There is no generalizability crisis

D. Lakens; D.U. Tunç; M.N. Tunç

doi:10.1017/S0140525X21000340

There is no generalizability crisis

D. Lakens, D.U. Tunç, M.N. Tunç

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Scientific › peer-review

Abstract

Falsificationist and confirmationist approaches provide two well-established ways of evaluating generalizability. Yarkoni rejects both and invents a third approach we call neo-operationalism. His proposal cannot work for the hypothetical concepts psychologists use, because the universe of operationalizations is impossible to define, and hypothetical concepts cannot be reduced to their operationalizations. We conclude that he is wrong in his generalizability-crisis diagnosis.
Keywords:

Original language	English
Journal	Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Volume	45
Issue number	e25
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X21000340
Publication status	Published - 2022
Externally published	Yes

Access to Document

10.1017/S0140525X21000340

Cite this

@article{9b4566a319234c4ea8483fc814d154c6,

title = "There is no generalizability crisis",

abstract = "Falsificationist and confirmationist approaches provide two well-established ways of evaluating generalizability. Yarkoni rejects both and invents a third approach we call neo-operationalism. His proposal cannot work for the hypothetical concepts psychologists use, because the universe of operationalizations is impossible to define, and hypothetical concepts cannot be reduced to their operationalizations. We conclude that he is wrong in his generalizability-crisis diagnosis.Keywords: ",

author = "D. Lakens and D.U. Tun{\c c} and M.N. Tun{\c c}",

year = "2022",

doi = "10.1017/S0140525X21000340",

language = "English",

volume = "45",

journal = "Behavioral and Brain Sciences",

issn = "0140-525X",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

number = "e25",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - There is no generalizability crisis

AU - Lakens, D.

AU - Tunç, D.U.

AU - Tunç, M.N.

PY - 2022

Y1 - 2022

N2 - Falsificationist and confirmationist approaches provide two well-established ways of evaluating generalizability. Yarkoni rejects both and invents a third approach we call neo-operationalism. His proposal cannot work for the hypothetical concepts psychologists use, because the universe of operationalizations is impossible to define, and hypothetical concepts cannot be reduced to their operationalizations. We conclude that he is wrong in his generalizability-crisis diagnosis.Keywords:

AB - Falsificationist and confirmationist approaches provide two well-established ways of evaluating generalizability. Yarkoni rejects both and invents a third approach we call neo-operationalism. His proposal cannot work for the hypothetical concepts psychologists use, because the universe of operationalizations is impossible to define, and hypothetical concepts cannot be reduced to their operationalizations. We conclude that he is wrong in his generalizability-crisis diagnosis.Keywords:

U2 - 10.1017/S0140525X21000340

DO - 10.1017/S0140525X21000340

M3 - Article

SN - 0140-525X

VL - 45

JO - Behavioral and Brain Sciences

JF - Behavioral and Brain Sciences

IS - e25

ER -

There is no generalizability crisis

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this