Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T16:50:09.711Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 January 2022

Joshua W. Clegg
Joshua W. Clegg
Affiliation:
John Jay College, CUNY
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Good Science
Psychological Inquiry as Everyday Moral Practice
 , pp. 180 - 188
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, G., Dobles, I., Gómez, L. H., Kurtiş, T., & Molina, L. E. (2015). Decolonizing Psychological Science: Introduction to the Special Thematic Section. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 3(1), 213–238.Google Scholar
American Psychological Association. (2006). Policy Statement on Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology. American Psychologist, 61, 271–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Psychological Association, Presidential Task Force on the Future of Psychology as a STEM Discipline. (2010). Psychology as a core science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) discipline. Retrieved from www.apa.org.Google Scholar
Banks, M. L., Czoty, P. W., & Negus, S. S. (2017). Utility of Nonhuman Primates in Substance Use Disorders Research. ILAR Journal, 58 (2), 202–215.Google Scholar
Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science (vol. 356). University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Barenbaum, N. B., & Winter, D. G. (2003). Personality. In Freedheim, D. K. and Weiner, I. B. (eds.), Handbook of Psychology (pp. 177–204). John Wiley and Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benjamin, L. T. (2003). Harry Hollingworth and the Shame of Applied Psychology. Thick Description and Fine Texture: Studies in the History of Psychology (pp. 38–56).Google Scholar
Bernstein, R. J. (1983). Beyond Objectivism and Relativism: Science, Hermeneutics, and Praxis. University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Bhatia, S. (2019). Searching for Justice in an Unequal World: Reframing Indigenous Psychology as a Cultural and Political Project. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 39 (2), 107.Google Scholar
Bibace, R., Clegg, J. W., & Valsiner, J. (2009). What’s in a Name? Understanding the Implications of Participant Terminology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 43 (1), 67–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Billig, M. (2011). Writing Social Psychology: Fictional Things and Unpopulated Texts. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50 (1), 4–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blum, D. (1996). The Monkey Wars. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bromberg, W., & Simon, F. (1968). The “Protest” Psychosis: A Special Type of Reactive Psychosis. Archives of General Psychiatry, 19 (2), 155–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinkmann, S. (2004). The Topography of Moral Ecology. Theory & Psychology, 14 (1), 57–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brydon-Miller, M. (2001). Education, Research, and Action Theory and Methods of Participatory. In Tolman, D. L. and Miller, M. B. (eds.), From Subjects to Subjectivities: A Handbook of Interpretive and Participatory Methods (pp. 76–89). New York University Press.Google Scholar
Burman, E. (2006). Emotions and Reflexivity in Feminised Education Action Research. Educational Action Research, 14 (3), 315–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burman, E. (2012). Disciplines for and against Psychology. Universitas Psychologica, 11 (2), 645–662.Google Scholar
Chataway, C. J. (2001). Negotiating the Observer–Observed Relationship. In Tolman, D. L. and Miller, M. B. (eds.), From Subjects to Subjectivities: A Handbook of Interpretive and Participatory Methods (pp. 239–255). New York University Press.Google Scholar
Clegg, J. W. (2010). Uncertainty as a Fundamental Scientific Value. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 44 (3), 245–251.Google Scholar
Clegg, J. W. (2016). Reconsidering Philosophy of Science Pedagogy in Psychology: An Evaluation of Methods Texts. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 36 (4), 199–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, J. W. (2019). The Moral Affordances of Publishing Practices. In Slife, B. D. and Yanchar, S. (eds.), Hermeneutic Moral Realism in Psychology: Theory and Practice (pp. 86–96). Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, J. W., & Slife, B. D. (2005). Epistemology and the Hither Side: A Levinasian Account of Relational Knowing. European Journal of Psychotherapy & Counselling, 7 (1–2), 65–76.Google Scholar
Clegg, J. W., Wiggins, B. J., & Ostenson, J. A. (2020). Overpublication as a Symptom of Audit Culture: A Comment on Phaf (2020). Theory & Psychology, 30 (2), 292–298.Google Scholar
