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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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