Current criticism of theoretical psychology concerns, in particular, the state of its foundations and the construction of theories, while the evolution of the discipline leads to its disunity. According to one of the points of view discussed, psychological knowledge must be unified in order to overcome theoretical fragmentation. Those who are concerned about the lack of a unified theory in psychology explore various aspects of disunity and the possibility of unifying theoretical psychology. In recent decades, a number of approaches to unification have been developed, and now theoretical studies of unification need to be harmonized. I believe that in order to develop a solid framework, it makes sense to reach a consensus on the general, conceptual and methodological ideas of unification. On this basis, it would be possible to develop a program for creating an approach to unification in theoretical psychology, and I propose an outline of three possible ones.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Anderson, N. H. (2008). Unified social cognition. Psychology Press.
Anderson, N. H. (2016). Information integration theory: Unified psychology based on three mathematical laws. Universitas Psychologica, 15(3). https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.upsy15-3.iitu
Ball, G., & Medintsev, V. (2016). Teoretiko-mnozhestvennyy metod opisaniya protsessov i yego primeneniye v psikhologii [The set-theoretic method for describing processes and its application in psychology]. Kiev: Pedagogicheskaya mysl’.
Beall, J. C., & Restall, G. (2006). Logical pluralism. Clarendon Press.
Bechtel, W., & Richardson, R. (2010). Discovering complexity: decomposition and localization as strategies in scientific research. MIT Press.
Borghi, A. M., & Fini, C. (2019). Theories and explanations in psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 958. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00958
Borsboom, D., van der Maas, H. L. J., Dalege, J., Kievit, R. A., & Haig, B. D. (2021). Theory construction methodology: a practical framework for building theories in psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(4), 756–766. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620969647
Chemero, A., & Silberstein, M. (2008). After the philosophy of mind: replacing scholasticism with science. Philosophy of Science, 75(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1086/587820
Chiari, G. (2009). The issue of the unity and specificity of psychology from the viewpoint of a constructivist epistemology. Humana Mente, 11, 81–95.
Churchland, P. M. (1984). Matter and consciousness: A contemporary introduction to the philosophy of mind. MIT Press and Bradford Books.
Druzhinin, V. N. (1994). Struktura i logika psihologicheskogo issledovaniia [The structure and logic of psychological research]. Moskva: IPRAN.
Einstein, A. (1936). Physik und Realität. Journal Franklin Institut, 221(3), 313–347.
Eronen, M. I., & Romeijn, J.-W. (2020). Philosophy of science and the formalization of psychological theory. Theory & Psychology, 30(6), 786–799. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354320969876
Fetters, M., & Molina-Azorin, J. (2017). The journal of mixed methods research starts a new decade: the mixed methods research integration trilogy and its dimensions. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(3), 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689817714066
Fiedler, K. (2017). What constitutes strong psychological science? The (neglected) role of diagnosticity and a priori theorizing. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(1), 46–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616654458
Gaj, N. (2018). Psychology between science and technology: A proposal for the development of a theory of practice. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 38(2), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1037/teo0000081
Gijsbers, V. (2007). Why unification is neither necessary nor sufficient for explanation. Philosophy of Science, 74(4), 481–500.
Gijsbers, V. (2016). Explanatory pluralism and the (dis)unity of Science: the argument from incompatible counterfactual consequences. Front. Psychiatry, 7, 32. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00032
Goertzen, J. R. (2008). On the possibility of unification: the reality and nature of the crisis in psychology. Theory & Psychology, 18, 829–852. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354308097260
Greene, J. C. (2015). Preserving distinctions within the multimethod and mixed methods merger. In S. N. Hesse-Biber & R. B. Johnson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry (pp. 606–615). Oxford University Press.
Henriques, G. R. (2008). The problem of psychology and the integration of human knowledge: contrasting Wilson’s consilience with the tree of knowledge system. Theory & Psychology, 18, 731–755.
Henriques, G. (2011). A new unified theory of psychology. New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0058-5
Holbrook, J. B. (2013). What is interdisciplinary communication? Reflections on the very idea of disciplinary integration. Synthese, 190, 1865–1879. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0179-7
Horst, S. (2007). Beyond reduction: philosophy of mind and post-reductionist philosophy of science. Oxford University Press.
Hwang, K.-K. (2013). The construction of culture-inclusive theories by multiple philosophical paradigms. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 2(7), 46–58.
Hwang, K. K. (2023). An epistemological strategy for initiating scientific revolution against WEIRD psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 57, 361–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-022-09681-9
Kalmar, D. A., & Sternberg, R. J. (1988). Theory knitting: An integrative approach to theory development. Philosophical Psychology, 1(2), 153–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515088808572934
Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe: the search for the laws of self-organization and complexity. Oxford University Press.
