Abstract
Review shows authors of many psychology textbooks have frequently tried to promote the scientific status of their field by citing a number of classic studies. However, such studies are often presented in a distorted fashion that exaggerates their universality and validity. This paper argues that these studies are not universal or “shared” exemplars, but that they are actually instances of “system” exemplars specific to a particular psychological system or theory. The implications of the failure to maintain a distinction between shared and system exemplars are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
