Abstract
A set of recent arguments against the use of hypothetical constructs (H-C’s) in the behavioral sciences is briefly discussed and found wanting. It is contended that the alleged objectionable features of these H-C’s necessarily characterize sound H-C’s in the early phase of their development.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
EBEL, R. L. 1974. And still the dryads linger, American Psychologist, 29, 485–492.
CRONBACH, L. J. 1971. Test validation. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education.
HARRE, R. 1972. The philosophies of science. London: Oxford University Press.
MacCORQUODALE, K., & MEEHL, P. E. 1948. On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables, Psychological Review, 55, 95–107.
O’NEIL, W. M. 1969. Fact and theory. Sydney: Sydney University Press.
ROZEBOOM, W. W. 1961. Ontological induction and the logical typology of scientific variables, Philosophy of Science, 28, 337–377.
ROZEBOOM, W. W. 1972. Scientific inference: The myth and the reality. In R. S. Brown & D. J. Brenner (Eds.), Science, psychology and communication. New York: Teachers College Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Haig, B.D. Can Behavioral Scientists Produce Sound Hypothetical Constructs?. Psychol Rec 25, 433–436 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03394334
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03394334