ArticleIntegrative psychological & behavioral science2020
From Clay Feet to New Psychology: Starting the Move.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Closer Look at the Giant with Feet of Clay: Analyzing and Refining Neff´s Theory of Self-Compassion.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2024Article
- Towards a Framework for Unifying Research in Theoretical Psychology.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2024Article
- The Essence of What it Is to Act Rationally: A Perspective on Distinctively Human Action Based on Aristotelian Philosophy and Evolutionary Science.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2024Article
- Activity Theory for the De-Structuralized Modernity.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
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This Special Issue sets the stage for constructive integration of psychology with relevant phenomena it needs to study, and with its interdisciplinary collaboration possibilities. Based on a regular submission of an analysis of the conceptual network of psychology (Zagaria et al. 2020) an international constructive discussion ensued, with charting out three potential future pathways to psychology as science: (1) theoretical elaboration of the person-centered and idiographic approaches and move from "evidence-based" to experience-based research; (2) advancement of general developmental science perspective beyond the traditions of evolutionary psychology along the lines of the genetic logic of James Mark Baldwin, and (3) building interdisciplinary synthesis between psychology and semiotics in the domain of cultural psychology. The progress in contemporary biology (epigenetics) and qualitative mathematics can provide the epistemological support for this move.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32588372What 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.