You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Theory-Testing in Psychology and Physics: A Methodological Paradox
Paul E. Meehl
Philosophy of Science
Vol. 34, No. 2 (Jun., 1967), pp. 103-115
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/186099
Page Count: 13
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Psychology, Null hypothesis, Social psychology, Philosophical psychology, Psychological research, Experimental psychology, Physics, Test theory, Probabilities, Psychological techniques
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Because physical theories typically predict numerical values, an improvement in experimental precision reduces the tolerance range and hence increases corroborability. In most psychological research, improved power of a statistical design leads to a prior probability approaching 1/2 of finding a significant difference in the theoretically predicted direction. Hence the corroboration yielded by "success" is very weak, and becomes weaker with increased precision. "Statistical significance" plays a logical role in psychology precisely the reverse of its role in physics. This problem is worsened by certain unhealthy tendencies prevalent among psychologists, such as a premium placed on experimental "cuteness" and a free reliance upon ad hoc explanations to avoid refutation.
Philosophy of Science © 1967 The University of Chicago Press