Though we concur with the conclusions of the target article by Arocha (2021), in this commentary, we argue that his critiques of psychology’s standard research practices are not grounded in his scientific realism but in a (tacit) realistic theory about human behavioral variability. Then, we argue that both this tacit theory and his recommendations are already encompassed by the complex systems approach to psychology. We conclude that, taken together, these arguments strengthen Arocha’s conclusion and recommendations.
FisherA. J.MedagliaJ. D.JeronimusB. F. (2018). Lack of group-to-individual generalizability is a threat to human subjects research. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(27), E6106–E6115. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1711978115
3.
MolenaarP. C. (2004). A manifesto on psychology as idiographic science: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, this time forever. Measurement, 2(4), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15366359mea0204_1
4.
OlthofM.HasselmanF.Lichtwarck-AschoffA. (2020). Complexity in psychological self-ratings: Implications for research and practice. BMC Medicine, 18, Article 317. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01727-2
5.
ThelenE.SmithL. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. MIT Press.
6.
TurveyM. T.CarelloC. (2012). On intelligence from first principles: Guidelines for inquiry into the hypothesis of physical intelligence (PI). Ecological Psychology, 24(1), 3–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2012.645757
7.
van GeertP. L. (2019). Dynamic systems, process and development. Human Development, 63(3–4), 153–179. https://doi.org/10.1159/000503825
8.
van OrdenG. C.KloosH.WallotS. (2011). Living in the pink: Intentionality, wellbeing, and complexity. In HookerC. (Ed.), Philosophy of complex systems (pp. 629–672). North Holland.
