Applying Grounded Theory in Explaining the Process of Public Acceptance of Pseudo-Psychology: Presenting a Middle-Range Theory

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to identify the process driving the increasing public inclination toward pseudo-psychology services within society and to propose strategies for mitigating its consequences.

Methodology: A systematic grounded theory approach was employed for this purpose. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews with 24 experts and informants selected through purposive sampling. The data were analyzed through a three-phase coding process—open, axial, and selective.

Findings: Following open coding and the extraction of 476 open codes, these codes were reviewed and consolidated, combined, or eliminated based on similarities and differences, resulting in 113 final codes. The 113 final codes were categorized into 79 sub-categories and 16 categories, which were organized into a paradigmatic model illustrating the increased public acceptance of pseudo-psychology services. The six dimensions of this model include the core category (social superficiality, deceptive appearance, exploitation of insufficient public knowledge), causal conditions (weak performance of psychology-related organizations, the appeal of pseudo-psychology services, accessibility of pseudo-psychology services), contextual factors (the spread of pseudo-psychology in virtual spaces, the public’s tendency for quick psychology services, characteristics of pseudo-psychology consumers), intervening factors (economic factors, social beliefs), strategies (passivity, exploitation by professionals, ignoring issues arising from the spread of pseudo-psychology), and consequences (cultural degradation, weakening of psychology’s standing, reduced community mental health).

Conclusion: The study’s findings indicate that pseudo-psychology is not merely confined to certain individuals’ names but refers to a range of deceptive, populist, and oversight-averse activities that, under the guise of ambiguity, parallel work, negligence by authorities, and audience ignorance, provide a broad, superficial, and arbitrary array of psychological-consulting activities.