Skip to main content

The Two Disciplines of Scientific Psychology, or: The Disunity of Psychology as a Working Hypothesis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Dynamic Process Methodology in the Social and Developmental Sciences

Abstract

Anybody who has some familiarity with the research literature in scientific psychology has probably thought, at one time or another, ‘Well, all these means and correlations are very interesting, but what do they have to do with me, as an individual person?’. The question, innocuous as it may seem, is a deep and complicated one. In contrast to the natural sciences, where researchers can safely assume that, say, all electrons are exchangeable save properties such as location and momentum, people differ from each other. Furthermore, it is not obvious that these differences can be treated as irrelevant to the structure of the organisms in question, i.e., it is not clear that they can be treated as ‘noise’ or ‘error’. The problem permeates virtually every subdiscipline of psychology, and in fact may be one of the reasons that progress in psychology has been limited. As Lykken (1991, pp. 3–4) hypothesizes:

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Amidzic, O., Riehle, H. J., Fehr, T., Wienbruch, C., & Elbert, T. (2001). Pattern of focal γ-bursts in chess players. Nature 412, 603.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, M. (1992). Intelligence and development. Cambridge: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2007). The HEXACO model of personality structure and the importance of the H factor. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 1952–1962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1963). Social learning and personality development. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 230–244.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boomsma, D. I., Busjahn, A., & Peltonen, L. (2002). Classical twin studies and beyond. Nature Reviews Genetics, 3, 872–882.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Borsboom, D. (2005). Measuring the mind: Conceptual issues in contemporary psychometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Borsboom, D. (2008). Psychometric perspectives on diagnostic systems. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 64, 1089–1108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Borsboom, D., & Dolan, C. V. (2006). Why g is not an adaptation: A comment on Kanazawa. Psychological Review, 113, 433–437.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Borsboom, D., & Dolan, C. V. (2007). Theoretical equivalence, measurement, invariance, and the idiographic filter. Measurement, 5, 236–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & Van Heerden, J. (2003). The theoretical status of latent variables. Psychological Review, 110, 203–219.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cervone, D. (1991). The two disciplines of personality psychology. Psychological Science, 2, 371–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cervone, D. (2004). The architecture of personality. Psychological Review , 111, 183–204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cervone, D. (2005). Personality architecture: Within-person structures and processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 423–452.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cervone, D., Caldwell, T. L., Fiori, M., Orom, H., Shadel, W. G., & Kassel, J., et al. (2008). What underlies appraisals?: Experimentally testing a knowledge-and-appraisal model of personality architecture among smokers contemplating high-risk situations. Journal of Personality, 76, 929–967.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cervone, D., & Mischel, W. (Eds.). (2002). Advances in personality science. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchland, P. (1981). Eliminative materialism and the propositional attitudes. Journal of Philosophy, 78, 67–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 612–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danziger, K. (2000). Making social psychology experimental: A conceptual history, 1920–1970. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 36, 329–347.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deary, I. J. (2000). Looking down on human intelligence: From psychometrics to the brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • De Groot, A. D. (1978). Thought and choice in chess. Den Haag, Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, J. L., & Wollenberg, A. L. v. d. (1993). Local homogeneity in latent trait models: A characterization of the homogeneous monotone IRT model. Psychometrika, 58, 417–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, H. J. (1970). The structure of personality. (3rd ed.). London: Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. (1974). The special sciences, or: The disunity of psychology as a working hypothesis. Synthese, 28, 97–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. (1997). Special sciences: Still autonomous after all these years. Nous, 31, 149–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freud, S. (1900/1953). The interpretation of dreams. Standard Edition (Vol. 4, pp. 1–338; Vol. 5, pp.339–621). London: Hogarth Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freud, S. (1923/1961). The ego and the id . Standard Edition (Vol. 18, pp. 12–66). London: Hogarth Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind. New York: Basic books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garlick, D. (2002). Understanding the nature of the general factor of intelligence: The role of inter-individual differences in neural plasticity as an explanatory mechanism. Psychological Review, 109, 116–136.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J., Koole, S. L., & Pyszczynski, T. (Eds.). (2004). Handbook of experimental existential psychology. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gödel, K. (1931). Über formal unentscheidbare Satze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme I. In Feferman, S. (1986). Kurt Gödel: Collected Works, (Vol. 1, pp. 144–195). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hamaker, E. L., Dolan, C. V., & Molenaar, P. C. M. (2005). Statistical modeling of the individual: Rationale and application of multivariate time series analysis. Multivariate Behavior Research, 40, 207–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamaker, E. L., Nesselroade, J. R., & Molenaar, P. C. M. (2007). The integrated trait-state model. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 295–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harré, R. (1998). The singular self: An introduction to the psychology of personhood. