Cargando…
A decade of theory as reflected in Psychological Science (2009–2019)
The dominant belief is that science progresses by testing theories and moving towards theoretical consensus. While it’s implicitly assumed that psychology operates in this manner, critical discussions claim that the field suffers from a lack of cumulative theory. To examine this paradox, we analysed...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7935264/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33667242 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247986 |
_version_ | 1783660971587272704 |
---|---|
author | McPhetres, Jonathon Albayrak-Aydemir, Nihan Barbosa Mendes, Ana Chow, Elvina C. Gonzalez-Marquez, Patricio Loukras, Erin Maus, Annika O’Mahony, Aoife Pomareda, Christina Primbs, Maximilian A. Sackman, Shalaine L. Smithson, Conor J. R. Volodko, Kirill |
author_facet | McPhetres, Jonathon Albayrak-Aydemir, Nihan Barbosa Mendes, Ana Chow, Elvina C. Gonzalez-Marquez, Patricio Loukras, Erin Maus, Annika O’Mahony, Aoife Pomareda, Christina Primbs, Maximilian A. Sackman, Shalaine L. Smithson, Conor J. R. Volodko, Kirill |
author_sort | McPhetres, Jonathon |
collection | PubMed |
description | The dominant belief is that science progresses by testing theories and moving towards theoretical consensus. While it’s implicitly assumed that psychology operates in this manner, critical discussions claim that the field suffers from a lack of cumulative theory. To examine this paradox, we analysed research published in Psychological Science from 2009–2019 (N = 2,225). We found mention of 359 theories in-text, most were referred to only once. Only 53.66% of all manuscripts included the word theory, and only 15.33% explicitly claimed to test predictions derived from theories. We interpret this to suggest that the majority of research published in this flagship journal is not driven by theory, nor can it be contributing to cumulative theory building. These data provide insight into the kinds of research psychologists are conducting and raises questions about the role of theory in the psychological sciences. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7935264 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79352642021-03-15 A decade of theory as reflected in Psychological Science (2009–2019) McPhetres, Jonathon Albayrak-Aydemir, Nihan Barbosa Mendes, Ana Chow, Elvina C. Gonzalez-Marquez, Patricio Loukras, Erin Maus, Annika O’Mahony, Aoife Pomareda, Christina Primbs, Maximilian A. Sackman, Shalaine L. Smithson, Conor J. R. Volodko, Kirill PLoS One Research Article The dominant belief is that science progresses by testing theories and moving towards theoretical consensus. While it’s implicitly assumed that psychology operates in this manner, critical discussions claim that the field suffers from a lack of cumulative theory. To examine this paradox, we analysed research published in Psychological Science from 2009–2019 (N = 2,225). We found mention of 359 theories in-text, most were referred to only once. Only 53.66% of all manuscripts included the word theory, and only 15.33% explicitly claimed to test predictions derived from theories. We interpret this to suggest that the majority of research published in this flagship journal is not driven by theory, nor can it be contributing to cumulative theory building. These data provide insight into the kinds of research psychologists are conducting and raises questions about the role of theory in the psychological sciences. Public Library of Science 2021-03-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7935264/ /pubmed/33667242 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247986 Text en © 2021 McPhetres et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article McPhetres, Jonathon Albayrak-Aydemir, Nihan Barbosa Mendes, Ana Chow, Elvina C. Gonzalez-Marquez, Patricio Loukras, Erin Maus, Annika O’Mahony, Aoife Pomareda, Christina Primbs, Maximilian A. Sackman, Shalaine L. Smithson, Conor J. R. Volodko, Kirill A decade of theory as reflected in Psychological Science (2009–2019) |
title | A decade of theory as reflected in Psychological Science (2009–2019) |
title_full | A decade of theory as reflected in Psychological Science (2009–2019) |
title_fullStr | A decade of theory as reflected in Psychological Science (2009–2019) |
title_full_unstemmed | A decade of theory as reflected in Psychological Science (2009–2019) |
title_short | A decade of theory as reflected in Psychological Science (2009–2019) |
title_sort | decade of theory as reflected in psychological science (2009–2019) |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7935264/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33667242 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247986 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mcphetresjonathon adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT albayrakaydemirnihan adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT barbosamendesana adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT chowelvinac adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT gonzalezmarquezpatricio adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT loukraserin adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT mausannika adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT omahonyaoife adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT pomaredachristina adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT primbsmaximiliana adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT sackmanshalainel adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT smithsonconorjr adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT volodkokirill adecadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT mcphetresjonathon decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT albayrakaydemirnihan decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT barbosamendesana decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT chowelvinac decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT gonzalezmarquezpatricio decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT loukraserin decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT mausannika decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT omahonyaoife decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT pomaredachristina decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT primbsmaximiliana decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT sackmanshalainel decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT smithsonconorjr decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 AT volodkokirill decadeoftheoryasreflectedinpsychologicalscience20092019 |