Kendler, H. H. (1970). The unity of psychology. Canadian Psychologist/psychologie Canadienne, 11(1), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0082557
Kusch, M. (2017). Epistemic relativism, scepticism, pluralism. Synthese, 194, 4687–4703. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1041-0
Langton, C. G. (1990). Computation at the edge of chaos: phase transitions and emergent computation. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 42, 12–37.
Matthews, G. (2020). A grand challenge for personality and social psychology: competition, cooperation, or co-existence? Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1570. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01570
Mazilov, V. A. (2016). Kommunikativnaya metodologiya i integratsiya psikhologicheskogo znaniya [Communicative methodology and integration of psychological knowledge]. Iaroslavskii` Pedagogicheskii` Vestneyk, (3), 181–191.
Mazilov, V. A. (2021). Integratciia psihologicheskogo znaniia kak metodologicheskaia problema psihologii [Integration of psychological knowledge as a methodological problem of psychology]. In V. A. Mazilov (Ed.), Integratciia v psihologii: teoriia, metodologiia, praktika: sbornik statei` IV Vserossii`skoi` nauchno-prakticheskoi` konferentcii [Integration in Psychology: Theory, Methodology, Practice] (pp. 28–38). RIO IAGPU.
McGann, M., & Speelman, C. P. (2020). Two kinds of theory: what psychology can learn from Einstein. Theory & Psychology, 30(5), 674–689. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354320937804
Mironenko, I. A., & Sorokin, P. S. (2020). Concerning paradigmatic status of psychological science: for a flexible and flowing psychology in the face of practical and theoretical challenges. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 54, 604–612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-020-09530-7
Mischel, W. (2008). The toothbrush problem. APS Observer. https://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/the-toothbrush-problem. Accessed 31 Jan 2022.
Morse, J. M., & Niehaus, L. (2009). Mixed method design: Principles and procedures. Left Coast Press.
Mos, L. P. (1987). Integrity or unity? In A. W. Staats & L. P. Mos (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 345–347). Plenum.
Panferov V. N. (2017). Metodologiia integral`nogo sinteza v psihologicheskom poznanii [Integral synthesis methodology in psychological knowledge]. In E.Iu. Korzhova (Ed.), Integrativny`i` podhod k poznaniiu psihologii cheloveka [An integrative approach to understanding human psychology] (pp. 11–30). SPb.: Izdatel`stvo RGPU im. A.I. Gercena.
Popper, K. R. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: the growth of scientific knowledge. Routledge.
Prigogine, I. (1980). From being to becoming. WH Freeman.
Salmon, W. C. (1998). Causality and explanation. Oxford University Press.
Smedlund, M. B. (2021). On the foundations of psychology: the problem is grammatical, not theoretical. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 55, 181–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-020-09569-6
Society for Unification Psychology formed (12-85) (1986). Theoretical & Philosophical Psychology, 6(1), 70–71. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0091413
Staats, A. W. (1983). Psychology’s crisis of disunity: philosophy and method for a unified science. Praeger Publishers.
Staats, A. W. (1987). Unified positivism: philosophy for the revolution to unity. In A. W. Staats & L. P. Mos (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 11–54). Plenum.
Staats, A. W. (1996). Behavior and personality: psychological behaviorism. Springer.
Staats, A. W. (2005). A road to, and a philosophy of, unification. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Unity in psychology: possibility or pipedream? (pp. 159–177). APA.
Sternberg, R. (2002). Unifying psychology. Commentary to Daniel N. Robinson: inventing the subject: the renewal of “psychological” psychology. Journal of Anthropological Psychology, 11, 55–57.
Swinburne, R. (2001). Epistemic justification. New York: Oxford.
Trafimow, D. (2012). The role of mechanisms, integration, and unification in science and psychology. Theory & Psychology, 22(5), 697–703. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354311433929
Uher, J. (2021). Psychology’s status as a science: peculiarities and intrinsic challenges. Moving beyond its current deadlock towards conceptual integration. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 55, 212–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-020-09545-0
Uprichard, E., & Dawney, L. (2019). Data diffraction: challenging data integration in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689816674650
Valsiner, J. (2020). From clay feet to new psychology: starting the move. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 54, 515–520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-020-09564-x
van Rooij, I., & Baggio, G. (2021). Theory before the test: How to build high-verisimilitude explanatory theories in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(4), 682–697. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620970604
von Wright, G. H. (1993). The tree of knowledge and other essays. Koln: Brill.
Wolfram, S. (1984). Computation theory of cellular automata. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 96(1), 15–57.
Yanchar, S. C. (1997). Fragmentation in focus: History, integration, and the project of evaluation. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 17, 150–171.
Yela M. (1987). Toward a unified psychological science: the meaning of behavior. In H. V. Rappard, P. J. van Strien, L. P. Mos, W. J. Baker (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (vol. 5, pp 241–274). Plenum.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Conflict of Interest
The author declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Medintsev, V. Towards a Framework for Unifying Research in Theoretical Psychology. Integr. psych. behav. (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-023-09790-z