1 Paradigms that search for "objectivity" (type 1)**

The implemented action, with a high degree of probability, makes the expected changes to the situation or obtain the expected advantages. This implicit but prevailing condition has led researchers in human sciences to valorize the quest for objectivation. They adopted a paradigm that, since the mid-nineteenth century, has largely demonstrated its efficiency: the objective experimental paradigm (OEP).

#### **4.2 The objective experimental paradigm (OEP)**

Although attempts were made previously, particularly in physics and chemistry, it appeared for the first time in the book by Claude Bernard [6] dedicated to medicine. Since then, the approach has witnessed numerous "aggiornamento" and is now considered to be an organized series of well-defined operations [7]. In view of its undeniable successes, in a wide range of disciplines, extending from the formalized sciences to the human and social sciences, at the present time, those adhering to the qualities of objectivity and replicability consider that the OEP and the experimental approach underlie numerous research strategies.

The purpose of this chapter is not to provide an exhaustive analysis of this approach, which specialized reviews do very well [8, 9]. We will simply make comments on two characteristics of this method; a *place* (the laboratory) and a *strategy* (in processing information).

#### **4.3 The laboratory: A privileged location**

So that it can be applied, the experimental method must be implemented in a special location, protected from external influences considered to be disturbing: the laboratory. Used systematically in the material and life sciences, it was used for the first time in psychology by Wundt in 1879. Wundt wanted to make psychology a science by aligning the research studies with the procedures used in physiology.

While the laboratory led to the definition of the psychophysical laws concerning the relations between perception and sensation, it only became widely used following Pavlov's studies on conditioning and Watson's behaviorist theory, resulting in the emergence of experimental psychology. More recently, cognitive psychology uses experimental approaches in the study of brain activity in relation to the fundamental conduct of the human being.

The main feature of the laboratory is that it is carefully isolated from the outside world which is, in fact, *a priori* considered as a source of disturbance (interference

variables). We remember the "towers of silence" built by Pavlov to study conditioning. The laboratory provides controlled conditions under which reasoned operations can be conducted on properties considered, by assumption, as being essential.

### **4.4 An adapted strategy**

The laboratory also implies the use of a quite specific epistemology whose function is to "eliminate" from the system the momentary or incident characteristics which exist in concrete situations. The purpose of the epistemological section is to reveal fundamental information, which is always present under all circumstances. To achieve this, the situation studied will be reduced to a set of relations considered by the researcher as being fundamental while excluding, whenever possible, all the others. This cognitive operation is the first step of *scientific reductionism,* which will be accompanied by a second epistemological section.

A *deconstruction-reconstruction* strategy is then implemented and applied to what could be considered as being a cognitive model of the actual situation. Variables are isolated, processed, removed, added, correlated, etc. using procedures intended to reveal their effects and their relations. By manipulating or acting, using an ad hoc device built in the laboratory, any variations observed in the entity studied can finally be recorded.

#### **4.5 The cognitive consequences**

As implied by the etymology of the word, epistemology is a branch of philosophy concerned with knowledge. This knowledge stems from the choices of researchers at the two levels of cognition: first collection and then organization of the information collected. The resulting knowledge will depend on the initial stamp of the choices made at these two cognitive levels. These two operations will foster what can be considered a simplified mental reconstruction of the situation rather that the situation itself, which will then only appear in the background.

At this stage, the search for simplification still prevails, in a different form, by explicitly seeking *parsimony* [10] of the explanation (often called Occam's razor). Let us take the example of a researcher who would have two distinct mental constructions explaining the same conduct with equal efficiency; application of the parsimony criterion would lead us to choose the simplest form. However, this type of simplifying approach to knowledge has its downsides, which will appear—which is not at all paradoxical—with the progress of knowledge.
