Controversies - Scientific Status

Introduction - What do we mean by science?

Psychology is often described as “the science of behaviour,” but there has long been debate over whether it is truly a science.

A science is usually defined as the systematic study of the world through observation and experiment, with key features such as objectivity, controlled observation, falsifiability, and replicability. These features help us decide whether a subject can be classed as scientific.

In my opinion, psychology should be seen as a science because it uses the scientific method to study human behaviour through research, testing theories, and changing explanations when new evidence is found. Although, psychology could be seen as less scientific because it does not have a single paradigm, as there are many different explanations for the same behaviour.

Some argue that human behaviour may be too complex and unpredictable to be studied scientifically, which is why this remains a major controversy in psychology.

Benefits of being a science/ Counter to costs - Milgram (1963) - Strength

One strength of psychology being a science is that it uses the scientific method which is empirical, meaning explanations are based on evidence from observation and experiments rather than unfounded beliefs.

• For example, in Milgram’s (1963) obedience study, the authority figure and instructions were carefully controlled to test levels of obedience.

• This showed scientifically that ordinary people may obey a perceived authority figure even when asked to harm others, suggesting that behaviour is influenced more by the social situation than the innate personality of the individual.

• Milgram originally aimed to understand what was different about the German people to explain behaviour during the The Holocaust, but his findings suggested obedience could occur in anyone.

• This greater understanding of human nature is important for society to be able to explain and better understand political and historical events as well as social behaviour.

• Makes us more aware of the capabilities of humans, stop history from repeating itself.

Benefits of being a science/ Counter to costs - Homosexuality - Strength

• Another example where the scientific nature of psychology has had an effect on society is with the changing diagnosis of homosexuality. Historically, homosexuality was seen as a perversion, or as a mental illness, and early editions of the DSM classified it as such.

• However, as more and more empirical research was carried out, this classification was seen to be unjustifiable, and eventually it was removed from the DSM. This has huge social consequences; homosexuality is no longer viewed as a problem that needs treatment, but as an alternative and equally valid sexuality.

• Homosexual people in the UK today have the same legal rights as their heterosexual counterparts.

• It could be argued that the shift in the public perception of homosexuality can be attributed (at least in part) to its declassification as a mental illness.

This is just one example of how empirical, scientific research in psychology can have a trickle-down effect in society in general.

Changing nature of science - Wundt & Freud

The changing nature of science can be seen in how psychology has developed over time.

• It has changed from philosophical ideas to using more scientific methods and evidence.

• Wilhelm Wundt is often seen as the start of modern scientific psychology.

• He opened the first psychology laboratory in Leipzig in 1879.

• He used introspection, where trained participants were asked to observe and report their own thoughts, feelings and sensations when shown a stimulus.

• This was one of the first attempts to study the mind in a controlled and systematic way.

• Sigmund Freud also tried to explain behaviour scientifically.

• He used case studies and clinical interviews with patients.

• For example, he analysed patients’ dreams, memories and unconscious conflicts to develop theories such as the id, ego and superego.

• This shows a move towards using evidence from real people, even though his methods were less scientific than lab studies (unfalsifiable)

Changing nature of science - Watson

Later, John B. Watson made psychology much more scientific through behaviourism.

• He argued that psychologists should only study observable behaviour, not thoughts or feelings.

• He was influenced by Ivan Pavlov and focused on stimulus-response learning.

• For example, in the Little Albert study, Watson showed how fear could be learned through classical conditioning.

• This made psychology more objective and measurable.

The scientific process itself has also changed.

• Peer review became an important part of science.

• This means research is checked by other psychologists before publication.

• Watson’s experiment was filmed → providing a visual record of everything that happened, this means that future psychologists can view the original footage, allowing them to see wether Watson's conclusions were correct.

  Also, because of the filming and the detailed procedures that Watson recorded, this study could be replicated and the results checked for reliability.

• They look at whether the methods, findings and conclusions are valid, reliable and ethical.

• This improves the quality and credibility of research.

Changing Nature of Science - Kuhn

Thomas Kuhn introduced the idea of a paradigm.

• A paradigm is an accepted framework or set of assumptions that guides research in a science.

• For example, behaviourism had the paradigm that all behaviour is learned from the environment.

• When new evidence challenges old ideas, a paradigm shift occurs.

• This means one way of thinking is replaced by another, such as the shift from behaviourism to cognitive psychology.

• Therefore, psychology clearly shows the changing nature of science, as its methods, theories and standards have developed over time.

