The Obstructed Ideas and Practice about Empiricism: Revisiting Frankfurt School’s Post-War Public Opinion Research “Group Experiment”

LU Guoliang

PDF(1613 KB)

Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2024, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (11) : 137-156.

The Obstructed Ideas and Practice about Empiricism: Revisiting Frankfurt School’s Post-War Public Opinion Research “Group Experiment”

LU Guoliang

Author information +

History +

Abstract

In the intellectual history of communication research, Frankfurt School is generally famous around the world for its abstruse and unfathomable critical theories. However, in addition to critical theories, what else? In order to answer such a question, this paper revisited Frankfurt School’s post-war public opinion research “Group Experiment”. After analyzing the reason, method, process and responses of such research, the article presented the details of “Group Experiment” and, ideas or practice about Empiricism from Frankfurt School. Contrary to the stereotype of mainstream record, Frankfurt School did not build their critical theories without any experimental study; instead, they endeavored to combine the critical theories and experimental study. Furthermore, researchers dedicated to analyze why Frankfurt school’s ideas and practice about empiricism have been obstructed in the intellectual history of communication research. Through analyzing the intellectual history of the Frankfurt School in China and American communication research, the paper revealed that it is not a natural process that Frankfurt school’s ideas and practice about empiricism have been obstructed in the intellectual history of communication research. In fact, such case has been associated with various reasons in the structural level.

Key words

Frankfurt School / Group Experiment / ideas and practice about empiricism / critical theory / the intellectual history of communication research

Cite this article

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

Download Citations

LU Guoliang. The Obstructed Ideas and Practice about Empiricism: Revisiting Frankfurt School’s Post-War Public Opinion Research “Group Experiment”[J]. Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication. 2024, 46(11): 137-156

References

List( Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within ) Chart analysis

[1]	埃米尔·瓦尔特-布什(2010/2014). 《法兰克福学派史: 评判理论与政治》(郭力译). 社会科学文献出版社. Cited in this article [1]

[2]	冯露, 宋伟(2016). 当实证遭遇批判:一个文化研究的“理论事件”. 《文艺争鸣》,(10),151-155. Cited in this article [1]

[3]	冯露, 章于炎(2021). 缘起、冲突与交汇:批判学派的实证研究进路——以法兰克福学派权威人格研究为中心. 《辽宁大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,(2),110-116. Cited in this article [1]

[4]	傅永军(2009). 接受与拒斥——批判理论在中国大陆的命运. 《山东社会科学》,(8),5-9. Cited in this article [1]

[5]	郭旭东(2021). 从“占有”到“存在”:论弗洛姆的人本主义交往观. 《新闻与传播评论》,(1),35-46. Cited in this article [1]

[6]	赫伯特·席勒, 陈复庵(1979). “思想操纵和意识定型”(上). 《国际新闻界》,(2),1-20. Cited in this article [1]

[7]	赫伯特·席勒, 陈复庵(1980). 知识工业:政府的组成部分(上). 《国际新闻界》,(2),14-24. Cited in this article [1]

[8]	霍耐特, 王才勇(2009). 法兰克福学派与中国——“法兰克福学派在中国”国际学术研讨会开幕致辞. 《现代哲学》,(1),20-21 Cited in this article [2]

[9]	克里斯托弗·辛普森(1996/2017). 《胁迫之术: 心理战与美国传播研究的兴起(1945-1960)》(王维佳,刘扬,李杰琼译),华东师范大学出版社. Cited in this article [1]

[10]	罗尔夫·魏格豪斯(1995/2010). 《法兰克福学派: 历史、理论及政治影响(下册)》(孟登迎,赵文,刘凯译). 上海人民出版社. Cited in this article [3]

[11]	刘海龙, 黄雅兰(2013). 试论“文化工业”到“文化产业”的语境变迁. 《山西大学学报(哲学社会科版)》,(2),110-118. Cited in this article [2]

