ArticleJournal for person-oriented research2024
On Persons, Populations, and Causal Mechanisms Some Critical Reflections on Lundh (2023).
Article in Journal for person-oriented research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Person, Population, Mechanism. A Rejoinder to Critics and an Elaboration of the Three-Branch Model.Journal for person-oriented research · 2024Article
- The 10th yearly volume of JPOR is complete.Journal for person-oriented research · 2024Article
- Further Critical Reflections on the Notion of a "Population Psychology".Journal for person-oriented research · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While agreeing with Lundh (2023) on many of his major points, this article also questions the notion of a 'population psychology.' It is argued that the knowledge produced in population-level studies, whether correlational, experimental, or mixed, is inherently demographic in nature. Concerning individual-level studies, agreement with Lundh (2023) is expressed concerning the need to distinguish between a conception of individuals as mere depositories of neurophysiological mechanisms on the one hand, and as active, purposeful agents on the other. It is suggested that the conceptual framework called 'critical personalism' would well serve a scientific psychology committed to the latter view.
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.