However, not a single paradigm.

Costs of being a science - Popper (1972) & Bowlby (1944)

A cost of psychology being a science is that scientific methods are not always suitable for studying human behaviour.

• Human behaviour is complex, subjective and influenced by context, making it difficult to measure with full objectivity.

• Karl Popper (1972) argued that observation can never be fully objective because researchers always observe with expectations, assumptions and prior theories in mind.

• This can be directly applied to John Bowlby’s 44 thieves study.

• Bowlby used case studies and interviews, which are non-scientific methods compared to controlled experiments, and concluded that maternal deprivation caused delinquency.

• However, his interpretation may have been influenced by his own hypothesis and researcher bias. Participants may also have shown socially desirable behaviour during interviews.

• This makes the findings subjective, difficult to replicate and less scientific.

• Furthermore, this demonstrates that psychology often relies on non-scientific methods to understand behaviour.

A cost of psychology as a science is that qualitative methodologies could not be used; experiments would be favoured, meaning that qualitative information about participants could never be gathered.

Psychology cannot rely only on the scientific method, because qualitative information about participants makes for better therapies tailored to individual needs.

Costs of being a science - Laing (1965) + Watson & Rayner

Another cost is that psychology may become too reductionist when it aims to be scientific.

• Reductionism means reducing complex behaviour into simple variables or measurable parts, which can oversimplify behaviour and ignore the full human experience.

• Laing (1965) criticised scientific explanations of mental illness. He argued that disorders such as schizophrenia are often reduced to symptoms and biological causes.

• This ignores the patient’s personal distress, emotions and lived experience. Laing believed individuals should be treated as unique people, not just a set of symptoms.

• Furthermore, Replicability is scientific, but due to the methodologies and participants used in psychology, it is not always possible to replicate research.

• For example, Watson and Rayner were able to classically condition Little Albert to form a phobia of a white rat by continually pairing its presence with a loud bang that scared the baby.

• Due to the fact that only one male baby was used, it would be near impossible to fully replicate this research because no other participant would have the same upbringing or temperament as Little Albert.

• Because replicability is not always possible, the reliability of research cannot be tested and validated.

• This reduces the reliability and generalisability of the findings.

A cost of psychology being a science is that it can encourage reductionist explanations that ignore the complexity and uniqueness of behaviour.

Methodologies used by the various approaches - Biological & Behaviourist (Scientific)

Different approaches in psychology use different methodologies, which affects how scientific they are. The biological approach is often seen as highly scientific because it uses controlled laboratory methods such as brain scans, twin studies and animal research.

For example, Raine used PET scans in a controlled study to investigate brain activity in murderers with an insanity plea. This makes the approach objective, reliable and replicable, as the same equipment and procedures can be used again.

Twin and family studies also allow psychologists to test falsifiable predictions about genetic influences on behaviour. Similarly, the behaviourist approach uses controlled laboratory experiments, observations and animal studies.

For example, Watson and Rayner used a controlled lab setting in the Little Albert study to show how phobias can be learned through classical conditioning. This method is scientific because it is controlled, measurable and easy to replicate, which increases credibility and allows findings to be generalised, for example in therapies such as systematic desensitisation.

However, both approaches can be criticised for being reductionist and often taking place in artificial environments, which may reduce ecological validity.

Methodologies used by the various approaches - Cognitive, Psychodynamic & Positive

The cognitive approach is also relatively scientific because it often uses laboratory experiments, field experiments and questionnaires to investigate internal mental processes such as memory and perception.

For example, Loftus and Palmer used a controlled experiment to investigate the effect of leading questions on eyewitness testimony, while Richard Atkinson and Richard Shiffrin developed the multi-store model of memory using experimental evidence.

However, questionnaires and self-report methods can be subjective, as participants may be dishonest or lack insight. In contrast, the psychodynamic and positive approaches are often seen as less scientific.

Freud and Bowlby relied on case studies, clinical interviews and rich qualitative data, which provide detailed insight but are often subjective, difficult to replicate and unfalsifiable.

Similarly, the positive approach, for example Myers and Diener, often uses questionnaires and interviews, which may lack objectivity and reliability because responses depend on self-report.

Therefore, the methodology used by each approach strongly influences how scientific it can be considered.

Conclusion

Agree/ disagree with specific quote in question. (To agree must have more points for & to disagree must have more pounts against - can sit on the fence if providing completely balanced argument) This has more positive points

Justify opinion using studies & mini conclusions mentioned throughout essay.