Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-dfw9g Total loading time: 0.446 Render date: 2022-08-11T09:37:56.952Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Theory Confirmation in Psychology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Chris Swoyer
Affiliation:
Universities of Oklahoma and Minnesota
Thomas C. Monson
Affiliation:
Universities of Oklahoma and Minnesota

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Discussion
Copyright
Copyright © 1975 by the Philosophy of Science Association

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.)

Footnotes

We are indebted to Paul Meehl for numerous discussions on these and other topics. He is, however, not responsible for any errors contained in this paper.

References

Bakan, D. “The Test of Significance in Psychological Research.” In On Method. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1967. Pages 1-29. (Reprinted in [14])Google Scholar
Bandt, C. L. and Boen, J.R. “A Prevalent Misconception about Sample Size, Statistical Significance, and Clinical Importance.” Journal of Period ontology 43 (1972) : 181-183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolles, R. C. “The Difference between Statistical Hypotheses and Scientific Hypotheses.” Psychological Reports 11 (1962): 639-645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camilleri, S.F. “Theory, Probability, and Induction in Social Research.” American Sociological Redell' 27 (1962): 170-178. (Reprinted in [14])CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, W., Lindman, H. and Savage, L. J., “Bayesian Statistical Inference for Psychological Research.” Psychological Review 70 (1963): 193-242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hays, W. L. Statistics for the Social Sciences, (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1973.Google Scholar
Hempel,C. G. “Deductive-Nomological vs. Statistical Explanation.” In Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Vol. III. Edited by H. Feigl and G. Maxwell. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 1966. Pages 98-169.Google Scholar
Jeffreys, R. The Logic of Decision. New York: McGraw-Hili, 1965.Google Scholar
Keuth, H. “On Prior Probabilities of Rejecting Statistical Hypotheses.” Philosophy of Science 40(1973): 538-546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levi,I. Gambling with Truth. Cambridge, Massachuseus: M.I.T. Press, 1967.Google Scholar
Lykken, D, “Statistical Significance in Psychological Research.” Psychological Bulletin 70 (1968)151-159, (Reprinted in [14])Google Scholar
Maxwell, G, “Corroboration with Demarcation.“ In The Philosophy of Karl Popper. Edited by P.A. Schilpp. Laxalle, Illinois: OpenCourt, 1974. Pages 292-321.Google Scholar
Meehl, P.E. “Theory Testing in Psychology and Physics: A Methodological Paradox.” Philosophy of Science 34(1967):103-115, (Reprinted in [14])CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, D., and Henkel, R.E. (eds.). The Significance Test Controversy: A Reader, Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co., 1970.Google Scholar
Popper, K. Conjectures and Refutations. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reichenbach. H. Experience and Prediction. Chicago: University Press, 1938.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, R. and Gaito, J. “The Interpretationof Levels of Significance by Psychological Researchers.” Journal of Psychology 55 (1963):33-38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rozeboom. W.W. “The Fallacy of the Null Hypothesis Significance Test.” Psychological Blilletin 57 (1960): 416-428. (Reprinted in [14])CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salmon, W. The Foundations of Scientiiic Inference. Pittsburgh: University Press, 1966.Google Scholar
Savage, L. J. et al. The Founndations of Statistical Inference. New York: John Riley and Sons, 1962.Google Scholar
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. “Belief in the Law of Small Numbers.” Psychological Bulletin 76 (1971): 105-110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodson, C. E., “Parameter Estimation vs. Hypothesis Testing.” Philosophy of Science 36 (1969): 203-204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org 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.

Theory Confirmation in Psychology
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

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

Theory Confirmation in Psychology
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

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

Theory Confirmation in Psychology
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *