For the purpose of this essay, it will attempt to analyze some of the key differences between the views of experimental, humanistic/experiential, and critical social psychologists. The essay will be looking at the three approaches' key characteristics and some important ways in which they differ. For example, the kind of understanding should social psychology provide and how it should be applied, the question of whether people are autonomous or determined, topics to study in social psychology, which kind of science should social psychology be and which methods should be used. Further, the essay will state and give examples of why I find the view of critical social psychologists most convincing. A conclusion will summarize the issues discussed within this essay.
             As mentioned above, one key difference between the three approaches is the question of the kind of understanding social psychology should provide and how it should be applied. For example the experimental social psychologists, aim to understand the origins and consequences of people's mental processes. Further they suggest, that some social behaviour both internal and external to individuals has causal influences that are governed by laws. Therefore, according to this approach social psychology should be how to build a working model of the social world. Which based on expert knowledge, can make predictions and be applied (P. McGhee 2001.). Where as experimental social psychologists understand most human behaviour to be determined, humanistic/experiential social psychologists on the other hand, sees people as autonomous agents and suggests, that social psychology should aim to understand conscious awareness of being a person and find ways in which human can actualise latent capabilities (R Stevens 2001). In contrast to both experimental and humanistic and experiential which focus on the individual. Critical social psychology suggests, that although individuals are autonomous...