[12]	刘海龙, 秦艺丹(2023). 中层理论与传播学的知识生产:默顿的传播研究及其思想遗产. 《新闻记者》,(5),26-37. Cited in this article [1]

[13]	连水兴(2018). 被遮蔽的存在:论法兰克福学派的经验性传播研究. 《新闻与传播研究》,(3), 41-51+126-127. Cited in this article [2]

[14]	陆国亮(2022). 被遗忘的时光——拉扎斯菲尔德的维也纳岁月. 《国际新闻界》,(5),49-70. Cited in this article [2]

[15]	马蒂亚斯·本泽尔(2011/2020). 《阿多诺社会学》(孙斌译). 北京师范大学出版社. Cited in this article [2]

[16]	孙藜(2021). “灵晕”即“启迪”:从原初性关系看媒介革命——本雅明媒介视域再阐释. 《国际新闻界》,(11), 44-64. Cited in this article [1]

[17]	夏巍(2021). 法兰克福学派在中国的传播及其思想效应研究概览. 《理论视野》,(11),94-98. Cited in this article [3]

[18]	吴畅畅(2019). 施拉姆的学术遗产与美国传播学四大奠基人的神话. 《国际新闻界》,(8),52-80. Cited in this article [1]

[19]	温旭(2022). 从数字异化到数字共鸣:数字资本主义社会加速的双重幻象——以罗萨的社会加速批判理论为视角. 《新闻界》,(09),55-65. Cited in this article [1]

[20]	约翰·杜伦·彼得斯(2003/2011). 霍克海默与阿多诺的奥义: 读《文化工业》有感. 载伊莱休·卡茨,约翰·杜伦·彼得斯,泰玛·利比斯,艾薇儿·奥尔洛夫(主编),《媒介研究经典文本解读》(常江译)(第13-39页).北京大学出版社. Cited in this article [1]

[21]	赵勇(2004). 法兰克福学派的中国之旅——从一篇被人遗忘的“序言”说起. 《书屋》,(3),65-69. Cited in this article [2]

[22]	曾一果(2016). 批判理论、文化工业与媒体发展——从法兰克福学派到今日批判理论. 《新闻与传播研究》, (1),26-40+126. Cited in this article [1]

[23]	朱国华(2018). 文化政治之外的政治:重思法兰克福学派中国之旅. 《兰州大学学报(社会科学版)》,(1)85-93. Cited in this article [2]

[24]	展宁(2020). 伊莱休·卡茨与大众传播研究:半个多世纪的学术演变. 《新闻与传播研究》,(10),5-22+126. Cited in this article [1]

[25]	Я.Г.福格列尔, 涂纪亮(1978). 法兰克福哲学-社会学学派基本思想的历史发展. 《哲学译丛》,(5), 44-48. Cited in this article [1]

[26]	Adorno T. W. (2010). Guilt and Defense: On the Legacies of National Socialism in Postwar Germany (Perrin, J.& Olick, J. Trans.). Harvard University Press. Cited in this article [11]

[27]	Boesten J. (2012). Book Review. German Politics & Society, 30(4), 105-107. Cited in this article [1]

[28]

Clavey

C. H.

(2019). Experiments in theory: The Transatlantic Development of Social Science and Critical Theory, 1930- 1950. [PhD dissertation, Harvard University], ProQuest. https://www.proquest.com/openview/786291cb21997ade5a307945c164bb0c/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y.

https://www.proquest.com/openview/786291cb21997ade5a307945c164bb0c/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y

Cited in this article [3]

[29]	Colm G. (1955). Review of Theorie der allgemeinen Volkswirtschaftspolitik. Weltwirtschaftliches Archive, 75, 89-91. Cited in this article [1]

[30]	Claussen D. (2008). Theodor W. Adorno: One Last Genius. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Cited in this article [1]

[31]	Davision P. (1956). Institute for social research, University of Frankfurt. Public Opinion Quarterly, 20(2), 480-484. Cited in this article [3]

