Professional Documents
Culture Documents
In evaluating whether Psychology is a science or not the issue is broken down into several
operationally define science and psychology and how they are intertwined and related. The
limitations of the science in the realm of psychology are then discussed and future paradigm
shifts outlined.
A Definition of Science
systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws. This knowledge is gained
through observation and experimentation and systematic study. The discipline of science can be
experimental investigation and theoretical explanation of the phenomena under study. The
Positivist view of science focuses on causal explanation with evidence of a theory based on
measurement, carried out in a thorough, meticulous and objective manner. Such scientific
experimentation is precise and tightly controlled, quantifiable, repeatable and not open to
influence from culture or history, allowing for limited opportunities for bias. This definition of
scientific experimentation is further expanded by Kuhn (1962) who suggests that science and
training, accreditation, global paradigms, professional self-regulating public societies and peer-
reviewed journals.
A Definition of Psychology
Zimbardo (1992) formally defines psychology as the scientific study of the behaviours of
individuals and their mental processes. Cattell (1981) describes this scientific study of
‘as one would the mechanisms of a watch, the chemistry of the life processes in mammals
He emphasises objectivity and the quest to predict and control what will happen next in the realm
of personality or more loosely human psychological nature. In doing so, scientific laws of a
general nature can be inferred. Harré (1985) in his work notes that common sense is the basis of
psychology, upon which scientific study of the area is built. As a human activity Wellman (1990)
gives relevance to desires, beliefs, thinking and intentions that help shape mentalistic
psychology. Heider (1958) espouses common sense psychology as one mixing the personal
dispositional and internal world with that of the environment, situational factors and the external
surroundings. There is a duality of science in terms of the internal and the external. Blackman
(1980) and Van Langenhove (1995) align these two seemingly at odds concepts into an
underlying belief in the importance of empirical methods and by adapting and borrowing
scientific methods and vocabulary from traditional natural sciences psychological phenomena
Psychology was originally the domain of philosophy where rational argument rather than data
collection and analysis was used to describe and explain psychological events within a person.
Wundt (1874) has been attributed with making this movement from philosophical debate to the
as Locke, Hume and Berkeley gave pertinence to only those things that were measurable and
repeatable. Introspection held no place in this new scientific realm of psychology. Graham
(1986) identifies that the emergence of psychology as a separate discipline distinct from
philosophy was merely a reflection of the zeitgeist of the day. Philosophy as Richards (2002)
describes had made significant contributions to the body of psychological concepts was filtered
out. Heather (1976) suggests that to gain acceptance as a science the human face or philosophical
beginnings of psychology were suppressed. The importance of description and explanation was
Defining Psychology as a science suggests that personality and behaviour can be described by
universal laws. It is, however impossible to prove anything universally true by observation alone.
There is no scientific knowledge without experiential influence. Desse (1972) suggests that
objectivity is always a matter of degree as the experimenter uses their own intuitions in
determining what to control or observe. In psychology there is a deluge of factors to consider and
mot cannot be controlled or designed out of an experiment. Gould (1987) questions if science
can truly be objective. Similarly, Danziger (1990) speaks to the historical and cultural world in
which both experimenter and subject / participant lives. The hard definition of science cannot be
applied to any experiment and certainly not in relation to psychology. Popper (1972) states that
observations are always pre-structured and directed. In Rosenthal (1966), it is found that
fulfilling prophecy have a huge and profound effect on results obtained. Science as specifically
applied to psychology is wrought with biases, prejudices and assumptions of the individual
scientist and the professional bodes which they work under. Psychology in dealing with human
nature is distinct from the physical and natural sciences and should not be considered a science in
the traditional sense. In trying to imitate the natural sciences Graham (1986) notes that the soul
of the participant and the experimenter are left to one side which is exactly what psychology is
trying to measure and predict. By falling into a rational based analysis and method of
experimentation Rogler (1999), Lee (1994), Reid (1994) suggests that psychology has become
reductionist in nature making use of experimental paradigms that are incapable of explaining the
phenomena under investigation. As such psychology is curtailed and confined by being defined
as a science. By being restricted to the rigours of science and the responsibilities that such a label
brings about psychology is valuing truth over usefulness. There is a balance required between the
formal and informal definition and classification of psychology. Gahagan (1991) indicates that
there is a difference between Psychologists as scientist concerned with truth versus psychologist
as lay person concerned with using psychology in a practical manner. Psychological concepts are
difficult to measure. Berger and Luckmann (1966) speak to similar considerations, that of lay
considered a science then variables must be controllable and predictable. By trying to shoe-horn
psychology into laboratory conditions external validity of results are brought into doubt.
