Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Concepts and Reasoning: a Conceptual Review and Analysis of Logical Issues in Empirical Social Science Research

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

Abstract

A substantial number of social science studies have shown a lack of conceptual clarity, inadequate understanding of the nature of the empirical research approaches, and undue preference for deduction, which have caused much confusion, created paradigmatic incommensurability, and impeded scientific advancement. This study, through conceptual review and analysis of canonical discussions of concepts and the reasoning approaches of deduction and induction and their applications in social science theorization by philosophers and social scientists, is purported to unveil the logical nature of empirical research and examine the legitimacy of the preference of deduction among social scientists. The findings note that conceptual clarity as the foundation of social science research, exchange, and replication can be achieved through interdisciplinary stress of conceptual analyses to establish universal measurements and that the primacy of deduction in social sciences needs to concede to or be balanced with induction for new knowledge, more discoveries, and scientific advancement. The study recommends that institutions and researchers of social sciences invest more in conceptual analysis and inductive research through collaboration and separate efforts.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

This conceptual review paper involves no empirical data.

References

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association. https://www.apa.org/science/programs/testing/standards

  • Allen, M. S., Iliescu, D., & Greiff, S. (2022). Single item measures in psychological science: A call to action. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 38(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle. (1984). The organon. In J. Barnes (Ed.), The complete works of Aristotle: The revised Oxford translation (v. 1). Princeton University Press.

  • Aven, T. (2018). Reflections on the use of conceptual research in risk analysis. Risk Analysis, 38(11), 2415–2423. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Babbie, E. (2021). The practice of social research (15th ed.). Cengage.

  • Bacon, F. (2000). In L. Jardine, & M. Silverthorne (Eds.), The new organon. Cambridge University Press.

  • Bal, M. (2009). Working with concepts. European Journal of English Studies, 13(1), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/13825570802708121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, D. (1980). Interdependence and power: A conceptual analysis. International Organization, 34(4), 471–506. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300018828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskaran, S., Ng, C. H., Mahadi, N., & Ayob, S. A. (2017). Youth and social media comportment: A conceptual perspective. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(11), 1260–1277. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i11/3563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergkvist, L. (2015). Appropriate use of single-item measures is here to stay. Marketing Letters, 26, 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-014-9325-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bird, F. (2020). A defense of objectivity in the social sciences, rightly understood. Sustainability: Science Practice and Policy, 16(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2020.1785679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2015). Grounded theory: A practical guide (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

  • Blumer, H. (1956). Sociological analysis and the “variable. American Sociological Review, 21(6), 683–690. https://doi.org/10.2307/2088418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quinonez, H., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Boole, G. (1952/2012). Studies in logic and probability. Dover Publications.

  • Boyd, N. M., & Bogen, J. (2021). Theory and observation in science. In N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021 Edition).  https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2021/entries/science-theory-observation/. Accessed 1 Apr 2023.

  • Brandt, P., & Timmermans, S. (2021). Abductive logic of inquiry for quantitative research in the digital age. Sociological Science, 8, 191–210. https://doi.org/10.15195/v8.a10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, W. F., & Chinn, C. A. (1994). The theory-ladenness of data: An experimental demonstration. In A. Ram & K. Eiselt (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixteenth annual conference of the cognitive science society (p.5). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315789354

  • Bringmann, L. F., Elmer, T., & Eronen, M. I. (2022). Back to basics: The importance of conceptual clarification in psychological science. Current Direction in Psychological Science, 31(4), 340–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214221096485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnap, R. (1956). The methodological character of theoretical concepts. In H. Feigl, & M. Scriven (Eds.), Foundations of science and the concepts of psychology and psychoanalysis (pp. 38–76). University of Minnesota Press.

  • Carnap, R. (1963). Replies and systematic expositions. In P. A. Shilpp (Ed.), The philosophy of Rudolf Carnap (pp. 859–1013). Open Court.

  • Chaffee, S. (1991). Explication. Sage Publications.

  • Charmaz, K., & Thornberg, R. (2021). The pursuit of quality in grounded theory. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 305–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1780357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (2019). Constructing validity: New developments in creating objective measuring instruments. Psychological Assessment, 31(12), 1412–1427. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000626

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, T., Foster, L., Sloan, L., & Bryman, A. (2021). Bryman’s social research methods (6th ed.). Oxford University Press.

