ArticleIntegrative psychological & behavioral science2020
The Need for Epistemological Vigilance : (Commentary to the Target Article "Psychology: A Giant With Feet of Clay", Zagaria, Andò & Zennaro).
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward a Cultural Evolutionary Psychology: Why the Evolutionary Approach does not Imply Reductionism or Determinism.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2021Article
- From Clay Feet to New Psychology: Starting the Move.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The analysis and proposal of Zagaria, Andò and Zennaro are suggestive, but the essential question is not raised: the need for scientific research to be explicitly based on an epistemological reflection that takes into account the specificity of psychology. In the first and second parts of my comment, I will justify the need for epistemological reflection in psychology, and in the third part, I will analyze, by means of an example, why the option of adopting the principles of evolutionary psychology does not guarantee greater theoretical coherence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32361964What 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.