We agree with Arocha’s criticism of psychological science’s reliance on statistical procedures that factor out intraindividual variability and the complex dynamics inherent to behavior, as well as with his call for the adoption of a metatheoretical framework that embraces such variability. However, we disagree that scientific realism provides such a framework, given its reductive privileging of certain forms of explanation over others. We advocate, instead, a process-relational paradigm and the explanatory pluralism that it supports, allowing psychological science to more dynamically, and realistically, model individual human behavior.
LourencoO.MachadoA. (1996). In defense of Piaget’s theory: A reply to 10 common criticisms. Psychological Review, 103(1), 143–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.1.143
5.
MolenaarP. C. M.CampbellC. G. (2009). The new person-specific paradigm in psychology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(2), 112–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01619.x
6.
NesselroadeJ. R. (2010). On an emerging third discipline of scientific psychology. In MolenaarP. C. M.NewellK. M. (Eds.), Individual pathways of change: Statistical models for analyzing learning and development (pp. 209–218). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12140-012
7.
OvertonW. F. (1991). The structure of developmental theory. In van GeertP.MosL. P. (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (Vol 7., pp. 191–235). Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-3842-4_9
OvertonW. F. (2010). Life-span development: Concepts and issues. In OvertonW. F. (Ed.), The handbook of life-span development: Vol. 1. Cognition, biology, and methods (pp. 1–29). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470880166.hlsd001001
10.
OvertonW. F. (2015). Processes, relations, and relational-developmental-systems. In OvertonW. F.MolenaarP. C. M. (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Vol. 1. Theory & method (7th ed., pp. 9–62). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118963418.childpsy102