  • Cohen, I. B. (1994). A note on “social science” and on “natural science.” In I. B. Cohen (Ed.), The natural sciences and the social sciences (pp. xxv-xxxvi). Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  • Copi, I., Cohen, C., & McMahon, K. (2010). Introduction to logic (14th ed.). Prentice-Hall.

  • Darwin, C. (1897). In F. Darwin (Eds.), The life and letters of Charles Darwin. D. Appleton and Company.

  • Dewey, J. (1910/1997). How we think. Dover Publications.

  • Dreher, A. (2000). Foundations for conceptual research in psychoanalysis. Karnac (Books) Ltd.

  • Dreher, A. (2003). What does conceptual research have to offer? In M. Leuzinger-Bohleber, A. Dreher, & J. Ganestri (Eds.), Pluralism and unity? Methods of research in psychoanalysis (pp. 109–124). IPA.

  • Dubin, R. (1978). Theory building (2nd ed.). Free Press.

  • Dummett, M. (1991). The logical basis of metaphysics. Harvard University Press.

  • Dunwoody, S. (2005). Explicate, please. MAPOR News, fall issue, 4. http://www.mapor.org/newsletters/Fall2005.pdf

  • Eagly, A., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

  • Fetzer, J. (2022). Carl Hempel. In N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved April 1, 2023, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hempel/

  • Fisher, R. (1955). Statistical methods and scientific induction. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B(Methodological), 17(1), 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1955.tb00180.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. (1998). Concepts: Where cognitive science went wrong. Oxford University Press.

  • Fodor, J. (2004). Having concepts: A brief refutation of the 20th century. Mind and Language, 19, 29–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2004.00245.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foxall, G. R. (1986). The role of radical behaviorism in the explanation of consumer choice. In R. J. Lutz (Ed.), Advances in consumer research (13 vol., pp. 187–191). Association for Consumer Research.

  • Francis, G. (2012). Publication bias and the failure of replication in experimental psychology. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 19, 975–991. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0322-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. L., Dunham, R. B., & Pierce, J. L. (1998). Single-item versus multiple-item measurement scales: An empirical comparison. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58(6), 898–915. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164498058006003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gatzka, T. (2021). Aspects of openness as predictors of academic achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 170,. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine de Gruyter.

  • Gunnell, J. (1975). Philosophy, science, and political inquiry. General Learning Press.

  • Haslam, N. (2016). Concept creep: Psychology’s expanding concepts of harm and pathology. Psychological Inquiry, 27(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2016.1082418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haslam, N., Dakin, B. C., Fabiano, F., McGrath, M. J., Rhee, J., Vylomova, E., Weaving, M., & Wheeler, M. A. (2020). Harm inflation: Making sense of concept creep. European Review of Social Psychology, 31(1), 254–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2020.1796080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haslam, N., Tse, J. S. Y., & Deyne, S. D. (2021). Concept creep and psychiatrization. Frontiers in Sociology, 6, 806147. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2021.806147

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use Omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability but…. Communication Methods and Measures, 14(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hempel, C. (1965). Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. Free Press.

  • Homans, G. (1951). The human group. Routledge.

  • Hume, D. (1748/1999). An enquiry concerning human understanding. Oxford University Press.

  • Hurley, P., & Watson, L. (2018). A concise introduction to logic (13th ed.). Cengage Learning.

  • Husserl, E. (1900/1973). Logical investigations (trans. Findlay J.N.). Routledge & Kegan Paul.

  • Jackson, F. (1998). From metaphysics to ethics: A defense of conceptual analysis. Oxford University Press.

  • Kant, I. (1781/1998). The critique of pure reason (Trans. P Guyer, & A. W. Wood). Cambridge University Press.

  • Kerlinger, F. N, & Lee, H. B. (1999). Foundations of behavioral research (4th ed.). Wadsworth Publishing.

  • King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (2021). Designing social inquiry: Scientific inference in qualitative research (new ed.). Princeton University Press.

  • Kistruck, G. M., & Shantz, A. S. (2022). Research on grand challenges: Adopting an abductive experimentation methodology. Organization Studies, 43(9), 1479–1505. https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406211044886

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. The University of Chicago Press.

  • Leibniz, G. W. (1989). Dissertation on the art of combinations. In L. E. Loemker (Ed.) Philosophical papers and letters. The new synthese historical library (Texts and studies in the history of philosophy) (vol 2). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1426-7_2

  • Lakatos, I. (1978). The methodology of scientific research programmes. In J. Worrall, & G. Currie (Eds.), Philosophical papers, V 1. Cambridge University Press.

