{"title":"Another quasi-30 years of slow progress","authors":"Gregory A Miller","doi":"10.1016/j.appsy.2004.02.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Meehl (1978) discussed a variety of characteristics of the culture of scholarly psychology that critically affect its progress toward a stronger science. These characteristics include assumptions about the nature of theory, approaches to the testing of theories, and the reliance on significance tests that is pervasive in many subfields of psychology research. Several of these characteristics and Meehl’s perspective on them are examined years later in this brief commentary. Meehl’s criticisms, though sometimes misrepresented, remain compelling and strikingly current. Yet it should be remembered that Meehl emphasized that “soft” psychology at its best is a profound and worthy challenge and will necessarily progress slowly. It can be improved, but not replaced, by hardnosed scholarship.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":84177,"journal":{"name":"Applied & preventive psychology : journal of the American Association of Applied and Preventive Psychology","volume":"11 1","pages":"Pages 61-64"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.appsy.2004.02.010","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied & preventive psychology : journal of the American Association of Applied and Preventive Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0962184904000113","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14
Abstract
Meehl (1978) discussed a variety of characteristics of the culture of scholarly psychology that critically affect its progress toward a stronger science. These characteristics include assumptions about the nature of theory, approaches to the testing of theories, and the reliance on significance tests that is pervasive in many subfields of psychology research. Several of these characteristics and Meehl’s perspective on them are examined years later in this brief commentary. Meehl’s criticisms, though sometimes misrepresented, remain compelling and strikingly current. Yet it should be remembered that Meehl emphasized that “soft” psychology at its best is a profound and worthy challenge and will necessarily progress slowly. It can be improved, but not replaced, by hardnosed scholarship.