Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Variables and Quantity: What Else?

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The article aims to comment Toomela’s (Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science 42(3):245–265, 2008) paper on variables and quantitative psychology. Topics as the choice of variables, their measurement and statistical analysis, the deductions based on data, are briefly reviewed. All variables can be misleading if used in a misleading way, but the Author contends that the psychology based on the variables has not the possibility to represent selected samples of inner processes and contents. Quantitative analyses based on linear causality and probabilistic inference pose many problems, but some alternative approaches devised to cope with these problems are indicated. An hermeneutic approach aware of the constructivist ground of the scientific knowledge is proposed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Baldwin, J. F. (1996). Fuzzy logic. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouchon-Meunier, B., Detyniecki, M., Lesot, M. J., Marsala, C., & Rifqi, M. (2007). Real world fuzzy logic applications in data mining and information retrieval. In P. P. Wang, D. Ruan, & E. E. Kerre (Eds.), Fuzzy logic—A spectrum of theoretical and practical issues, studies in fuzziness (pp. 219–247). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, H. M. (1984). The integrative research review: a systematic approach. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., & Hoffman, M. (1979). The dynamic assessment of retarded performers: The learning potential assessment device, theory, instruments, and techniques. Baltimore: University Park Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grigorenko, E. L., & Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Dynamic testing. Psychological Bulletin, 124(1), 75–111. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.1.75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, N. (Ed.) (1997). Doing qualitative analysis in psychology. Hove: Psychology.

  • Haywood, H. C. (1992). Special focus section on dynamic assessment. The Journal of Special Education, 26(3).

  • Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis. Correcting error and bias in research findings. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kosko, B. (1992). Neural networks and fuzzy systems: a dynamical systems approach to machine intelligence. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laurenceau, J. P., Hayes, A. M., & Feldman, G. C. (2007). Some statistical and methodological issues in the study of change in psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology Review, 27(6), 682–695. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2007.01.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • McRae, A. W. (1988). Measurement scales and statistics: what can significance tests tell us about the world? The British Journal of Psychology, 79, 161–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1987). Judgment studies: design, analysis, and meta-analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosnow, R. L., & Rosenthal, R. (1989). Statistical procedures and the justification of knowledge in psychological science. The American Psychologist, 4(10), 1276–1284. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.44.10.1276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salvatore, S., & Valsiner, J. (2008). Idiographic science on its way: towards making sense of psychology. In J. Valsiner, S. Salvatore, S. Strout, & J. Clegg (Eds.), Yearbook of Idiographic Science, Vol. 1. Rome: Firera.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuermann, J. (1996). Pattern classification: a unified view of statistical and neural approaches. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulze, R. (2004). Meta-Analysis. A Comparison of Approaches. Bern: Hogrefe & Huber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serlin, R. C. (1987). Hypothesis testing, theory building, and the philosophy of science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34(4), 365–371. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.34.4.365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stine, W. M. (1989). Meaningful inference: the role of measurement in statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 147–155. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.105.1.147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toomela, A. (2008). Variables in psychology: A critique of quantitative psychology. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 42(3), 245–265. doi:10.1007/s12124-008-9059-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Geert, P. (1994). Dynamic systems of development. Change between complexity and chaos. Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann, H. J. (1996). Fuzzy set theory and its applications. 3rd Ed. Boston: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Catania, Catania, Italy

    Santo Di Nuovo

Authors
  1. Santo Di Nuovo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Santo Di Nuovo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Di Nuovo, S. Variables and Quantity: What Else?. Integr. psych. behav. 43, 84–88 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-008-9081-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-008-9081-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation