Specification: Features of science: objectivity and the empirical method; replicability and falsifiability; theory construction and hypothesis testing; paradigms and paradigm shifts.

An ongoing debate in the field of psychology is whether psychology can be considered a science. It is important to look at the different aspects of what makes a science and how, if at all, psychology fulfils these expectations.

Objectivity and empirical method

A key feature of science is the ability for researchers to remain objective, meaning that they must not let their personal opinions, judgements or biases interfere with the data. Laboratory experiments are the most objective method within the psychology discipline because of the high level of control that is exerted over the variables. On the other hand, a natural experiment, by its very nature, cannot exert control over the manipulation of independent variables and is often viewed as less objective. Similarly, the observational and content analysis methods can fall victim to objectivity issues since the behavioural categories assigned are at the personal discretion of the investigator.

Empirical methods refer to the idea that knowledge is gained from direct experiences in an objective, systematic and controlled manner to produce quantitative data. It suggests that we cannot create knowledge based on belief alone, and therefore any theory will need to be empirically tested and verified in order to be considered scientific. Adopting an empirical approach reduces the opportunity for researchers to make unfounded claims about phenomena based on subjective opinion.

Replicability and falsifiability

Replicability is a key feature of a science, and refers to the ability to conduct research again and achieve consistent results. If the findings can truly be generalised, and thus be truly valid, psychologists would expect that any replication of a study using the same standardised procedures would produce similar findings and reach the same conclusions.

For research to be considered scientific it should also be falsifiable. Falsifiability (Popper, 1934) refers to the idea that a research hypothesis could be proved wrong. Scientific research can never be ‘proven’ to be true, only subjected to research attempts to prove them as false. For this reason, all investigations have a null hypothesis which suggests that any difference or relationship found is due to chance.

An example within psychology which causes conflict in the scientific community for its lack of falsifiability is the Freudian psychodynamic approach. A central principle of this approach is the notion of the Oedipus complex, which occurs for boys during childhood whereby they must resolve an unconscious sexual desire for the opposite‐sex parent in order to develop the final element of their psyche: the superego. If a male individual refutes the idea that he will have gone through this stage of psychosexual development in his youth, psychodynamic theorists would counter this with the supposition that they were in denial (a defence mechanism) which is another facet of the theory. Herein a circular argument is created to prevent the initial claim from being refuted or falsified.

Popper argued that if falsification cannot be achieved, the theory cannot have derived from a true scientific discipline, which should instead be regarded as a pseudoscience. Therefore, the psychodynamic approach casts doubt on the scientific rigour of psychology when considered as a whole.

Theory construction and hypothesis testing

A theory is a set of principles that intend to explain certain behaviours or events. However, to construct a theory, evidence to support this notion needs to be collected first, since the empirical method does not allow knowledge to be based solely on beliefs.

If a researcher suspects something to be true, they need to devise an experiment that will allow them to examine their ideas. If they start to discover patterns or trends in their research then a theory can be constructed. This is called the inductive process and is sometimes referred to as the ‘bottom up’ approach. Thereafter, researchers can make predictions about what they expect to happen – a hypothesis.

When designing a hypothesis, it must be objective and measurable so that at the end of the investigation a clear decision can be made as to whether results have supported or refuted the hypothesis. If findings support the hypothesis, then the theory will have been strengthened; if it is refuted, then it is likely that alterations will be made to the theory accordingly.

Conversely, there is the deductive process of theory construction which works from the more general ideas to the more specific and is informally referred to as a ‘top‐down’ approach. Here, the psychologist may begin with a theory relating to a topic of interest. This will then be narrowed down into a more specific hypothesis which can be tested empirically. Any data gathered from testing the hypothesis in this way will then be used to adjust the predictions.

Paradigms and paradigm shifts

A paradigm is a set of shared assumptions and methods within a particular discipline. Kuhn (1962) suggested that it was this that separated a scientific discipline from non‐scientific disciplines. Under this assumption, he suggested that psychology was perhaps best seen as a pre‐science, separate from the likes of physics or biology. He suggested that psychology had too much disagreement at its core between the various approaches (e.g. behaviourist versus cognitive psychologists), and was unable to agree on one unifying approach to consider itself a science.

The way in which a field of study moves forward is through a scientific revolution. It can start with a handful of scientists challenging an existing, accepted paradigm. Over time, this challenge becomes popular with other scientists also beginning to challenge it, adding more research to contradict the existing assumptions. When this happens, it is called a paradigm shift.

A classic example of a paradigm shift is how scientists historically believed the world to be flat when now it is widely accepted that the earth is, in fact, round. In psychology, there have been numerous paradigm shifts over the decades. From the late nineteenth century psychoanalytic theory was at the forefront of psychological thinking, with the role of the unconscious mind in governing behaviour being the dominant approach. However, between 1927 and 1938 the work of Pavlov and Skinner emerged who adopted the behaviourist position that all behaviour was learned from the environment and experiences. Shortly thereafter, in the 1960s, another paradigm shift occurred with the cognitive approach taking precedence in psychology with the development of the electronic computer. Here, the shift from behaviourist thinking moved towards the role of cognitions in explaining human behaviour although elements of the behaviourist approach remained in use and were combined in cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). 

Possible exam questions

1. Outline what is meant by falsifiability in psychological research. (2 marks)

2. Define what is meant by the term paradigm. (2 marks)

3. Explain replicability as a feature of science. (2 marks)

4. Explain what is meant by a paradigm shift. You may use a suitable example to illustrate your point. (2 marks)

5. Outline objectivity and empirical methods as features of science. (4 marks)

6. Discuss the extent to which psychology can be considered a science. Refer to research and/or approaches in your answer. (10 marks)