[32]	Gitlin T. (1978). Media sociology. Theor Soc, 6, 205-253. Cited in this article [1]

[33]	Hardt H. (1989). The Return of the “Critical” and the Challenge of Radical Dissent: Critical Theory, Cultural Studies, and American Mass Communication Research. Annals of the International Communication Association, 12(1), 558-600. Cited in this article [2]

[34]	Hohendahl U. (2011). The Quarterly Book Review. The German Quarterly, 84(4), 523-524. Cited in this article [2]

[35]	Habermas J., & Luhmann N. (1971). Theorie der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologie—Was leistet die Systemforschung? Suhrkamp. Cited in this article [1]

[36]	Lazarsfeld P. F. (1969). An episode in the history of social research:A memoir. In D. Fleming & B. Bailyn (Eds.). The Intellectual Migration: Europe and America, 1930-1960 (pp. 270-337). Harvard University Press. Cited in this article [1]

[37]	Link F. (2016). Cooperation and Competition: Re-establishing the Institute of Social Research and the Emergence of the “Frankfurt School. NTM Zeitschrift Für Geschichte Der Wissenschaften, Technik Und Medizin, 24(2), 225-249. Cited in this article [3]

[38]	Morrison E. (1978). Kultur and Culture: The Case of Theodor W. Adorno and Paul F. Lazarsfeld. Social Research, 45(2), 331-355. Cited in this article [1]

[39]	Moebius S. (2021). Sociology in Germany: A History. Palgrave Macmillan. Cited in this article [1]

[40]	Noelle-Neumann E. (1974). The Spiral of Silence a Theory of Public Opinion. Journal of Communication, 24(2), 43-51. Cited in this article [1]

[41]	Neumann F., Marcuse H., & Kirchheimer O. (2013). Secret Reports on Nazi Germany:The Frankfurt School Contribution to the War Effort ( edited Laudani, R.). Princeton University Press. Cited in this article [1]

[42]	Pollock F., Adorno T. W., & colleagues. (2011). Group Experiment and other writings: The Frankfurt School on Public Opinion in Postwar Germany (Perrin, A. & Olick, J. Trans.). Harvard University Press. Cited in this article [29]

[43]	Rosenthal G. (1992). Antisemitismus im lebensgeschichtlichen Kontext: soziale Prozesse der Dehumanisierung und Schuldzuweisung. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaften, 3(4), 449-479. Cited in this article [1]

[44]	Simim A., & Kurkdjian N. (2020). Entrevista com Dirk Braunstein. https://www.revistas.usp.br/filosofiaalema/article/download/170101/161530/. https://www.revistas.usp.br/filosofiaalema/article/download/170101/161530/ Cited in this article [1]

[45]	Said E. W. (1983). Traveling theory. In Said, E. W (Eds.), The world, the text, and the critic (pp.226-247). Harvard University Press. Cited in this article [1]

[46]	Walter J. (1956). Das Gruppenexperiment - Eine neue Methode der empirischen Sozialforschung. Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), 92(1), 109-112. Cited in this article [1]

Footnotes

1. 这是法兰克福学派罕为人知的大型经验研究，因为该研究并没有出版。据沃雷尔（Mark Worrell）的著作Dialectic of solidarity: Labor, antisemitism, and the frankfurt school记载，这项研究由旅居美国时期的法兰克福社会研究所成员于1944至1945年独立完成，主要探究美国当地的工人阶级对于法西斯主义、反犹主义的态度。

2. 以“文化工业”“法兰克福学派”“阿多诺”“霍克海默”“马尔库塞”在中国知网的“新闻与传媒”范围进行搜索，CSSCI刊物文献总量分别为：80、74、23、10、4。而且，“法兰克福学派”及其他代表人物的相关文献的关注点较多在于批判理论，而非学派本身。

PDF(1613 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections

Recommended

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export