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hermans, H. J. M. (2001). The construction of a personal position repertoire: Method and practice. Culture and Psychology, 7, 323–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaenisch, R., & Bird, A. (2003). Epigenetic regulation of gene expression: How the genome integrates intrinsic and environmental signals. Nature Genetics, 35, 245–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, B. R. J., & Van der Maas, H. L. J. (2002). The development of children’s rule use on the balance scale task. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 81, 383–416.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, A. (1998). The g factor. Westport: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, A. (2002). Psychometric g: Definition and substantiation. In R. J. Sternberg & E. L. Grigorenko (Eds.), The general factor of intelligence: How general is it? (pp. 39–54). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The big-five factor taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 102–138). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanazawa, S. (2004). General intelligence as a domain-specific adaptation. Psychological Review, 111, 512–523.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, R. F. (1999). The structure of common mental disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 921–926.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhl, J., & Koole, S. L. (2004). Workings of the will: A functional approach. In J. Greenberg, S. L. Koole, & T. Pyszczynski (Eds.), Handbook of experimental existential psychology (pp. 411–430). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (1987). The psychology of personality: An epistemological inquiry. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lykken, D. T. (1991). What’s wrong with psychology anyway? In D. Cicchetti & W. M. Grove (Eds.), Thinking clearly about psychology. Vol. 1: Matters of public interest (pp. 3–39). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1996). Toward a new generation of personality theories: Theoretical contexts for the five-factor model. In J. S. Wiggins (Ed.), The five-factor model of personality: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 51–87). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (2008). Empirical and theoretical status of the five-factor model of personality traits. In G. Boyle, G. Matthews, & D. Saklofske (Eds.), Sage handbook of personality theory and assessment (Vol. 1, pp. 273–294). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis, and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58, 525–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miele, F. (2002). Intelligence, race, and genetics: Conversations with Arthur Jensen. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246–286.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Molenaar, P. C. M. (1999). Longitudinal analysis. In H. J. Ader & G. J. Mellenbergh (Eds.), Research methodology in the social, behavioural, and life sciences (pp. 143–167). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molenaar, P. C. M. (2004). A manifesto on psychology as ideographic science: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, this time forever. Measurement, 2, 201–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molenaar, P. C. M., Boomsma D. I., & Dolan, C. V. (1993). A third source of developmental differences. Behavior Genetics, 23, 519–524.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Molenaar, P. C. M., Huizenga, H. M., & Nesselroade, J. R. (2003). The relationship between the structure of interindividual and intraindividual variability: A theoretical and empirical vindication of developmental systems theory. In U. M. Staudinger & U. Lindenberger (Eds.), Understanding human development: Dialogues with lifespan psychology (pp. 339–360). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, B. O. (1989). Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations. Psychometrika, 54, 557–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearl, J. (2000). Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posthuma, D., de Geus, E. J. C., Baaré, W. F. C., Hulshoff Pol, H. E., Kahn, R. S., & Boomsma, D. I. (2002). The association between brain volume and intelligence is of genetic origin. Nature Neuroscience, 5, 83–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, E. H. (1951). The interpretation of interaction in contingency tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 13, 238–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2001). Unified psychology. American Psychologist, 56, 1069–1079.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Timmerman, M. E., Ceulemans, E., Lichtwarck-Aschoff, A., & Vansteeland, K. (2009). Multilevel simultaneous component analysis for studying intra-individual variability and inter-individual differences. In J. Valsiner & P. C. M. Molenaar (Eds.), Developmental process methodology in the social and developmental sciences (pp. 291–318). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Maas, H. L. J., Dolan, C. V., Grasman, R. P. P. P., Wicherts, J. M., Huizenga, H. M., & Raijmakers, M. E. J. (2006). A dynamical model of general intelligence: The positive manifold of intelligence by mutualism. Psychological Review, 113, 842–861.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Geert, P. (1991). A dynamic systems model of cognitive and language growth. Psychological Review, 98, 3–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Rijn, P. (2008). Categorical time series in psychological measurement. University of Amsterdam, Unpublished doctoral dissertation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verguts, T., & De Boeck, P. (2002). The induction of solution rules in Raven’s Progressive Matrices test. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14, 521–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, A. N., & Russell, B. (1910). Principia mathematica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Denny Borsboom’s work was supported by NWO innovational research grant no. 452-07-005.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Denny Borsboom .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Borsboom, D., Kievit, R., Cervone, D., Hood, S. (2009). The Two Disciplines of Scientific Psychology, or: The Disunity of Psychology as a Working Hypothesis. In: Valsiner, J., Molenaar, P., Lyra, M., Chaudhary, N. (eds) Dynamic Process Methodology in the Social and Developmental Sciences. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-95922-1_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics