ArticleJournal for person-oriented research2021
Averting the Next Credibility Crisis in Psychological Science: Within-Person Methods for Personalized Diagnostics and Intervention.
Article in Journal for person-oriented research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Student motivation and instructional clarity: Linking experience sampling method data to objective behavioural observations.The British journal of educational psychology · 2025Article
- Why and When You Should Avoid Using z-scores in Graphs Displaying Profile or Group Differences.Journal for person-oriented research · 2025Article
- Specific, situated, intra-individual, ambivalent, and open: integrating and advancing the research on entrepreneurial passion.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
- Positioning adolescence in the developmental timeline.Journal of research on adolescence : the official journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence · 2024Article
- How peer status and ability track shape behavioral disengagement over the transition from primary to secondary school.Journal of research on adolescence : the official journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence · 2024Article
- Causal inference on human behaviour.Nature human behaviour · 2024Review
- The direction of effects between parenting and adolescent affective well-being in everyday life is family specific.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Person, Population, Mechanism. Three Main Branches of Psychological Science.Journal for person-oriented research · 2023Article
- Temporal associations between depressive symptoms, self-esteem, and satisfaction with family life: A 15-year study.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- [Growth trajectories of intrinsic value beliefs in mathematics and French: Relations with career orientations].Zeitschrift fur Erziehungswissenschaft : ZfE · 2022Article
- The Central Role of the Concept of Person in Psychological Science.Journal for person-oriented research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Personalizing assessments, predictions, and treatments of individuals is currently a defining trend in psychological research and applied fields, including personalized learning, personalized medicine, and personalized advertisement. For instance, the recent pandemic has reminded parents and educators of how challenging yet crucial it is to get the right learning task to the right student at the right time. Increasingly, psychologists and social scientists are realizing that the between-person methods that we have long relied upon to describe, predict, and treat individuals may fail to live up to these tasks (e.g., Molenaar, 2004). Consequently, there is a risk of a credibility loss, possibly similar to the one seen during the replicability crisis (Ioannides, 2005), because we have only started to understand how many of the conclusions that we tend to draw based on between-person methods are based on a misunderstanding of what these methods can tell us and what they cannot. An imminent methodological revolution will likely lead to a change of even well-established psychological theories (Barbot et al., 2020). Fortunately, methodological solutions for personalized descriptions and predictions, such as many within-person analyses, are available and undergo rapid development, although they are not yet embraced in all areas of psychology, and some come with their own limitations. This article first discusses the extent of the theory-method gap, consisting of theories about within-person patterns being studied with between-person methods in psychology, and the potential loss of trust that might follow from this theory-method gap. Second, this article addresses advantages and limitations of available within-person methods. Third, this article discusses how within-person methods may help improving the individual descriptions and predictions that are needed in many applied fields that aim for tailored individual solutions, including personalized learning and personalized medicine.
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.