Through dynamic interplay and mutual transformation, yin and yang generate harmonious and orderly states. Image generated by AI

Psychology, as a discipline concerned with the study of human beings, carries a unique responsibility in understanding the psychological and behavioral patterns of the Chinese people. However, psychological research in China remains heavily reliant on Western paradigms for knowledge production, which not only constrains the discipline’s capacity for original innovation but also creates profound tensions between knowledge systems and social practice. The key to addressing this challenge lies in advancing the innovation of psychological research paradigms, for which China’s fine traditional culture can provide intellectual resources.

Rich intellectual resources of China’s fine traditional culture

Holistic view of “tianren heyi” (unity of heaven and humanity): As early as the Western Zhou Dynasty (1046–771 BCE), ancient Chinese thinkers regarded “tian” (Heaven, encompassing the cosmos, nature, and moral order) and “ren” (humanity, including human life, ethical norms, and political practice) as an inseparable whole.

From Laozi’s statement “man takes his law from the Earth; the Earth takes its law from Heaven; Heaven takes its law from the Dao; the law of the Dao is its being what it is,” to Mencius’s assertion that “all things are complete within me,” and Zhuangzi’s observation that “life is not yours to hold; it is the blended harmony (of yin and yang), entrusted to you by Heaven and Earth,” ancient Chinese thinkers consistently expressed a profound awareness of the unity between the subject who knows and the object known. This conception offers philosophical insight into overcoming the epistemological dilemma of the “subject-object dichotomy” in quantitative research and into understanding the inner connections between researchers and their objects of inquiry.

Dialectical view of “yinyang hugen” (mutual rooting of yin and yang): I Ching (The Book of Changes) systematically articulates the concept of “taihe” (supreme harmony) and develops a philosophy of yin and yang that seeks to resolve conflict through harmony. Yin and yang are at once opposed and unified, mutually dependent, and responsive to each other. Yang is associated with initiation, giving, and activity, while yin is associated with completion, receiving, and coordination. Through dynamic interplay and mutual transformation, the two forces generate harmonious and orderly states. This dialectical mode of thinking stands in sharp contrast to the Western logic of either-or binary opposition.

Practical view of “tiyong bu’er” (non-duality of substance and function): Xiong Shili, a leading figure of New Confucianism, distinguished between “xingzhi” (qualitative understanding, awareness of ultimate reality) and “liangzhi” (quantitative understanding, cognitive activity directed toward the empirical world), integrating the two through the principle of tiyong bu’er. By unifying knowledge with morality, and understanding with practice, this perspective offers a highly original theoretical resource for transcending the Western epistemological dichotomies of fact versus value, and method versus ethics.

Methodological view of “zhongyong zhihe” (achieving equilibrium and harmony through the Mean): In the Confucian doctrine of “zhongyong” (the Mean), “zhong” (middle) does not signify a simple compromise between two extremes. Rather, it points to a third quality that transcends opposing poles. Building on this conception, Chinese philosopher Pang Pu proposed the framework of “one divided into three,” which identifies a creative third path between seemingly irreconcilable opposites and provides a practical way to mediate them. The Buddhist concept of “yuanrong” (consummate interfusion) takes “yuan” (completeness) as the highest metaphysical perspective and “rong” (integration) as the means of reconciliation, dissolving contradictions and oppositions to attain the ideal state of “harmony without uniformity.”

Yuanrong paradigm: Integrating ontology, methodology, research ethics

Drawing upon traditional Chinese epistemology rooted in I Ching and integrating the dual perspectives of tianren heyi and tiyong bu’er, the author proposes the “yuanrong paradigm,” a scientific research paradigm with distinct Chinese cultural characteristics. Through the three dimensions of yinyang hugen, “zihe pingheng” (yin and yang harmonize on their own and achieve balance), and “yinyang hede” (yin and yang unite according to their qualities), this paradigm offers ontological, methodological, and ethical foundations for the organic integration of quantitative and qualitative research.

At the ontological level, the yuanrong paradigm adopts the principle of yinyang hugen to establish the foundation for integrating qualitative and quantitative research. According to this principle, the fundamental reason these two approaches can be unified lies in the fact that the dual forces of yin and yang are inherent in every research method. Once diverse methods are recognized as differing in form yet sharing a common underlying structure, methodological integration ceases to be a mechanical external juxtaposition and instead becomes a natural process of activating their inherent complementarity.

Methodologically, the yuanrong paradigm proposes a dual strategy of “inter-method integration” and “intra-method integration” based on the principle of zihe pingheng. Western mixed-methods research primarily integrates qualitative and quantitative approaches along the temporal sequence of the research process, namely through inter-method integration. While retaining this strategy, the yuanrong paradigm further introduces the possibility of intra-method integration: drawing on the principle of “one divided into three” within the Confucian doctrine of zhongyong to generate a creative third alternative between apparently opposing poles.

At the level of research ethics, the yuanrong paradigm reconstructs the relationship between researchers and their objects of study through the concept of yinyang hede. Research ethics in Western psychology is fundamentally grounded in a binary framework of “controller and controlled.” By contrast, drawing on the idea that “yin and yang unite according to their qualities, and there comes the embodiment of the result by the strong and weak,” the yuanrong paradigm maintains that research ethics is not merely a set of external behavioral regulations. Rather, it is also an indispensable pathway through which researchers enter the inner world of those they study, achieve a state of unity with them, and jointly uncover the mechanisms underlying psychological phenomena. In this way, research ethics is elevated from an external constraint to a form of internal self-cultivation, with researchers’ self-reflection and moral practice themselves serving as routes to genuine knowledge.

Wang Yinan is a distinguished research fellow from the Faculty of Psychology at Beijing Normal University.