scholarly journals Theory Before the Test: How to Build High-Verisimilitude Explanatory Theories in Psychological Science

2021 ◽  
pp. 174569162097060
Author(s):  
Iris van Rooij ◽  
Giosuè Baggio
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Psychology ◽  
Empirical Data ◽  
Psychological Explanation ◽  
Levels Of Analysis ◽  
Analysis Framework ◽  
Psychological Science ◽  
Critical Issues ◽  
Psychological Capacities ◽  
Theoretical Analyses

Drawing on the philosophy of psychological explanation, we suggest that psychological science, by focusing on effects, may lose sight of its primary explananda: psychological capacities. We revisit Marr’s levels-of-analysis framework, which has been remarkably productive and useful for cognitive psychological explanation. We discuss ways in which Marr’s framework may be extended to other areas of psychology, such as social, developmental, and evolutionary psychology, bringing new benefits to these fields. We then show how theoretical analyses can endow a theory with minimal plausibility even before contact with empirical data: We call this the theoretical cycle. Finally, we explain how our proposal may contribute to addressing critical issues in psychological science, including how to leverage effects to understand capacities better.

scholarly journals Theory before the test: How to build high-verisimilitude explanatory theories in psychological science

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iris van Rooij ◽  
Giosuè Baggio
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Psychology ◽  
Empirical Data ◽  
Psychological Explanation ◽  
Levels Of Analysis ◽  
Analysis Framework ◽  
Psychological Science ◽  
Critical Issues ◽  
Psychological Capacities ◽  
Theoretical Analyses

Drawing on the philosophy of psychological explanation (Cummins, 1983; 2000), we suggest that psychological science, by focusing on effects, may lose sight of its primary explananda: psychological capacities. We revisit Marr’s (1982) levels-of-analysis framework, which has been remarkably productive and useful for cognitive psychological explanation. We discuss ways in which Marr’s framework may be extended to other areas of psychology, such as social, developmental, and evolutionary psychology, bringing new benefits to these fields. Next, we show how theoretical analyses can endow a theory with minimal plausibility even prior to contact with empirical data: we call this the theoretical cycle. Finally, we explain how our proposal may contribute to addressing critical issues in psychological science, including how to leverage effects to understand capacities better.

External Validity and Multi-Organization Samples: Levels-of-Analysis Implications of Crowdsourcing and College Student Samples

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 214-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel A. Newman ◽  
Dana L. Joseph ◽  
Jennifer Feitosa
Keyword(s):  
College Student ◽  
External Validity ◽  
Levels Of Analysis ◽  
Analysis Framework ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Organization Level

Here, we expand on Landers and Behrend's (2015) discussion of the external validity of convenience samples. In particular, we note that their focal article failed to mention one important limitation of multi-organization convenience samples (e.g., MTurk samples, student samples): Multi-organization convenience samples tend to confound levels of analysis, which affects the external validity of these samples. Specifically, between-organizations phenomena (i.e., organization-level) and within-organizations phenomena (i.e., individual-level) are distinct and separable (Ostroff, 1993; Robinson, 1950). Unfortunately, multi-organization samples such as those found in MTurk or MBA student samples can confound these two sets of phenomena. The current commentary uses a levels-of-analysis framework to expand on Landers and Behrend's discussion of what external validity is, and then the commentary illustrates how the diversity of convenience samples can actually harm external validity under some common circumstances.

scholarly journals Leveraging the Strengths of Psychologists with Lived Experience of Mental Illness

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Victor ◽  
Jessica L. Schleider ◽  
Brooke A. Ammerman ◽  
Daniel E. Bradford ◽  
Andrew Devendorf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
School Psychology ◽  
Graduate Students ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Coming Out ◽  
Empirical Data ◽  
Common Element ◽  
Psychological Science ◽  
Psychology Faculty ◽  
Clinical Counseling

Psychopathology is a common element of the human experience, and psychological scientists are not immune. Recent empirical data demonstrate that over 80% of clinical, counseling, and school psychology faculty and graduate students have lived experience of mental illness (Victor et al., under review). This commentary compliments these findings by leveraging the perspectives of the authors and signatories, who all have personal lived experience of psychopathology, to improve professional inclusivity within these fields. By “coming out proud” (Corrigan et al., 2013), the authors aim to foster discussion, research, and inclusion efforts as they relate to psychopathology experiences within psychological science. To that end, the authors describe considerations related to disclosure of lived experience, identify barriers to inclusion, and provide concrete recommendations for personal and systemic changes to improve recognition and acceptance of psychopathology lived experience among psychologists.

