Common Criticisms in Psychology Paper

1470 Words May 10th, 2011 6 Pages
Common Criticisms in Psychology Paper
University of Phoenix
August 9, 2009

Common Criticisms in Psychology Paper The artificiality of inventive conditions in experimental environments is a repeated concern. How real can laboratory-based research be? This paper will explain the criticism of artificiality in the discipline of psychology and apply this criticism to at least three sub disciplines within psychology. This paper will also compare and contrast the breakthrough model of scientific research and the principle of connectivity in explaining events and outcomes; finally ending with comparing and contrasting the concepts of the single cause explanation and the principle of multiple causation in explaining events and outcomes.
…show more content…
Darwin’s theory called pangenesis, abandons the principle of connectivity to illustrate the means heredity correlating with natural selection (Unspoken Bible, n.d.). Where the problem lies is creationism proving no connectivity among any other things in science like in geology, genetics, ecology, chemistry and biology (Unspoken Bible, n.d.). The utmost connectivity is proven with all the other sciences by evolution (Unspoken Bible, n.d.).
Single Cause Explanation and Principle of Multiple Causation Even though a cause of behavior may be determined does not imply the only or most important cause of behavior (Stanovich, 2007). Causal analysis stems from the event explained as extreme, negative or unexpected. Preferences in single cause explanations may happen, such as when not enough time has been made looking for other possibilities, or a lack of cognitive resources. On the other hand, where constraints are lacking consideration in real effort may be given on a multitude of feasible causes for the event in question (Chu & Shaw, 2005). In providing a complete abdication of a specific behavior the weight of many different variables must be studied by the researcher as well as mixing the results of the studies in order to give a thorough snapshot of all the causal associations (Chu & Shaw, 2005). Despite an

Related Documents