Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study assessed the nature of psychology and its consensus regarding core content. We hypothesized that psychology possesses little agreement regarding its core content areas and thus may “envy” more canonical sciences, such as physics. Using a global sample, we compared psychologists’ and physicists’ perceptions regarding the nature of their field and consensus of core content areas within their respective disciplines. Results revealed that psychologists perceive their field as less theoretically and empirically grounded, and its major findings less agreed upon than physics. Psychologists also generated little consensus regarding its most important, core content areas. Discussion focuses on the importance of psychology establishing a core knowledge base and strategies to overcome “physics envy” in the classroom.

Keywords

physics envy core content

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Psychological Association. (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from www.apa.org/ed/resources.html

Bem

D. J.

(2011). Feeling the future: Experimental evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 407–425. doi: 10.1037/a0021524

Berezow

A. B.

(July 2012). Why psychology isn’t a science. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/13/news/la-ol-blowback-pscyhology-science-20120713

Carey

(November 2011). Noted dutchpsychologist, Stapel, accused of research fraud. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/health/research/noted-dutch-psychologist-stapel-accused-of-research-fraud.html?_r=0

Carter

T. J.

(August 2012). Despite what you might have heard, psychology is science. Psychology Today. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/make-your-mind/201208/despite-what-you-might-have-heard-psychology-is-science

Clarke

K. A.

Primo

D. M.

(March 2012). Overcoming ‘physics envy.’ New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/opinion/sunday/the-social-sciences-physics-envy.html?_r=0

Fish

J. M.

(2000). What anthropology can do for psychology: Facing physics envy, ethnocentrism, and a belief in “race.” American Anthropologist, 102, 552–563. doi: 10.1525/aa.2000.102.3.552

Gorenflo

D. W.

McConnell

J. V.

(1991). The most frequently cited journal articles and authors in introductory psychology textbooks. Teaching of Psychology, 18, 8–12.

Griggs

R. A.

Marek

(2001). Similarity of introductory psychology textbooks: Reality or illusion? Teaching of Psychology, 28, 254–256.

10.

Griggs

R. A.

Bujak-Johnson

Proctor

D. L.

(2004). Using common core vocabulary in text selection and teaching the introductory course. Teaching of Psychology, 31, 265–269.

11.

Griggs

R. A.

Proctor

D. L.

Cook

S. M.

(2004). The most frequently cited books in introductory texts. Teaching of Psychology, 31, 113–117.

12.

Mueller

(2010). Warning: physics envy may be hazardous to your wealth!. Retrieved from SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1563882orhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1563882

13.

National Science Foundation. (2012). FY 2012 NSF budget request. Retrieved January 14, 2013 from http://nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2012/?

14.

Pashler

Wagenmakers

E.-J.

(Eds.). (2012). Special section on replicability in psychological science: A crisis of confidence? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 528–689. doi:10.1177/1745691612465253.

15.

Wilson

T. D.

(July 2012). Stop bullying the ‘soft’ sciences. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/12/opinion/la-oe-wilson-social-sciences-20120712.

Physics Envy

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References