On starting points and priorities: A rejoinder.

Responds to the reply by L. T. Hoshmand and J. Martin (see record 1997-02285-002) to S. C. Yanchar and K. B. Kristensen's comments (see record 1997-02285-001) on Hoshmand and Martin's (see record 1995-28533-001) proposal for a naturalistic epistemological approach to psychological science. Hoshmand and Martin argue that in Yanchar and Kristensen's stance toward some aspects of their proposal, they have attributed to Hoshmand and Martin a relationship between theory, method, and data that they do not hold. According to Hoshmand and Martin, in making their case Yanchar and Kristensen have objected to empirical means of evaluation, and essentially undermined their own argument. The authors clarify their position by responding to these claims. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Constructionists and creationists.

Comments on L. T. Hoshmand and D. E. Polkinghorne's (see record 1992-21300-001) article on redefining the science–practice relationship. A constructivist role in psychology such as that advocated by Hoshmand and Polkinghorne, it is argued, is analogous to that of creationism in biology. The aim of both is to undermine belief that reasoned application of the scientific principles provides a valuable domain of knowledge. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Epistemology is more than method: A reply to Yanchar and Kristensen.

Responds to S. C. Yanchar and K. B. Kristensen's (see record 1997-02285-001) comments on L. T. Hoshmand and J. Martin's (see record 1995-28533-001) proposal for a naturalistic epistemological approach. Further clarification of the proposal is provided and implications for the development of a theory of method and issues of communal evaluation and intelligibility are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Redefinitions of the science-practice relationship without a framework for unity will fail.

Comments on L. T. Hoshmand and D. E. Polkinghorne's (see record 1992-21300-001) article on redefining the science–practice relationship. Contrary to Hoshmand and Polkinghorne's position, it is suggested that the common-sense language of practice needs to be connected to the systematic language of the relevant basic science. Important activities in psychology are currently separated because the connections have not yet been established, not because they are incommensurate. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of Culture, psychotherapy and counseling: Critical and integrative perspectives.

Reviews the book, Culture, psychotherapy and counseling: Critical and integrative perspectives (see record 2006-00543-000) edited by Lisa Hoshmand. Lisa Tsoi Hoshmand points out in a new book she has edited, Culture, psychotherapy and counseling: Critical and integrative perspectives, framing the culture concept in this way trivializes and distorts the significance of "the cultural," both for psychotherapists and for psychologists more generally. In this volume, Hoshmand and her contributors both explicate and perform a much broader understanding of what culture is, and of the ways in which it inescapably does (and should) influence psychotherapeutic and counseling theory and practice. Most notably, she highlights the ways that personal history, sociopolitical context, social change, and globalization all influence an individual's cultural identity; as a corollary of this, she asserts, "the internalized culture and identity of a given individual cannot be presumed on the basis of ethnic origin and cultural tradition". In spite of the limitation, virtually all of the chapters blend personal history, theoretical reflection and clinical material in interesting ways that enhance the reader's appreciation of the many contexts that surround and infuse the therapeutic encounter. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

On the role of theory in the postmodern integration of science and practice.

Comments on L. T. Hoshmand and D. E. Polkinghorne's (see record 1992-21300-001) article on redefining the science–practice relationship. Missing from their work is an account of the restrictions placed on theory by positivism. The challenge of postmodernism is not to look beyond theory for an assumption-free discovery of practitioner understanding but to expand the mechanistic and stage-based theoretical repertoires to include context-sensitive models of embodied psychological processes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Evolutionary psychology: Controversies, questions, prospects, and limitations.

