Cognitive Metascience: A New Approach to the Study of Theories

Marcin Miłkowski
{"title":"Cognitive Metascience: A New Approach to the Study of Theories","authors":"Marcin Miłkowski","doi":"10.31648/przegldpsychologiczny.9682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In light of the recent credibility crisis in psychology, this paper argues for a greater emphasis on theorizing in scientific research. Although reliable experimental evidence, preregistration, methodological rigor, and new computational frameworks for modeling are important, scientific progress also relies on properly functioning theories. However, the current understanding of the role of theorizing in psychology is lacking, which may lead to future crises. Theories should not be viewed as mere speculations or simple inductive generalizations. To address this issue, the author introduces a framework called “cognitive metascience,” which studies the processes and results of evaluating scientific practice. This study should proceed both qualitatively, as in traditional science and technology studies and cognitive science, and quantitatively, by analyzing scientific discourse using language technology. By analyzing theories as cognitive artifacts that support cognitive tasks, this paper aims to shed more light on their nature. This perspective reveals that multiple distinct theories serve entirely different roles, and studying these roles, along with their epistemic vices and virtues, can provide insight into how theorizing should proceed. The author urges a change in research culture to appreciate the variety of distinct theories and to systematically advance scientific progress.","PeriodicalId":508615,"journal":{"name":"Przegląd Psychologiczny","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Przegląd Psychologiczny","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31648/przegldpsychologiczny.9682","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In light of the recent credibility crisis in psychology, this paper argues for a greater emphasis on theorizing in scientific research. Although reliable experimental evidence, preregistration, methodological rigor, and new computational frameworks for modeling are important, scientific progress also relies on properly functioning theories. However, the current understanding of the role of theorizing in psychology is lacking, which may lead to future crises. Theories should not be viewed as mere speculations or simple inductive generalizations. To address this issue, the author introduces a framework called “cognitive metascience,” which studies the processes and results of evaluating scientific practice. This study should proceed both qualitatively, as in traditional science and technology studies and cognitive science, and quantitatively, by analyzing scientific discourse using language technology. By analyzing theories as cognitive artifacts that support cognitive tasks, this paper aims to shed more light on their nature. This perspective reveals that multiple distinct theories serve entirely different roles, and studying these roles, along with their epistemic vices and virtues, can provide insight into how theorizing should proceed. The author urges a change in research culture to appreciate the variety of distinct theories and to systematically advance scientific progress.
认知元科学:理论研究的新方法
鉴于最近心理学界的信誉危机,本文主张在科学研究中更加重视理论化。尽管可靠的实验证据、预注册、方法论的严谨性以及新的建模计算框架都很重要,但科学进步还有赖于正常运作的理论。然而,目前人们对理论化在心理学中的作用缺乏了解,这可能会导致未来的危机。理论不应被视为单纯的猜测或简单的归纳概括。 为了解决这个问题,作者引入了一个名为 "认知元科学 "的框架,研究科学实践的评价过程和结果。这项研究既要像传统的科学技术研究和认知科学那样,从定性的角度进行,也要通过使用语言技术分析科学话语,从定量的角度进行。 通过将理论作为支持认知任务的认知人工制品进行分析,本文旨在进一步揭示其本质。这一视角揭示了多种不同的理论发挥着完全不同的作用,而研究这些作用以及它们在认识论上的缺点和优点,可以让我们深入了解理论研究应该如何进行。作者呼吁改变研究文化,欣赏多种不同的理论,系统地推动科学进步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信