Psychology, by its very nature deals with elastic concepts, behaviours have multiple causes and
relationships far too complex for accurate scientific measurement in the laboratory. Linsay
(1995) states that psychology does not operate in a value free vacuum. If we accept this
question. Traditional science as lead to cultural insensitivity, Rogler (1999) notes that
ethnocentrism and are culture bound, Sinha (1997). Psychology cannot be expanded and applied
out from a precise situation to a general all encompassing theory. Issues such as representative
ness, in terms of use of students in a large amount of experimentation (Krupat and Garonzik,
1994) leads us to question if psychology should be considered a science. Science lays greatest
credence with quantative rather than qualitative, but as Bassett (2002) notes there is a large
observation. Psychology is extremely diverse and versatile and bounding study to scientific
laboratory would be extremely limiting. Non-experimental studies such as those carried out by
Pilavin (1969), experimentation outside the lab, Hazan and Shaver (1987), a correlation study
and Freud (1909) would be left on the scientific scrapheap without sufficient quantative data to
Science and its emphasis on empirical data is too limiting in nature for the subject of psychology.
Banniter and Fransella (1980) suggest that research continues to formally define and measure
experimental variables but that the results obtained would be less important than how the
experiment helped to progress the understanding of human behaviour. In doing so this would
refocus psychology on to its definition as originally outlined, the study of human behaviour.
Danziger (1997) discusses the assumption under which modern psychology places huge weight
forward. It ignores the issues of culturally and socially bound experimentation. A combination of
with those of humanistic approaches. May (1967) suggests that incorporating humanistic
endeavours does not invalidate the scientific approach, as Graham (1986) notes, eastern
psychology, rooted in humanistic theories along with western scientific theories of psychology
can work in tandem in a dualistic nature. Graham goes further to suggest that natural science
provide partial explanation and that a dualistic approach, that incorporates but is not bound by
Conclusion
approaches. As Strickland (2000) and Miller (1969) discuss, psychology must build upon and
step beyond its classification as a science. Considering psychology as a science has brought
many benefits and will continue to do so but if we are to continue to deepen our understanding of
psychology and integrate this knowledge into beneficial social change we must look beyond
Bannister, D. and Fransella, F. (1980) Inquiring Man: The Psychology of Personal Constructs
Bassett, C. (2002) Nurses’ and students’ perceptions of care: Aphenomenological study. Nursing
Berger, P.L. and Luckmann, T. (1966) The Social Construction of Reality. Harmondsworth:
Penguin.
Blackman, D.E. (1980) Images of man in contemporary behaviourism. In A.J. Chapman and
Cattell, R. B. (1981) Where next in human motivation research? Some possible crucial
Danziger, K. (1997) Naming the Mind: How Psychology Found Its Language. London: Sage.
Desse, J. (1972) Psychology as Art and Science. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Freud, S. (1909) Analysis of a phobia in a five-year-old boy. Pelican Freud Library, Volume 8,
Harré, R., Clarke, D. and De Carlo. N. (1985) Motives and Mechanisms: An Introduction to
Hazan, C. and Shaver, P.R. (1987) Romantic love conceptualised as an attachment process.
Krupat, E. and Garonzik, R. (1994) Subjects’ expectations and the search for alternatives to
Kuhn, T. S. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 1st. ed., Chicago: Univ. of Chicago
Pr.
Lee, Y. (1994) Why does psychology have cultural limitations? American Psychologist, 49, 524.
May. R. (1967) Psychology and the Human Dilemma. New York: Van Nostrand.
776-83.
Piliavin, I.M., Rodin, J. and Piliavin, J.A. (1969) Good Samaritanism: An underground
Reason, P. and Rowan, J. (eds) (1981) Human Inquiry: A Sourcebook of New Paradigm
Reid, P.T. (1994) The real problem in the study of culture. American Psychologist, 49, 524-525.
Richards, G. (2002) Putting Psychology in its Place: A Critical Historical Overview (2nd edn).
Hove: Routledge.
Rogler, L.H. (1999) Methodological sources of cultural insensitivity in mental health research.
Century-Crofts.
Sinha, D. (1997) Indigenizing psychology. In J.W. Berry, Y.H. Porting and J. Pandey (eds)
Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology, vol. 1, 2nd edn. Boston, MA:Allyn and Bacon.
Valentine, E.R. (1992) Conceptual Issues in Psychology, 2nd edn. London: Routledge.
alternatives. In J.A. Smith, R. Harre and L. Van Langenhowe (eds) Rethinking Psychology.
Zimbardo, P.G. (1992) Psychology and Life, 13th edn. New York: HarperCollins.