Psychology as a science

Cloudy_lemonade

Hello. Can anyone give me some quick for and against arguments for psychology being classed as a science?

Thanks!

Reply 1

TSR Jessica

Sorry you've not had any responses about this. :frown:

Are you sure you've posted in the right place? :smile:

Here's a link to our subject forum which should help get you more responses if you post there. :redface:

Reply 2

username4256810

Original post by Cloudy_lemonade

Hello. Can anyone give me some quick for and against arguments for psychology being classed as a science?

Thanks!

It has low replicabilty. Meaning studies done in psychology can’t be repeated. This of course being because of statistical manipulation, poor methodology and humans are diverse and complicated and it’s tough to single out certain behaviours.

In addition psychology isn’t just one science it’s the culmination of several, there is physics involved in (ecological psychology - how to navigate the environment), biology regarding hormones and how they govern behaviour such as the stress hormone and it’s implications on the immune system and how it causes depression.. etc.

But mostly psychology is a science because it follows the frameworks of science. It tests hypotheses scientificatially using statistical models. As opposed to philosophy which of course, is mostly underpinned theoretically.

Reply 3

Cloudy_lemonade

Thank you Henry, much appreciated.

Reply 4

random_matt

Original post by Cloudy_lemonade

Thank you Henry, much appreciated.

Yeah, don't listen too much to thee above, I got a first in my very first uni essay on this exact question. I'm guessing it's a argumentative assignment? In which case you need to take a stand on yes or no and back that argument up.

Reply 5

Cloudy_lemonade

Yes, I'm completing my A level Psychology atm but we've not delved into this yet. I was just curious to see more about the section and what we will be learning. When answering questions like this in the past, I've been taught to give a few points against and a few points for, and then conclude with our own opinion.

Reply 6

random_matt

Original post by Cloudy_lemonade

Just do your research, and the studies in psychology are highly replicated, they do not make the major journals otherwise, the guy is clueless. The only downside to this, which you can debate, is that some journals have what is known as the publication bias, and when they are advocates for a particular thing they are trying to put across. Advocacy and science do not mix and never will.

Reply 7

Cloudy_lemonade

Ok thank you. Yes, thinking about it now, studies in psychology can be replicated and provide very similar results to one another. An example is with Milgram's shock experiment, and I've seen it be replicated.

Thank you for clearing that up.

Reply 8

random_matt

Original post by Cloudy_lemonade

Look up falsification as well, Karl Popper.

Reply 9

username4256810

Just in response to Matt, I student psychology at university and by no means do I discredit it as a science. I am endeavouring to become a lecturer in psychology. In terms of the caveats with psychology there is a replicability crisis in psychology the British psychological society (BPS) admits so. The guy in charge of the BPS (professor Daryl O’Connor has made videos on YouTube regarding the crisis) many psychological studies have not been replicated for instance a famous example Amy Cuddys study on power poses

I am of course, not doing your assignment for you. So I won’t quote which studies have failed it is up to you to do research. But Nature, the most prestigious and highly acclaimed journal across the field of science has released this https://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248 it quotes as many as two thirds of studies not being replicated.

The reasons being many. Some including sweeping generalisations can’t be made from lab studies because they lack ecological validity. Just take the brilliant example of the Myers-Briggs personality test give a read of the criticism section.

The major issue to highlight is that the replicability crisis holds true for medicine and biology also amongst many other sciences, maybe a paradigm shift from quantitive measures of science to qualitiative measures is needed. I must confess, I love psychology and replicability in and of itself, is no measure of how sciency psychology is but reflects it’s legitimatcy to operate and produce results that are valid and can’t be admonished for being verification transcendent.