  • Locke, E. A. (2007). The case for inductive theory building. Journal of Management, 33(6), 867–890. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307307636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, J. (1689/1997). An essay concerning human understanding, book III. Penguin Press.

  • Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2020). Building a theory by induction: The example of goal setting theory. Organizational Psychology Review, 10(3–4), 223–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386620921931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, E., & Laurence, S. (2022). Concepts. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2022 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2022/entries/concepts/. Accessed 1 Apr 2023.

  • Martinez, R. A. M., Andrabi, N., Goodwin, A. N., Wilbur, R. E., Smith, N. R., & Zivich, P. N. (2023). Conceptualization, operationalization, and utilization of race and ethnicity in major epidemiology journals, 1995–2018: A systematic review. American Journal of Epidemiology, 192(3), 483–496. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwac146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCombs, M., & Donald, S. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1086/267990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLeod, J., & Chaffee, S. (2017). The construction of social reality. In J. T. Tedeschi (Ed.), The social influence processes (pp50-99). Routledge.

  • Mill, J. S. (1843/2011). A system of logic, ratiocinative and inductive: Being a connected view of the principles of evidence, and the methods of scientific investigation (1V vol). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139149839.017

  • Mokgohloa, K., Kanakana-Katumba, G., Maladzhi, R., & Xaba, S. (2021). A grounded theory approach to digital transformation in the postal sector in southern Africa. Advances in Science Technology and Engineering Systems Journal, 6(2), 313–323. https://doi.org/10.25046/aj060236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mollaret, P. (2009). Using common psychological terms to describe other people: From lexical hypothesis to polysemous conception. Theory and Psychology, 19(3), 315–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354309104157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mukumbang, F. C., Kabongo, E. M., & Eastwood, J. G. (2021). Examining the application of retroductive theorizing in realist-informed studies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211053516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuhoglu, H. (2020). The effect of deduction and induction methods used in modeling current environmental issues with system dynamics approach in science education. Participatory Education Research (PER), 7(1), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.20.7.7.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. (1987). Introduction to psychological measurement. McGraw-Hill Book Company.

  • O’Shaughnessy, J. (1992). Explaining buyer behavior: Central concepts and philosophy of science issues. Oxford University Press.

  • Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 10(1), 55–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.1993.9962963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peacocke, P. (2009). Frege’s hierarchy: A puzzle. In J. Almog, & P. Leonardi (Eds.), The philosophy of David Kaplan (pp. 159–186). Oxford University Press.

  • Peirce, C. S. (1898/1992). Reason and the logic of things: The Cambridge conferences lectures of 1898 (ed. Ketner, K.L). Harvard University Press.

  • Petronio, S., & Child, J. T. (2020). Conceptualization and operationalization: Utility of communication privacy management theory. Current Opinion in Psychology, 31, 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.08.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Philipsen, K. (2017). Theory building: Using abductive search strategies. In P. Freytag, & L. Young (Eds.), Collaborative research design (pp. 45–71). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5008-4_3

  • Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. Hutchinson.

  • Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. Routledge & Kegan Paul.

  • Popper, K. (1982). Unended quest: An intellectual autobiography. Open Court.

  • Potter, J. (2012). Media effects. Sage Publications.

  • Putnam, H. (1962). The analytic and the synthetic. In H. Feigl, & G. Maxwell (Eds.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science, V III (pp. 358–97). University of Minnesota Press.

  • Quine, W. (1974). Roots of reference. Open Court.

  • Rose, J., & Johnson, C. W. (2020). Contextualizing reliability and validity in qualitative research: Toward more rigorous and trustworthy qualitative social science in leisure research. Journal of Leisure Research, 51(4), 432–451. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2020.1722042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg-Jansen, S. (2022). The emerging world of humanitarian energy: A conceptual research review. Energy Research and Social Science, 92,. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102779

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B. (1946). A history of western philosophy. George Allen and Unwin Ltd.

  • Sætre, A. S., & Van de Ven, A. (2021). Generating theory by abduction. Academy of Management Review, 46(4), 684–701. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2019.0233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, W. (1971). Statistical explanation and statistical relevance. University of Pittsburgh Press.

