Theoretical psychology: discursive transformations and continuity in Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung

Abstract

Psychological Research (formerly Psychologische Forschung) has been published for a century which makes it a valuable subject matter for historical investigations. The journal’s development bears traces of the progress in psychology. This development is of particular interest for the field of theoretical psychology which investigates the epistemological and methodological background. Our hypothesis is that the history of Psychological Research is indicative for the transformations within the discourse of the discipline, i.e., the general context of communication in psychology. We revisit the changes in the editorial practises of the journal through a scientometric mixed-methods approach, combining bibliometric analyses which compare Psychological Research to Psychological Review and the British Journal of Psychology with a single-case investigation. Regarding form, we find continuities and disruptions in the development of the editorial customs from long and single-author to short and multi-author contributions. Investigating content through word frequency analysis shows that the journal’s history reflects the rise of the cognitivist paradigm as well as a transition from theoretical discourse towards experimentation. The analysis of a single case demonstrates the nature of past theoretical discourse in contrast to contemporary practises. Overall, our findings support the assumption of discursive transformations. From the perspective of theoretical psychology, these transformations can be described as a shift towards Methodism which entails a critical negligence of theory.

Neuropsychological assessment methodology revisited: metatheoretical reflections

“…Without such a framework, statements like "The circuit X is involved in behavior Y" (ibid., 485) would be a mere restatement of the correlative or causal relation and would not (further) contribute to any explanation. The lack of explicit metatheoretical frameworks coincides with the notion of a neglect of (formal) explanatory theory in psychology (Teigen, 2002;Oberauer and Lewandowsky, 2019;McPhetres et al, 2021;Borgstede, 2022;Wendt and Wolfradt, 2022). We wish to call attention to the influence of different metatheoretical frameworks, as it may be the case, that a single empirical finding can be accounted for by multiple explanatory frameworks.…”

Primacy of theory? Exploring perspectives on validity in conceptual psychometrics

“…However, scientometric studies show that not all psychological research can be regarded as theory-driven ( McPhetres et al, 2021 ; Wendt and Wolfradt, 2022 ), even though low replication rates in psychology have repeatedly been attributed to deficiencies in theory-building and application ( Fiedler, 2017 ; Muthukrishna and Henrich, 2019 ; Oberauer and Lewandowsky, 2019 ; Green, 2021 ; Witte, 2022 ; Ramminger et al, 2023 ). Such agreement lacks regarding the relationship between theory and validity, even though validity is a prerequisite for replicability ( Flake et al, 2022 ).…”