ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024
Reorienting psychological science.
Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2024. 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.
- Ball Don't Lie: Commentary on Chemero (2024) and Wallot et al. (2024).Topics in cognitive science · 2026Article
- People, places, things and communities: expanding behaviour settings theory in the twenty-first century.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 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
Psychological phenomena occur across a wide range of scales, ranging from small, quick events of neurology and biology, to broader, more prolonged unfoldings typical of extended cultural practices. Although theories deployed by psychologists of different stripes have tended to incorporate these different scales, this is typically done in a manner that is implicit, and often unsystematic. That is, typical psychological research is conducted in a manner that is 'scale-blind'. In this article, I explore some of the historical and more recent recognition of this scale-blindness and place it in the context of recent work on the concept and implications of scale. I conclude by elucidating some of the important ways in which behaviour settings theory, and the researchers who developed it, are explicit and disciplined in their approach to scale, and how such scale-aware work promises practical value in improving scientific practice. This article is part of the theme issue 'People, places, things, and communities: expanding behaviour settings theory in the 21st century'.
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.