Evolutionary psychology has emerged over the past 15 years as a major theoretical perspective, generating an increasing volume of empirical studies and assuming a larger presence within psychological science. At the same time, it has generated critiques and remains controversial among some psychologists. Some of the controversy stems from hypotheses that go against traditional psychological theories; some from empirical findings that may have disturbing implications; some from misunderstandings about the logic of evolutionary psychology; and some from reasonable scientific concerns about its underlying framework. This article identifies some of the most common concerns and attempts to elucidate evolutionary psychology’s stance pertaining to them. These include issues of testability and falsifiability; the domain specificity versus domain generality of psychological mechanisms; the role of novel environments as they interact with evolved psychological circuits; the role of genes in the conceptual structure of evolutionary psychology; the roles of learning, socialization, and culture in evolutionary psychology; and the practical value of applied evolutionary psychology. The article concludes with a discussion of the limitations of current evolutionary psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Moral Dimensions of Globalization.

Responds to the comments by L. T. Hoshmand (see record 2003-08988-012) and J. Aros (see record 2003-08988-013) on the article by J. Arnett (see record 2002-18352-003) regarding the psychology of globalization. In this response, Arnett discusses the moral implications of globalization. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Psychology's ethics of belief.

Comments on S. L. Jones's (see record 1994-29392-001) attempt to steer away from conventional habits of discourse toward a discussion of metaphysical and moral issues in general and of the relationship between religion and psychology in particular. Hoshmand contends that what Jones failed to address fully are individual differences in the epistemic styles, and personal–developmental and cultural influences on the ethics of belief. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Empirical issues in theoretical psychology: Comment on Kukla.

It is far from clear that A. Kukla's (see record 1989-24526-001) vision of a discipline concerned with the rigorous development and analysis of psychological theory could be realized in a completely nonempirical theoretical psychology. This issue is discussed in terms of Kukla's treatment of artificial intelligence and his call for the development of theoretical and empirical psychology as distinct disciplines. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Some scientist-practitioners do.

Comments on the argument of L. T. Hoshmand and D. E. Polkinghorn (see record 1992-21300-001) that psychological practice should inform science to the same degree that science informs practice. Based on a survey of 121 faculty members in programs accredited by the American Psychological Association, 65% reported practice activity. The authors agree that the problem involves a much more complex integrative task that goes beyond simply recognizing knowledge gained in practice settings as valid. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of Methods of theoretical psychology.

Reviews the book, Methods of theoretical psychology by André Kukla (see record 2001-18914-000). This comprehensive survey of the tools of theoretical psychology is the culmination of the author's previous writings (e.g., Kukla 1989, 1995) wherein he tried to "convince psychologists that our discipline had suffered from a gross and systematic underestimation of the scope, variety, and import of theoretical work" and "persuade my colleagues that there are many important theoretical issues the resolution of which does not call for empirical research" (p. xi). This is not a book in theoretical psychology (the author cites as examples the volumes by Marx and Hillix, and Wolman), but a book about theoretical psychology, the "types of theoretical activities" that "require nothing but thinking" (p. xi). Notable is the book's epigraph, a quotation from Jerry Fodor claiming that the distinction between psychological and philosophical theorizing is merely heuristic, and issuing the moral challenge for a plurality of argument styles that transcends disciplines. For Kukla has written a book about the logic of science, or what was traditionally referred to as the philosophy of science, and, as might be expected, examples are strewn throughout from the natural sciences as well as some classic theoretical problems in psychology, most notably, cognitive science. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Under what conditions can theoretical psychology survive and prosper? Integrating the rational and empirical epistemologies.

This article reexamines some important issues raised by Greenwald, Pratkanis, Leippe, and Baumgardner (see record 1986-20964-001) concerning the nature of theory and its role in research progress, practical applications of psychological knowledge, strategies for developing and evaluating theories, and relations between empirical and theoretical psychology. I argue that Greenwald et al.'s result-centered methods will not solve problems such as confirmation bias and irreplicability and will aggravate other existing problems: lack of viable theory, fragmentation of the field, mechanical fact gathering, limited applicability of psychological knowledge, and noncumulative development of facts, with needless duplication of results and reinvention of empirical constructs. I conclude that all of these problems are best solved by establishing a balance between the "rational" and "empirical" epistemologies in psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Strengthening the scientific foundations of professional psychology: Time for the next steps.

