{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.010362694300518135, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.313725490196078, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Language and Social Psychology

In the social psychology of language, one recent major development has been an expansion in the types of method considered acceptable for generating and probing descriptions and explanations. Six methodological contrasts are examined, and arguments are advanced both for matching methods to questions and for preferring a multiplicity of them to any exclusive commitment to one. A sketch of the history of research into language use, social class, and education is used to illustrate the academic and sociopolitical consequences of methodological tunnel vision. The example is generalized to questions of whether the development of our societies and subject is to be founded on rational constructions of realities. It is argued that the issue of what are to count as well-founded beliefs depends on the attitudes adopted to the representational function of language and the criteria used to evaluate statements serving this function.