Collins, H. (2010). Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danziger, K. (1990). Constructing the Subject: Historical Origins of Psychological Research. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Daston, L., & Galison, P. (2007). Objectivity. Zone Books.Google Scholar
Deneau, G., Yanagita, T., & Seevers, M. H. (1969). Self-Administration of Psychoactive Substances by the Monkey. Psychopharmacologia, 16 (1), 30–48.Google Scholar
Dewsbury, D. A. (2003). Conflicting Approaches: Operant Psychology Arrives at a Primate Laboratory. The Behavior Analyst, 26 (2), 253–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowling, M. (2006). Approaches to Reflexivity in Qualitative Research. Nurse Researcher, 13 (3).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duffy, M., & Chenail, R. J. (2009). Values in Qualitative and Quantitative Research. Counseling and Values, 53 (1), 22–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feyerabend, P. (1987). Farewell to Reason. Verso.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, P. (1993). Against Method. Verso.Google Scholar
Fine, M. (2016). Just Methods in Revolting Times. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 13 (4), 347–365.Google Scholar
Finlay, L. (2002). Negotiating the Swamp: The Opportunity and Challenge of Reflexivity in Research Practice. Qualitative Research, 2 (2), 209–230.Google Scholar
Fuller, S. (2000). The Governance of Science. Open Press.Google Scholar
Gadamer, H. G. (1975b). Truth and Method. Seabury Press.Google Scholar
Gilbert, G. N., & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora’s Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientists’ Discourse. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a Different Voice. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gluck, J. P. (2016, September 2). Second thoughts of an animal researcher. The New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com.Google Scholar
Goldman, A. (1999). Knowledge in a Social World. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gone, J. P. (2011). Is Psychological Science A-Cultural? Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17 (3), 234.Google Scholar
Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, Reflexivity, and “Ethically Important Moments” in Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10 (2), 261–280.Google Scholar
Haan, N., Bellah, R. N., Rabinow, P., & Sullivan, W. M. (1983). Social Science as Moral Inquiry. Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Hacker, P. M. S. (2015). Philosophy and Scientism: What Cognitive Neuroscience Can, and What it Cannot, Explain. In Williams, R. N. and Robinson, D. N. (eds.), Scientism: The New Orthodoxy (pp. 97–116). Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
Halling, S., Kunz, G., & Rowe, J. O. (1994). The Contributions of Dialogal Psychology to Phenomenological Research. Journal of Humanistic Psychology Special Issue: Dialogue, 34 (1), 109–131.Google Scholar
Haney, C., Banks, W. C., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1973). A Study of Prisoners and Guards in a Simulated Prison. Naval Research Reviews, 9, 1–17.Google Scholar
Haraway, D. (1987). A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s. Australian Feminist Studies, 2 (4), 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harding, S. (1992). After the Neutrality Ideal: Science, Politics, and “Strong Objectivity.” Social Research, 567–587.Google Scholar
Head, J. C., Quigua, F., & Clegg, J. W. (2019). The Radical Potentials of Human Experience: Maslow, Leary, and the Prehistory of Qualitative Inquiry. Qualitative Psychology, 6 (1), 116.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, trans.). Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. (1993). Basic Writings: Revised and Expanded, ed. Krell, D. F.. Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). Most People Are Not WEIRD. Nature, 466 (7302), 29–29.Google Scholar
Herrnstein, R. J., & Murray, C. (1995). The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Hook, D., Kiguwa, P., & Mkhize, N. (2004). Critical Psychology. UCT Press.Google Scholar
Howard, D. (2009). Better Red than Dead – Putting an End to the Social Irrelevance of Postwar Philosophy of Science. Science & Education, 18 (2), 199–220.Google Scholar
Jahoda, M., Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Zeisel, H. (2002). Marienthal: The Sociography of an Unemployed Community. Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Jasanoff, S. (2005). In the Democracies of DNA: Ontological Uncertainty and Political Order in Three States. New Genetics and Society, 24 (2), 139–156.Google Scholar
