ArticleIntegrative psychological & behavioral science2020
Moving On Our Feet: For a Nomadic Psychology.
Article in Integrative psychological & behavioral science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Foucault's Social, Community, and Cultural Psychology.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2025Article
- Cleaning Up or Throwing out the Psychological Insight with the Bath Water.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2022Article
- Toward a Cultural Evolutionary Psychology: Why the Evolutionary Approach does not Imply Reductionism or Determinism.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2021Article
- Is Psychology an 'Abysmal' Science? A Review of Rewriting Psychology.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2020Article
- "Systematic Semiotic Organisation and Anthropologisation of the Science of Soul - Towards Cultural Psychology".Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2020Article
- From Clay Feet to New Psychology: Starting the Move.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Zagaria, Andò and Zennaro have provided a useful analysis of the theoretical precariousness of psychology by looking at a number of its core concepts. They propose that evolutionary psychology could be a unifying approach for the otherwise fragmented discipline. In this response, I argue that although evolutionary psychology provides many interesting perspectives on the mental life of human beings, it is much too soon to jump to a unifying conclusion for psychology on its basis. Before beginning the work of explaining the functioning of the mind in evolutionary terms, we need illuminating descriptions of mental life as such. Phenomenological description should precede evolutionary explanation, and the former will reveal that mental life is intentional and normative - something that evolutionary and other explanatory perspectives have difficulties accommodating. When the subject matter is human mental life, it might be better to live with conceptual confusion than obtaining consensus on a misguided foundation. I agree with the authors that psychology stands on feet of clay, but instead of lamenting the "unsteady building" of the discipline, I suggest we embrace a more nomadic life for psychology - moving about on our feet - given the fact that humans perpetually and historically seem to reflect on their own lives, which is a process that should be kept open rather than terminated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.