Cargando…

Why Psychology Needs to Stop Striving for Novelty and How to Move Towards Theory-Driven Research

Psychological science is maturing and therefore transitioning from explorative to theory-driven research. While explorative research seeks to find something “new,” theory-driven research seeks to elaborate on already known and hence predictable effects. A consequence of these differences is that the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Burghardt, Juliane, Bodansky, Alexander Neil
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7902022/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33633639
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.609802
_version_ 1783654477091307520
author Burghardt, Juliane
Bodansky, Alexander Neil
author_facet Burghardt, Juliane
Bodansky, Alexander Neil
author_sort Burghardt, Juliane
collection PubMed
description Psychological science is maturing and therefore transitioning from explorative to theory-driven research. While explorative research seeks to find something “new,” theory-driven research seeks to elaborate on already known and hence predictable effects. A consequence of these differences is that the quality of explorative and theory-driven research needs to be judged by distinct criterions that optimally support their respective development. Especially, theory-driven research needs to be judged by its methodological rigor. A focus on innovativeness, which is typical for explorative research, will instead incentivize bad research practices (e.g., imprecise theorizing, ignoring previous research, parallel theories). To support the advancement of psychology, we must drop the innovation requirement for theory-driven research and instead require the strongest methods, which are marked by high internal and external validity. Precise theorizing needs to substitute novelty. Theories are advanced by requiring explicit, testable assumptions, and an explicit preference for one theory over another. These explicit and potentially wrong assumptions should not be silenced within the peer-review process, but instead be scrutinized in new publications. Importantly, these changes in scientific conduct need to be supported by senior researchers, especially, in their roles as editors, reviewers, and in the hiring process. An important obstacle to further theory-driven research is to measure scientific merit using researchers’ number of publications, which favors theoretically shallow and imprecise writing. Additionally, it makes publications the central target of scientific misconduct even though they are the main source of information for the scientific community and the public. To advance the field, researchers should be judged by their contribution to the scientific community (e.g., exchange with and support of colleagues, and mentoring). Another step to advance psychology is to clearly differentiate between measurement model and theory, and not to overgeneralize based on few stimuli, incidences, or studies. We will use ideas from the theory of science to underline the changes necessary within the field of psychology to overcome this existential replication crisis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7902022
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79020222021-02-24 Why Psychology Needs to Stop Striving for Novelty and How to Move Towards Theory-Driven Research Burghardt, Juliane Bodansky, Alexander Neil Front Psychol Psychology Psychological science is maturing and therefore transitioning from explorative to theory-driven research. While explorative research seeks to find something “new,” theory-driven research seeks to elaborate on already known and hence predictable effects. A consequence of these differences is that the quality of explorative and theory-driven research needs to be judged by distinct criterions that optimally support their respective development. Especially, theory-driven research needs to be judged by its methodological rigor. A focus on innovativeness, which is typical for explorative research, will instead incentivize bad research practices (e.g., imprecise theorizing, ignoring previous research, parallel theories). To support the advancement of psychology, we must drop the innovation requirement for theory-driven research and instead require the strongest methods, which are marked by high internal and external validity. Precise theorizing needs to substitute novelty. Theories are advanced by requiring explicit, testable assumptions, and an explicit preference for one theory over another. These explicit and potentially wrong assumptions should not be silenced within the peer-review process, but instead be scrutinized in new publications. Importantly, these changes in scientific conduct need to be supported by senior researchers, especially, in their roles as editors, reviewers, and in the hiring process. An important obstacle to further theory-driven research is to measure scientific merit using researchers’ number of publications, which favors theoretically shallow and imprecise writing. Additionally, it makes publications the central target of scientific misconduct even though they are the main source of information for the scientific community and the public. To advance the field, researchers should be judged by their contribution to the scientific community (e.g., exchange with and support of colleagues, and mentoring). Another step to advance psychology is to clearly differentiate between measurement model and theory, and not to overgeneralize based on few stimuli, incidences, or studies. We will use ideas from the theory of science to underline the changes necessary within the field of psychology to overcome this existential replication crisis. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-01-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7902022/ /pubmed/33633639 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.609802 Text en Copyright © 2021 Burghardt and Bodansky. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Burghardt, Juliane
Bodansky, Alexander Neil
Why Psychology Needs to Stop Striving for Novelty and How to Move Towards Theory-Driven Research
title Why Psychology Needs to Stop Striving for Novelty and How to Move Towards Theory-Driven Research
title_full Why Psychology Needs to Stop Striving for Novelty and How to Move Towards Theory-Driven Research
title_fullStr Why Psychology Needs to Stop Striving for Novelty and How to Move Towards Theory-Driven Research
title_full_unstemmed Why Psychology Needs to Stop Striving for Novelty and How to Move Towards Theory-Driven Research
title_short Why Psychology Needs to Stop Striving for Novelty and How to Move Towards Theory-Driven Research
title_sort why psychology needs to stop striving for novelty and how to move towards theory-driven research
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7902022/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33633639
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.609802
work_keys_str_mv AT burghardtjuliane whypsychologyneedstostopstrivingfornoveltyandhowtomovetowardstheorydrivenresearch
AT bodanskyalexanderneil whypsychologyneedstostopstrivingfornoveltyandhowtomovetowardstheorydrivenresearch