  • Schimmack, U. (2020). A meta-psychological perspective on the decade of replication failures in social psychology. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 61(4), 364–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlagwein, D. (2021). Natural sciences, philosophy of science and the orientation of the social sciences. Journal of Information Technology, 36(1), 85–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268396220951203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schrepp, M. (2020). On the usage of Cronbach’s alpha to measure reliability of UX scales. Journal of Usability Studies, 15(4), 247–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrestha, Y. R., He, V. F., Puranam, P., & von Krogh, G. (2020). Algorithm supported induction for building theory: How can we use prediction models to theorize? Organization Science, 32(3), 856–880. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2020.1382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stadler, M., Sailer, M., & Fischer, F. (2021). Knowledge as a formative construct: A good alpha is not always better. New Ideas in Psychology, 60,. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2020.100832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stich, S., & Weinberg, J. (2001). Jackson’s empirical assumptions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 62(3), 637–643. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2001.tb00081.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Surma-aho, A., & Otto, K. H. (2021). Conceptualization and operationalization of empathy in design research. Design Studies, 78, 101075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svejvid, P. (2021). A meta-theoretical framework for theory building in project management. International Journal of Project Management, 39, 849–9722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.09.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szatek, P. K. (2020). The Duhem-Quine thesis reconsidered. Studies in Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric, 62(75), 73–93. https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2020-0014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarski, A. (1946/1996). Introduction to logic: And to the methodology of deductive sciences. Dover Publications.

  • Toulmin, S. (1953). The philosophy of science: An introduction. Hutchinson.

  • Thomas, C. G. (2021). Research methodology and scientific writing (2nd ed.). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64865-7

  • Tie, Y. T., Birks, M., & Francis, K. (2019). Grounded theory research: A design framework for novice researchers. Sage Open Medicine, 7, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312118822927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veen, M. (2021). Creative leaps in theory: The might of abduction. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 26, 1173–1183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-021-10057-8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Verster, J. C., Sandalova, E., Garssen, J., & Bruce, G. (2021). The use of single-item ratings versus traditional multiple-item questionnaires to assess mood and health. European Journal of Investigation in Health Psychology and Education, 11, 183–198. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe11010015

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, A. N., & Russell, B. (1956). Principia Mathematica to *56. Cambridge University Press.

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1922/2007). Tractatus Logico-Philosohicus. Cosimo, Inc.

  • Woiceshyn, J., & Daellenbach, U. (2018). Evaluating inductive versus deductive research in management studies: Implications for authors, editors, and reviewers. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 13(2), 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM-06-2017-1538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, X., Levis, B., Sun, Y., Krishnan, A., He, C., et al. (2020). Probability of major depression diagnostic classification based on the SCID, CIDI and MINI diagnostic interviews controlling for hospital anxiety and depression scale-depression subscale score: An individual participant data meta-analysis of 73 primary studies. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 129, 109892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2019.109892

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Xin, S., Tribe, J., & Chambers, D. (2013). Conceptual research in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 41, 66–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2012.12.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao, Q. J. (2023a). Conceptual analysis. In J. Mattingly (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of theory in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Sage Reference. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071872383

  • Yao, Q. J. (2023b). Deduction. In J. Mattingly (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of theory in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Sage Reference. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071872383

  • Yao, Q. J. (2023c). Induction. In J. Mattingly (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of theory in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Sage Reference. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071872383

  • Yao, Q. J., Liu, Z., & Stephens, L. S. (2020). Exploring the dynamics in the environmental discourse: The longitudinal interaction among public opinion, presidential opinion, media coverage, policymaking in 3 decades and an integrated model of media effects. Environment Systems and Decision, 40(1), 14–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-019-09746-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, C. (2008). The advertising research handbook (2nd ed.). Ad Essentials, LLC.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author appreciates Dr. Steven H. Chaffee for the inspiration of his work on explication in conducting this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication & Media, Lamar University, P.O. Box 10050, Beaumont, TX, 77710, USA

    Qingjiang Yao

Authors
  1. Qingjiang Yao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

This paper is solely authored by Qingjiang (Q. J.) Yao, who bears all responsibility related to the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qingjiang Yao.

Ethics declarations

The author has no financial or non-financial interests that are directly or indirectly related to this work submitted.

Ethical Approval

This conceptual research study is conducted in accordance with relevant guidelines/regulations applicable and involves no human participants. *

Informed Consent

NA.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yao, Q. Concepts and Reasoning: a Conceptual Review and Analysis of Logical Issues in Empirical Social Science Research. Integr. psych. behav. 58, 502–530 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-023-09792-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-023-09792-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation