REVIEW PAPER
Towards a comprehensive model of scientific research and professional practice in psychology
 
More details
Hide details
1
Institute of Psychology, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poznan, Poland
Submission date: 2016-02-01
Acceptance date: 2016-03-01
Online publication date: 2016-03-18
Publication date: 2016-03-18
 
Current Issues in Personality Psychology 2016;4(1):1–10
 
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
In this article I present a model of associations between two social domains: the scientific research domain (here psychology) and the professional practice domain. In the former case, its quality is determined by social and individual methodological awareness (MA). I introduce my own definition of MA. What determines the validity and usefulness of practical actions undertaken by professionals (e.g., assessment, therapy) in the practice domain is the accurately constructed empirical theory high in descriptive power, explanatory power and predictive power. I propose a model (my own conceptualization) in which I analyze information flow between the domains of scientific research (psychology as a science) and professional practice (psychology as a profession). In the subsequent and final part I discuss my own model which links theory and practice: Scientific Research and Professional Practice in Psychology (SRPPP). The article ends with a presentation of three contexts in which the interrelationship between theory and practice is immersed: the ethical, psychological and cultural contexts.
 
REFERENCES (53)
1.
Ajdukiewicz, K. (1974). Pragmatic logic. Dordrecht-Holland/Boston-USA: Reidel.
 
2.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Author.
 
3.
American Psychological Association. (2014). Guidelines for clinical supervision in health service psychology. Retrieved from http://apa.org/about/policy/gu....
 
4.
American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code....
 
5.
American Psychological Association. (2008). Report of the task force on the implementation of the multicultural guidelines. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/about/poli....
 
6.
American Psychological Association. (2003). Guidelines on multicultural education, training, research, practice, and organizational change for psychologists. American Psychologist, 58, 377–402.
 
7.
American Psychological Association. (1982). Ethical principles in the conduct of research with human participants (rev. ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
 
8.
APA publications and communications board working group on journal article reporting standards. (2008). Reporting standards for research in psychology. Why do we need them? What might they be? American Psychologist, 63, 839–851.
 
9.
APA presidential task force on evidence-based practice. (2006). Evidence-based practice in psychology. American Psychologist, 61, 271–285.
 
10.
British Psychological Society. (2010). Code of human research ethics. Retrieved from http://www.bps.org.uk/sites/de....
 
11.
Brown, A. (2014). Expert Testimony and the Daubert and Frye Standards. Retrieved from http://www.aquilogic.com/pdf/E....
 
12.
Brzeziński, J. (2012). Jakich kompetencji badawczych oczekujemy od psychologa? [What competencies are expected from a psychologist?]. In: H. J. Grzegołowska-Klarkowska (ed.), Agresja, socjalizacja, edukacja. Refleksje i inspiracje [Aggression, socialization and education. Reflections and inspirations] (pp. 383–409). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Akademii Pedagogiki Specjalnej.
 
13.
Brzeziński, J. (2013). Methodological awareness and ethical awareness in the context of university education (on the example of psychology). In: B. Bokus (ed.), Responsibility. A cross-disciplinary perspective (pp. 261–277). Warszawa: Lexem.
 
14.
Brzeziński, J. (2008). Badania eksperymentalne w psychologii i pedagogice [Experimental research in psychology and education] (2nd ed.). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
 
15.
Brzeziński, J., & Zakrzewska, M. (2010). Metodologia. Podstawy metodologiczne i statystyczne prowadzenia badań naukowych w psychologii [Methodology. Methodological and statistical foundations for scientific research in psychology]. In: J. Strelau.
 
16.
& D. Doliński (eds.), Psychologia akademicka. Podręcznik [Psychology. The handbook] (pp. 175–302). Gdańsk: Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.
 
17.
Chambers, C. D., Feredoes, E., Muthukumaraswamy, S. D., & Etchells. P. J. (2014). Instead of “playing the game” it is time to change the rules: Registered Reports at AIMS Neuroscience and beyond. AIMS Neuroscience, 1, 4–17. Retrieved from http://orca.cf.ac.uk/59475/1/A....
 
18.
Chambers, C., & Munafo, M. (2013). Trust in science would be improved by study pre-registration. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/sci....
 
19.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.
 
20.
Cook T. D., & Campbell D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation. Design & analysis issues for field settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co.
 
21.
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993). (92-102), 509 U.S. 579. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/su....
 
22.
European Federation of Professional Psychologists Associations. (1995). Meta–Code of Ethics. Retrieved from ethics.efpa.eu/meta-code/.
 
23.
Frankfort-Nachmias, Ch., & Nachmias, D. (1996). Research methods in the social sciences (5th ed.). New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
 
24.
Grove, W. M., & Barden, R. C. (1999). Protecting the integrity of the legal system: The admissibility of testimony from mental health experts under Daubert/Kumho analyses. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 224–242.
 
25.
Gulliksen, H. (1950). Theory of mental tests. New York, NY: J. Wiley.
 
26.
Hardin, E. E., Robitschek, C., Flores, L. Y., Navarro, R. L., & Ashton, M. W. (2014). The cultural lens approach to evaluating cultural validity of psychological theory. American Psychologist, 69, 656–668.
 
27.
International Union of Psychological Science. (2008). Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists. Retrieved from International Union of Psychological Science website http://www.iupsys.net/about/go....
 
28.
Jacob, F. (1973). The logic of life: A history of heredity. New York: Pantheon Books.
 
29.
Jones, C., Shillito-Clarke, C., Syme, G., Hill, D., Casemore, R., & Murdin, L. (2000). Questions of ethics counselling and therapy. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
 
30.
Kirk, R. E. (1995). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks.
 
31.
Marion Merrell Dow. (n.d.). In: Wikipedia. Retrieved December 24, 2015 from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/ind....
 
32.
Mintz, J., Drake R., & Crits-Christoph P. (1996) Efficacy and effectiveness of psychotherapy: two paradigms, one science. American Psychologist, 51, 1084–1085.
 
33.
Nathan, P., Stuart, S., & Dolan, S. (2000). Research on psychotherapy efficacy and effectiveness. Between Scylla and Charybdis? Psychological Bulletin, 126, 964–981.
 
34.
Orne M. T. (1962). On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: With particular reference to demand characteristics and their implication. American Psychologist, 17, 776–783.
 
35.
Quintana, S. M., Troyano, N., & Taylor, G. (2001). Cultural validity and inherent challenges in quantitative methods for multicultural research. In: J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (2nd ed., pp. 604–630). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
 
36.
Pedhazur, E. J. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research. Explanation and research (3th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
 
37.
Popper, K. (2005). The logic of scientific discovery [Adobe Digitals Editions version]. Retrieved from http://strangebeautiful.com/ot....
 
38.
Qualification Policy. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.pearsonclinical.com....
 
39.
Reichenbach, H. (1938). Experience and prediction. An analysis of the foundations and the structure of knowledge. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
 
40.
Ritzler, B., Erard, R., & Pettigrew, G. (2002). Protecting the integrity of Rorschach expert witnesses. A Reply to Grove and Barden (1999) Re: The Admissibility of Testimony Under Daubert/Kumho Analyses. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 8, 201–215.
 
41.
Rosenthal, R. (1963). On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: The experimenter’s hypothesis as unintended determinant of experimental results. American Scientist, 51, 268–283.
 
42.
Rosenthal, R. (2002). Covert communication in classrooms, clinics, courtrooms, and cubicles. American Psychologist, 57, 839–849.
 
43.
Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow R. L. (eds.). (2009). Artifacts in behavioral research. Rosenthal and Rosnow’s classic books (A re-issue of Artifact in behavioral research; Experimenter effects in behavioral research; & The volunteer subject). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
 
44.
Rosenthal, R. (1994). Science and ethics in conducting, analyzing, and reporting psychological research. Psychological Science, 5, 127–134.
 
45.
Rosenzweig, S. (1933). The experimental situation as a psychological problem. Psychological Review, 40, 337–354.
 
46.
Schmidt, F. L. (1992). What do data really mean? Research findings, meta-analysis and cumulative knowledge in psychology. American Psychologist, 47, 1173–1181.
 
47.
Seligman, M. E. P. (1995). The effectiveness of psychotherapy: The Consumer Reports study. American Psychologist, 50, 965–974.
 
48.
Spendel, Z. (2005). Metodologia badań psychologicznych jako forma świadomości metodologicznej [Methodology of psychological research as a form of methodological consciousness]. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
 
49.
Spendel, Z. (2014). O pewnych kontrowersjach i nieporozumieniach wokół „teorii psychologicznej” i „psychologii teoretycznej” [About some controversies and misunderstandings related to “psychological theory” and “theoretical psychology”]. Czasopismo Psychologiczne, 20, 55–64.
 
50.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidel, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
 
51.
van der Linden, W. J., & Hambleton, R. K. (eds.). (1997). Handbook of modern item response theory. New York, NY: Springer.
 
52.
Wilkinson, L. & Task force on statistical inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594–604.
 
53.
Winer, B. J., Brown, D. R., & Michels, K. M. (1991). Statistical principles in experimental design (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
 
eISSN:2353-561X
ISSN:2353-4192