The field of professional psychology has been tremendously successful, although it has also been characterized by many competing preparadigmatic theoretical orientations, which have led to a great deal of contention as well as conflicting views regarding psychological development, functioning, and behavior change. There is now widespread agreement regarding scientific explanations of many psychological processes, however, and, consequently, it is time to update the basic conceptual frameworks used for professional psychology education and practice. Replacing the traditional reliance on an array of theoretical orientations with a science-based biopsychosocial framework would resolve many of the contradictions and conflicts that characterized the preparadigmatic era and would also provide a common perspective for unifying psychologists around a shared approach to practice, research, and training. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The need for a principle-based positive psychology.

Comments on M. E. P. Seligman and M. Csikszentmihalyi's (see record 2000-13324-001) introduction to the special issue on positive psychology (American Psychologist, 2000[Jan], Vol 55[1]). T. M. Kelley is concerned by the apparent absence of causal psychological principles to guide the emerging field of positive psychology in its study of optimal human functioning. Kelley illustrates how the principles of psychology of mind or health realization lead to a fundamentally different view of one of the most prominent theoretical concepts of positive psychology: Csikszentmihalyi's (1999) flow. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Can this marriage be saved?

Comments on an article by A. W. Staats (see record 1992-03794-001) on the unification and scientific status of psychology. The author argues that unification must begin with the tacit understanding that a naturalistic approach will be taken and that current integrative efforts may not be that far behind, in that cognitive psychology, for example, may not be as chaotic as Staats described. Furthermore, a unified theory requires the accurate understanding of current empirical and theoretical bases, and it is argued that Staats misrepresented Skinnerian theory with respect to (1) its supposedly restrictive scope, (2) an alleged rejection of the verbal report, and (3) a presumed absence of multiple levels of analysis. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of Stochastic models for learning.

Reviews the book "Stochastic models for learning" by R. R. Bush and F. Mosteller (see record 1955-15028-000). This contribution to learning theory analyzes the results of many learning experiments in terms of a probabilistic hypothesis after setting up a general theoretical model from which specific models to fit particular results can be derived. While this book is not an applied book except in the sense that mathematical techniques of much power are applied to basic psychological problems, it represents a distinct advance in the scientific analysis of learning data. Ultimately applied psychology may benefit from the methods so developed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Rebuilding the ship at sea: The historical and theoretical problems of constructionist epistemologies in psychology.

Argues that constructionist positions may provide important answers to critiques of psychological theories in the twentieth century. Focus is on the mental characterization of psychology and the intentional nature of the mental. The constructionist argument in psychology is drawn by tracing its roots in the sociology of knowledge and antifoundational philosophy. The problems of language bear centrally on the constructionist thesis, particularly the view that psychological phenomena are inherently linguistic and lingual. In recent years, constructionist programs in psychology have begun to reorient and reconstruct understandings of the subject matter in such areas as social, developmental, and cognitive psychology. The charge of relativism remains a serious challenge for the constructionist, although a coherentist interpretation of constructionist justifications may resolve this issue. (French abstract) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Present status of psychological research and training in hypnosis.

Anonymous questionnaires on training and research in hypnosis were returned by 54 of 55 psychology department chairmen with approved clinical psychology training programs and 39 of 85 American Medical Association approved medical schools. 8 psychology departments and 2 medical schools have courses in hypnosis. Unless the "psychological profession is more active in protecting its rights to research and clinical use of a methodology which is basically psychological, it may find itself legally excluded from the field." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Theoretical psychology: Subdiscipline or metadiscipline?

Comments on the article by B. D. Slife and R. N. Williams (see record 84-17550) concerning theoretical psychology as a subdiscipline of psychology. Considerations that may add to continuing positive discourse concerning a theoretical subdiscipline are presented. It is believed that efforts to avoid the development of any gulf between theoretical psychology and other areas of psychology should be given high priority in future discourse concerning the development of a subdiscipline of theoretical psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)