Some Comments About Unity in Psychology

Lee, Vicki L.

doi:10.1007/bf03395850

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A plausible explanation for this result may reflect the differential evaluation of the two disciplines. While statistics, being based on mathematics, as part of the exact sciences, can be viewed as conclusive and able to formulate definite rules (Peirce, 1976), psychology, as part of the social sciences, is evaluated as more subjective, inaccurate in data collection, unable to formulate definite rules, and having theories of a contradictory nature (Giorgi, 1985;Hetherinton, 1983;Kimble, 1984;Lee, 1985). A comparison between mathematics, which serves as a basis for statistics, and behavioural sciences made by Skemp (1971) can be seen in the framework of the above-described differences.…”

Section: Study I1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring epistemic authority: studies of politicians and professors

1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two studies assessed the perception of epistemic authority (denoting a source of information which has a determinative influence on the acquisition of knowledge) by means of a scale (Epistemic Authority Scale) which was constructed for this purpose. The first study showed that individuals perceive political leaders with similar political orientations as greater epistemic authorities than political leaders with different political orientations. In addition, the study investigated the reasons used by the subjects to explain reliance or lack of reliance on political leaders. In general, the responses showed that leaders' expressed opinions and characteristics were important determinants in epistemic authority selection. The second study found that students of statistics departments have a greater tendency to perceive their professors as epistemic authorities in their disciplinary knowledge than students of psychology departments, while the latter are more likely than the former to perceive their professors as epistemic authorities in general knowledge domains. Analysis of the Reason scores for reliance on the professors in the two departments reveals that expertness received the highest ratings.

show abstract

Section: Study I1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring epistemic authority: studies of politicians and professors

1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The resulting fragmentation of psychology has been noted by many critics (e.g. Johnson, 1990;Koch, 1993;Lee, 1985). One critic (Johnson, 1990) said psychology consists of guilds that are mutually incomprehensible and mutually antagonistic.…”

Section: Is the Individual Human Being Ormentioning

confidence: 99%

What is a Psychological Unit?

Lee

1995

Behav. change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper considers the question “What is a psychological unit?”. The ubiquity of units in daily life and in science is considered. The assumption that the individual human being or animal is the psychological unit is examined and rejected. The units represented by the data collected in operant laboratories are interpreted as a subset of the well-defined changes that individual human beings or animals can bring about. The departure of this interpretation from the traditional interpretation in terms of the behaviour of the organism is acknowledged. The paper concludes by noting the relation of the present interpretation of operant research to the problem of identifying psychological units.

show abstract

Some Comments About Unity in Psychology

Cited by 2 publications

References 13 publications

Measuring epistemic authority: studies of politicians and professors

Measuring epistemic authority: studies of politicians and professors

What is a Psychological Unit?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About