The Origins and Evolution of the Scientific Study of International Politics: How Methods Met Models, with a Short Interlude

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly M. Kadera ◽  
Dina Zinnes
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Data ◽  
Scientific Inquiry ◽  
Entire Range ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Scientific Study ◽  
Levels Of Analysis ◽  
International Studies ◽  
Employment Opportunities ◽  
Globalized World

The International Studies Association (ISA) was founded in 1959, but the Scientific Study of International Politics (SSIP) only became one of its sections in 1993. SSIP researchers initially believed that subject oriented committees were unparalleled. They argued that combining traditional and quantitative research on a single committee with a common subject focus would encourage cross-examination and provide a greater understanding of the problem—but this was not the case. Nowadays, the SSIP is dedicated to the pursuit of international studies using formal or empirical data. Following the methods of scientific inquiry, the section aims to support and promote replicable research in terms of the clarity of a theory and/or the testing of hypotheses. The SSIP is committed to bringing together researchers who, at all levels of analysis and with respect to the entire range of international political questions, pursue these issues using formally stated arguments and/or systematically collected and analyzed empirical data. Furthermore, the SSIP fully cooperates with any existing organization that has similar goals, both within and outside the ISA. The significance of international studies manifests through degrees and courses that engage students and researchers with the increasing number of issues and phenomena which have arisen in the current globalized world. As such, most education providers justify the need for the degrees by relating the increasing importance of the discipline with real-world situations and employment opportunities.

Literalism and Mechanistic Explanation

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carrie Figdor
Keyword(s):  
Mathematical Models ◽  
Mechanistic Explanation ◽  
Psychological Explanation ◽  
Mechanistic Explanations ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Psychological Capacities

Chapters 8 and 9 present objections to Literalism inspired by its implications. Chapter 8 presents the homuncular functionalist view of psychological explanation, which holds that in order to naturalize the mind we need to posit “homunculi”, or ever-simpler capacities, to avoid explaining intelligence with intelligence. Otherwise one commits the homuncular fallacy. The Literalist responds that the fallacy is not a fallacy. Many contemporary mechanistic explanations commonly ascribe the same capacities at many levels in the same decomposition, and there is no plausible way to carve out an exception for psychology. It reinterprets the demand for “discharging” the psychological capacities in terms of finding mathematical models to illuminate old concepts rather than inventing new ones. It also argues that decompositional hierarchies of simple and basic capacities and simple and basic objects are not mirror images of each other.

scholarly journals Why evolutionary psychology should abandon modularity

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Pietraszewski ◽  
Annie E. Wertz
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Psychology ◽  
Levels Of Analysis ◽  
Preventative Measures ◽  
The Future ◽  
Massive Modularity ◽  
Ill Posed ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Level Of Analysis

A debate surrounding modularity—the notion that the mind may be exclusively composed of distinct systems or modules—has held philosophers and psychologists captive for nearly forty years. Concern about this thesis—which has come to be known as the massive modularity debate—serves as the primary grounds for skepticism of evolutionary psychology’s claims about the mind. Here we will suggest that the entirety of this debate, and the very notion of massive modularity itself, is ill-posed and confused. In particular, it is based on a confusion about the level of analysis (or reduction) at which one is approaching the mind. Here, we will provide a framework for clarifying at what level of analysis one is approaching the mind, and explain how a systemic failure to distinguish between different levels of analysis has led to profound misunderstandings of not only evolutionary psychology, but also of the entire cognitivist enterprise of approaching the mind at the level of mechanism. We will furthermore suggest that confusions between different levels of analysis are endemic throughout the psychological sciences—extending well beyond issues of modularity and evolutionary psychology. Therefore, researchers in all areas should take preventative measures to avoid this confusion in the future.

scholarly journals HERITAGE INTERPRETATION: ANALYSIS OF LABOR HERITAGE IN THE CASE OF THAI LABOR MUSEUM (BANGKOK, THAILAND)

2021 ◽  
pp. 52-62
Author(s):  
Siripen Yiamjanya
Keyword(s):  
Swot Analysis ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Alternative Interpretation ◽  
Analysis Framework ◽  
Industrial Heritage ◽  
New Public ◽  
Critical Issues ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Heritage Interpretation ◽  
Work And Life

Thai Labor Museum in Bangkok is the first and the only museum in Thailand that brings many aspects and issues about Thai laborers to public awareness. The heritage narrated in this museum regards the significance of Thai history and contemporary events that involve Thai laborers in the political and social context. The museum represents the historical realm of Thai labor and recognizes labor identities through their hard work and life. The purpose of this study can be determined through the following research questions: (1) how is the situation with the interpretation of heritage in the case of Thai Labor Museum?; and (2) what could be an alternative interpretation approach for labor heritage? The study used SWOT analysis framework as the method, carried out within the existing interpretation of the museum. Primary, secondary and tertiary interpretations were suggested. Also, critical issues and problems with interpretation at the site were addressed. Additionally, the study marks tourism route potential, connecting the museum with the historic railway factory heritage at Makkasan Workshop. Future development would create a new public and tourism precinct set amongst the backdrop of the industrial heritage of Thailand.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document