| Abstract: | It is a commonly held belief among many psychological scientists that the more plausible a hypothesis, the better it is scientifically. It is also often believed that if there are two alternative theories which are equally strong in terms of explanatory power, one should choose the plausible theory over the implausible one. The goal of this article is to challenge these assumptions. Based on Popper's philosophical views, it will be argued that psychological scientists should be encouraged to formulate implausible (yet testable) hypotheses and theories. Examples from other scientific disciplines will be presented to illustrate this argument. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
