Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey! Sign in to get help with your study questionsNew here? Join for free to post

What is the usefulness of the debate 'is Psychology a science?' in understanding huma

Announcements Posted on
Applying to Uni? Let Universities come to you. Click here to get your perfect place 20-10-2014
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    What is the usefulness of the debate 'is Psychology a science?' in understanding human behaviour?
    1.I am not looking for answers as to whether psychology is a science, but answers or arguments on whether there should still be the debate or not.
    and
    2.How does that debate help understand human behaviour?
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bekezela)
    What is the usefulness of the debate 'is Psychology a science?' in understanding human behaviour?
    1.I am not looking for answers as to whether psychology is a science, but answers or arguments on whether there should still be the debate or not.
    and
    2.How does that debate help understand human behaviour?
    Scientific research is seen as valid, reliable and falsifiable. These three components are seen as key to strong research. If Psychology research is viewed as 'scientific', the results it produces, the conclusions it draws, and the solutions it devises are likely to have far higher credibility than non-scientific research. So the continuing debate is helpful to help assert the usefulness of Psychology in the context of real life and solving real life problems.

    The debate does show us a lot about human behaviour. It shows us that not all human behaviour can be tested by scientific methodology. This is because not all behaviours can be studied in laboratory environments and many do not produce the quantitative data scientific research requires. Psychoanalytical and individual difference psychology are key examples. Both perspectives often require unscientific human observations which are inherently subjective and therefore automatically unscientific. Both perspectives often produce masses of qualitative data which cannot be quantified for rigorous scientific analysis.

    What do you think about these two ideas?

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: March 18, 2012
New on TSR

Personal statement help

Use our clever tool to create a PS you're proud of.

Article updates
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.