Moderate Realism and the Quest for an O bservation Oriented Science of Psychology

1. Moderate Realism and the Quest for an Observation Oriented Science of Psychology James W. Grice Oklahoma State University Department of Psychology Presented at the 120th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Orlando, FL, August 2nd, 2012. Symposium Title: Renewing the Relationship between Psychology and Philosophy, James Lamiell, Chair.

2. Something is still Wrong with Psychology David Lykken (1991): What’s wrong with psychology, anyway? Thinking clearly about psychology. Minneapolis: University of MinnesotaPress. Brad Woods (2011). What’s still wrong with psychology, anyway? Unpublished Thesis, University of Canterbury, NZ. (“Probably the finest Masters thesis I have ever read.” Paul Barrett, www.pbarrett.net) Metaphysical, Measurement, and Methodological Problems Adler, Mortimer Bakan, David Barrett, Paul Cohen, Jacob Harre’, Rom Kazdin, Alan Lamiell, James Meehl, Paul Michell, Joel Molenaar, Peter Robinson, Daniel Rychlak, Joseph Valsiner, Jan Wright, Benjamin Cartesian Nightmare (Peter Redpath, Cartesian Nightmare, 1997)

3. Cartesian Nightmare Kantian Nightmare?

4. Cartesian Nightmare Karl Popper: “I reject all what-is? questions: questions asking what a thing is, what is its essence, or its true nature.” (p. 136, italics original, Realism and the Aim of Science, 1983, London: Routledge). Keith Stanovich, How to Think Straight about Psychology, 2007. What is intelligence, really? {scientifically useless question} “Psychology is like all other sciences in requiring operational definitions. However, people often demand answers to essentialist questions of psychology that they do not demand of other sciences.” (p. 51-52, emphasis added, How to Think Straight about Psychology, 8th Ed., 2007, Botson: Allyn and Bacon). (questions about the absolute, underlying nature of a concept) No, essentialism is about things!

5. Cartesian Nightmare S. S. Stevens’ definition of measurement: Measurement is the assignment of numerals according to rule Notice centrality of rule created by scientist Measurement is primarily subjective Measurement is “the estimation or discovery of the ratio of some magnitude of a quantitative attribute to a unit of the same attribute” (Michell, 1997, p. 358). Notice centrality of attribute of an existing object Measurement is not purely subjective

6. Cartesian Nightmare • Cause is understood through the work of J. S. Mill • Methods of Agreement, Residue, Difference, & Concomitant Variation • Derived from Hume’s skeptical notion of cause • Empiricism with a subjective foundation • Scientific laws are regularities of sense impressions within the mind ? ? C A B

7. Cartesian Nightmare Judea Pearl: “In summary, intervention amounts to a surgery on equations (guided by a diagram), and causation means predicting the consequences of such surgery”(p. 417, 2009, Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference (2nd Ed). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) X Y Z Y = 2X 2X– 2Y + Z – 1 = 0 Z = Y + 1 2X + 2Y – 3Z + 3 = 0

8. Variable-Based Models

9. Moderate Realism • The natural world is knowable to us • Natural science (epistēmē) is demonstrable knowledge of nature through its causes. Four factors to consider when putting forth a complete explanation of why something is the way it is: Formal, Material, Efficient, and Final

10. Moderate Realism 1. Material 2. Formal 3. Efficient 4. Final

11. Variable-Based Model A classic study of in-group/out-group bias Locksley, Ortiz, & Hepburn (1980) . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 773-783) • 6 People enter lab • Can contains 6 tickets: 3 Phi, 3 Gamma • Draw tickets • Unbeknownst to participants, all tickets printed with “Phi” • Enter private cubicle • For each of other 5 participants, assign up to 100 coins, individually • So, assigning coins to 3 Gammas and 2 Phis • Phis are “in-group”, Gammas are “out-group” • Which individuals will be assigned the most coins?

12. Variable-Based Model Hypotheses: Ho : μPhi= μGamma HA : μPhi> μGammaor μPhi< μGamma Assumption-laden NHST (IV) Group Membership t(17) = 2.91* (DV) Coin Allotment • Assumptions • Random sampling • Normal population distribution (for differences) • Continuous dependent variable • Independence of observations • Ho is true • “p ≤ .05” is proper significance level Goal is to estimate a population parameters; here, µdiff the difference between population means MPhi= 85.3, MGamma= 64.9, t(17) = 2.91, p < .01, η2= .33 (large effect using Cohen’s conventions)

13. Integrated Model

14. Integrated Model Expected Number of Coins = 90 for Phi, 60 for Gammas MPhi= 85.3, MGamma= 64.9, t(17) = 2.91, p < .01, η2= .33 In-group biasing efficient cause mechanism or equality final cause? (IV) Group Membership t(17) = 2.91* (DV) Coin Allotment

15. Integrated Model

16. Observation Oriented Modeling

17. Observation Oriented Modeling What are best termed the “abstract sciences” aim at an understanding of the fundamental processes of nature. Such inquiry may be motivated by discerning a pattern, but not all patterns will be of concern. Indeed, patterns which emerge from experimentally generated data, e.g., the results of Lavoisier’s painstaking use of the chemical balance, are of high importance. (Manicas, 2006, p. 25) Rom Harré (1986, p. 35) also states, “Theories are seen as solutions to a peculiar style of problem: namely, ‘Why is it that the patterns of phenomena are the way they are?’ A theory answers this question by supplying an account of the constitution and behavior of those things whose interactions with each other are responsible for the manifested patterns of behavior.”

18. Observation Oriented Modeling • Causality construed analogously as Order and Conformity • …thus in natural agents the form of the thing generated is conformed to the form of the generator. Summa, I, II, Q 1, a3 • In other words, the effect conforms to the cause • How are the observations ordered and do they conform to one another as expected?

19. Observation Oriented Modeling CauseObservations EffectObservations M F 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Conformed EffectObservations EffectObservations Accuracyof the operation is assessed by matching the conformed effect and original cause observations

20. Observation Oriented Modeling

21. Observation Oriented Modeling • Causes are not found in estimated population parameters but within persons • Qualities are not assumed to be structured as continuous quantities • Think schematically whenever possible • Demotion of Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST) • Results and effect magnitudes are transparent and meaningful (no esoteric effect sizes, e.g., d or η2) • Replication trumps single probability values Through philosophical realism and OOM, the goal is to liberate psychologists from the Cartesian Nightmare of the Pearsonian-Fisherian variable-based modeling approach that has dominated research design for 70+ years.

22. The End