“… Criteria for the scientific nature of knowledge are its validity, reliability, consistency, empirical confirmation and fundamentally possible falsifiability, conceptual coherence, predictive power and practical effectiveness … ”
The main ones among the criteria are truth, objectivity and consistency: “… the specificity of scientific knowledge is reflected in the criteria of scientific character, which distinguish scientific knowledge from non-scientific: 1. The truth of scientific knowledge … . … science seeks to obtain true knowledge by exploring various ways to establish the reliability of scientific knowledge. 2. Intersubjectivity of knowledge. Scientific knowledge is … knowledge of objective relationships and laws of reality. 3. Consistency and validity of scientific knowledge. The most important ways to substantiate the knowledge gained are: A). at the empirical level: — Multiple verifications by observation and experiments. B). not at the theoretical level: — Determination of logical coherence, derivation of knowledge; – Identification of their consistency, compliance with empirical data; — Establishing the ability to describe known phenomena and predict new ones … »
Scientists doubt the usefulness of the discoveries of psychologists
The researchers concluded that most of the discoveries from the world of psychology are questionable, since the results of the research cannot be replicated.
300 psychologists from different parts of the Earth were involved in the study of this issue. Their task was to analyze in detail the results of about a hundred psychological studies, which were published in prestigious peer-reviewed journals. The conclusions turned out to be disappointing: it was possible to achieve such results again only in 39% of cases. Project leader Brian Nosek said this is the first time such a study has been conducted.
For four years, scientists have analyzed the previously published work of their colleagues and accurately reproduced the described methods. Only in a third of cases they managed to achieve similar results. In other words, the conclusions of most psychologists are incorrect: they may contain errors, or they are the product of the desire to get a «beautiful» result.
Some experts have already said that this casts a shadow on psychology as a science. Brian Nosek himself is in no hurry to bury her and believes that psychology and the discoveries made within it are very important. Meanwhile, he emphasizes the need to improve research methods. A number of journals have already changed the rules for publishing materials, listening to new findings.