Jasanoff, S. (2011). Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Jensen, A. (1969). How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement? Harvard Educational Review, 39 (1), 1–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, E. F. (1983). A Feeling for the Organism: The Life and Work of Barbara McClintock. W. H. Freeman & Co.Google Scholar
Kitcher, P. (2003). Science, Truth, and Democracy. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1981) The Manufacture of Knowledge. An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Koch, S. (1973). The Image of Man in Encounter Groups. The American Scholar, 636–652.Google Scholar
Koch, S. (1981). The Nature and Limits of Psychological Knowledge: Lessons of a Century Qua “Science.” American Psychologist, 36 (3), 257–269.Google Scholar
Kraft, A. (2015, December 14). NIH to stop baby monkey experiments. CBS News. Retrieved from www.cbsnews.com.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd enl. ed.). University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (2004). Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern. Critical Inquiry, 30 (2), 225–248.Google Scholar
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Levinas, E. (1969). Totality and Infinity (A. Lingis, trans.). Duquesne University Press (original work published 1961).Google Scholar
Levinas, E. (1997). Otherwise Than Being: Or Beyond Essence (A. Lingis, trans.). Duquesne University Press (original work published 1981).Google Scholar
Levitt, H. M., Bamberg, M., Creswell, J. W., Frost, D. M., Josselson, R., & Suárez-Orozco, C. (2018). Journal Article Reporting Standards for Qualitative Primary, Qualitative Meta-Analytic, and Mixed Methods Research in Psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board Task Force Report. American Psychologist, 73 (1), 26.Google Scholar
Livingston, E. (1999). Cultures of Proving. Social Studies of Science, 29, 867–888.Google Scholar
Lomax, E. (1977). The Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial: Some of its Contributions to Early Research in Child Development. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 13 (3), 283–293.Google Scholar
Longino, H. E. (1995). Gender, Politics, and the Theoretical Virtues. Synthese, 104 (3), 383–397.Google Scholar
Longino, H. E. (2002). The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lovasz, N., & Clegg, J. W. (2019). The Social Production of Evidence in Psychology: A Case Study of the APA Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice. In O’Doherty, K., Osbeck, L., Schraube, E., and Yen, J. (eds.), Psychological Studies of Science and Technology (pp. 213–235). Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lynch, M. (1999). Silence in Context: Ethnomethodology and Social Theory. Human Studies, 22, 211–233.Google Scholar
Magwaza, A. (2001). Submissions to the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission: The Reflections of a Commissioner on the Culpability of Psychology. In Duncan, N., van Niekerk, A., de la Rey, C., and Seedat, M. (eds.), “Race,” Racism, Knowledge Production and Psychology in South Africa (pp. 37–59). Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Marecek, J., Kimmel, E. B., Crawford, M., & Hare-Mustin, R. T. (2003). Psychology of Women and Gender. In Freedheim, D. K. and Weiner, I. B. (eds.), Handbook of Psychology (pp. 249–268). John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Maslow, A. H. (1966). The Psychology of Science: A Reconnaissance. Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Melchert, T. P. (2016). Leaving Behind our Preparadigmatic Past: Professional Psychology as A Unified Clinical Science. American Psychologist, 71 (6), 486–496.Google Scholar
Morawski, J. (2001a). Gifts Bestowed, Gifts Withheld: Assessing Psychological Theory with a Kochian Attitude. American Psychologist, 56 (5), 433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morawski, J. (2001b). Feminist Research Methods: Bringing Culture to Science. In Tolman, D. L. and Miller, M. B. (eds.), From Subjects to Subjectivities: A Handbook of Interpretive and Participatory Methods (pp. 57–75). New York University Press.Google Scholar
Morawski, J. (2011). Our Debates: Finding, Fixing, and Enacting Reality. Theory & Psychology, 21 (2), 260–274.Google Scholar
Morawski, J. (2015). Epistemological Dizziness in the Psychology Laboratory: Lively Subjects, Anxious Experimenters, and Experimental Relations, 1950–1970. Isis, 106 (3), 567–597.Google Scholar
Morawski, J. (2019). The Replication Crisis: How Might Philosophy and Theory of Psychology Be of Use? Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 39 (4), 218.Google Scholar
Niaz, M. (2010). Science Curriculum and Teacher Education: The Role of Presuppositions, Contradictions, Controversies and Speculations vs Kuhn’s “Normal Science.” Teaching and Teacher Education, 26 (4), 891–899.Google Scholar
Nicholas, L. J. (2014). A History of South African (SA) Psychology. Universitas Psychologica, 13 (SPE5), 1983–1991.Google Scholar
Noddings, N. (2013). Caring: A Relational Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Nosek, B. A., Aarts, A. A., Anderson, J. E., Kappes, H. B., & Collaboration, Open Science. (2015). Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science. Science, 349 (6251).Google Scholar
Nosek, B. A., Spies, J. R., & Motyl, M. (2012). Scientific Utopia: II. Restructuring Incentives and Practices to Promote Truth over Publishability. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7 (6), 615–631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Reilly, M., Parker, N., & Hutchby, I. (2011). Ongoing Processes of Managing Consent: The Empirical Ethics of Using Video-Recording in Clinical Practice and Research. Clinical Ethics, 6 (4), 179–185.Google Scholar
Osbeck, L. (2018). Values in Psychological Science: Re-imagining Epistemic Priorities at a New Frontier. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ostenson, J. A., Clegg, J. W., & Wiggins, B. J. (2017). Industrialized Higher Education and its Sustainable Alternatives. The Review of Higher Education, 40 (4), 509–532.Google Scholar
Padovani, F., Richardson, A., & Tsou, J. Y. (eds.) (2015). Objectivity in Science: New Perspectives from Science and Technology Studies. Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, 310. Springer.Google Scholar
Peirce, C. (1935). Principles of Philosophy. In Hartshorne, C. & Weiss, P. (eds.), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Pelham, B. W., & Blanton, H. (2007). Conducting Research in Psychology: Measuring the Weight of Smoke. Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Peterson, D. (2015). All That Is Solid: Bench-building at the Frontiers of Two Experimental Sciences. American Sociological Review, 80 (6), 1201–1225.Google Scholar
Peterson, D. (2016). The Baby Factory: Difficult Research Objects, Disciplinary Standards, and the Production of Statistical Significance. Socius, 2, DOI: 10.1177/2378023115625071.Google Scholar
Phillips, N. (2014, July 31). University of Wisconsin to reprise controversial monkey studies. Wisconsin Watch. Retrieved from www.wisconsinwatch.org.Google Scholar
Plato. (1981). Five Dialogues. (G.M.A. Grube, trans.). Hackett Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Proctor, R. N. (1991). Value-free Science? Purity and Power in Modern Knowledge. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Pryiomka, K., & Clegg, J. W. (2020). A Historical Overview of Psychological Inquiry as a Contested Method. In Pickren, W. (ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rabinow, P. (1983). Humanism as Nihilism: The Bracketing of Truth and Seriousness in American Cultural Anthropology. In Haan, N., Bellah, R. N., Rabinow, P., & Sullivan, W. M. (eds.), Social Science as Moral Inquiry (pp. 52–75). Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Richardson, F. C., Fowers, B. J., & Guignon, C. B. (1999). Re-envisioning Psychology: Moral Dimensions of Theory and Practice. Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Roediger, H., III (2004). What Should They Be Called? Observer, 17 (4), 5, 46–48.Google Scholar
Rogers, A. (2017). Star neuroscientist Tom Insel leaves the Google-spawned verily for… a Startup. Wired. Retrieved from www. wired. com/.Google Scholar
Rose, A. C. (2011). The Invention of Uncertainty in American Psychology: Intellectual Conflict and Rhetorical Resolution, 1890–1930. History of Psychology, 14 (4), 356.Google Scholar
Rosnow, R. L., & Rosenthal, R. (2008). Beginning Behavioral Research: A Conceptual Primer. Pearson/Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Rushton, J. P. (1995). Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective. Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Principe, L. M. (2015). Scientism and the Religion of Science. In Robsinson, D. N. and Williams, R. N. (eds.), Scientism: The New Orthodoxy (pp. 41–61). Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Seedat, M. (1998). A Characterisation of South African Psychology (1948–1988): The Impact of Exclusionary Ideology. South African Journal of Psychology, 28 (2), 74–84.Google Scholar
Shore, C. (2008). Audit Culture and Illiberal Governance. Anthropological Theory, 8 (3), 278–298.Google Scholar
Sokal, M. M. (2010). Scientific Biography, Cognitive Deficits, and Laboratory Practice: James McKeen Cattell and Early American Experimental Psychology, 1880–1904. Isis, 101 (3), 531–554.Google Scholar
Solomon, M. (2008). STS and Social Epistemology of Science. In Hackett, E. J., Amsterdamska, O., Lynch, M., and Wajcman, J. (eds.), The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (pp. 241–258). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sugarman, J. (2015). Neoliberalism and Psychological Ethics. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 35 (2), 103–116.Google Scholar
Sugarman, J., & Thrift, E. (2017). Neoliberalism and the Psychology of Time. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, DOI: 10.1177/0022167817716686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. K. (1993). After the Demise of Empiricism: The Problem of Judging Social and Educational Inquiry. Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
Smith, J. K. A. (2015). Science as Cultural Performance: Leveling the Playing Field in the Theology and Science Conversation. In Williams, R. N. and Robinson, D. N. (eds.), Scientism: The New Orthodoxy (pp. 177–191). Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Smith, L. T. (2013). Social Justice, Transformation and Indigenous Methodologies. In Rinehart, R. E., Barbour, K. N., and Pope, C. C. (eds.) Ethnographic Worldviews: Transformations and Social Justice (pp. 15–20). Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Stewart, A. J., & Shields, S. A. (2001). Gatekeepers as Change Agents: What Are Feminist Psychologists Doing in Places Like This. In Tolman, D. L. and Miller, M. B. (eds.), From Subjects to Subjectivities: A Handbook of Interpretive and Participatory Methods (pp. 304–319). New York University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. A. (1996). Defining Science. University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Teo, T. (2010). What is Epistemological Violence in the Empirical Social Sciences? Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4 (5), 295–303.Google Scholar
Teo, T. (2015). Are Psychological “Ethics Codes” Morally Oblique? Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 35 (2), 78.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. F., & Zola, S. M. (2003). Biological Psychology. In Freedheim, D. K. and Weiner, I. B. (eds.), Handbook of Psychology (pp. 47–66). John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Trafimow, D., & Marks, M. (2016). Editorial. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 38, 1–2.Google Scholar
Traweek, S. (1988). Beamtimes and Lifetimes: The World of High Energy Physicists. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tuval-Mashiach, R. (2017). Raising the Curtain: The Importance of Transparency in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Psychology, 4 (2), 126.Google Scholar
Tweney, R. D., & Budzynski, C. A. (2000). The Scientific Status of American Psychology in 1900. American Psychologist, 55 (9), 1014.Google Scholar
van Fraasen, B. C. (2015). Naturalism in Epistemology. In Robsinson, D. N. and Williams, R. N. (eds.), Scientism: The New Orthodoxy (pp. 63–95). Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Vasquez, M. J. (2012). Psychology and Social Justice: Why We Do What We Do. American Psychologist, 67 (5), 337.Google Scholar
Walsh, R. T. (2015). Bending the Arc of North American Psychologists’ Moral Universe toward Communicative Ethics and Social Justice. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 35 (2), 90.Google Scholar
Weisstein, N. (1993). Power Resistance and Science: A Call for a Revitalized Feminist Psychology. Feminism & Psychology, 3 (2), 239–245.Google Scholar
Wiggins, B. J. (2011). Confronting the Dilemma of Mixed Methods. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 31 (1), 44.Google Scholar
Wiggins, B. J., & Christopherson, C. D. (2019). The Replication Crisis in Psychology: An Overview for Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 39, 202–217.Google Scholar
Williams, R. N. (2015). Introduction. In Williams, R. N. and Robinson, D. N. (eds.), Scientism: The New Orthodoxy (pp. 1–21). Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Winston, A. S. (1998). Science in the Service of the Far Right: Henry E. Garrett, the IAAEE, and the Liberty Lobby. Journal of Social Issues, 54 (1), 179–210.Google Scholar
Young, J. L. (2013). A Brief History of Self-report in American Psychology. In Clegg, J. W. (ed.), Self-observation in the Social Sciences (pp. 45–65). Transaction.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • References
  • Joshua W. Clegg
  • Book: Good Science
  • Online publication: 06 January 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009022217.017
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • References
  • Joshua W. Clegg
  • Book: Good Science
  • Online publication: 06 January 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009022217.017
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • References
  • Joshua W. Clegg
  • Book: Good Science
  • Online publication: 06 January 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009022217.017
Available formats
×