IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/jpepsi/v24y2018i2p9-30n1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discussing the Scientific Evidence Generation and Psychological Research Methods in Postmodern Societies

Author

Listed:
  • Sesé Albert

    (Department of Psychology, Balearic Islands University, Carretera de Valldemossa, km. 7’5, 07122 Palma de Mallorca, Spain)

Abstract

Evidence generation by current Social and Health Sciences is coping with some important barriers that difficult credibility of scientific products. Information and communication technologies have a strong impact over social relationships in our postmodern societies. The incidence of post-truth in our context is generating a pernicious relativism, far from contrasting the information veracity. The aim of this paper is to analyze and discuss the challenges of research methods and statistical models, more specifically for Psychological research, taking into account the impact of novel techniques as big data and virtual reality. Special attention is also devoted to the discussion about statistical shortcomings of psychological research and to the reproducibility problem. Finally, some potential solutions are proposed to be applied in order to improve the quality of scientific evidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Sesé Albert, 2018. "Discussing the Scientific Evidence Generation and Psychological Research Methods in Postmodern Societies," Journal for Perspectives of Economic Political and Social Integration, Sciendo, vol. 24(2), pages 9-30, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:jpepsi:v:24:y:2018:i:2:p:9-30:n:1
    DOI: 10.2478/pepsi-2018-0006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/pepsi-2018-0006
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/pepsi-2018-0006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Estelle Dumas-Mallet & Andy Smith & Thomas Boraud & François Gonon, 2017. "Poor replication validity of biomedical association studies reported by newspapers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-15, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Markus Lehmkuhl & Nikolai Promies, 2020. "Frequency distribution of journalistic attention for scientific studies and scientific sources: An input–output analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Estelle Dumas-Mallet & André Garenne & Thomas Boraud & François Gonon, 2020. "Does newspapers coverage influence the citations count of scientific publications? An analysis of biomedical studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 413-427, April.
    3. Green, David A. & Simard-Duplain, Gaëlle & Sweetman, Arthur & Warburton, William P., 2023. "A Scientific Approach to Addressing Social Issues Using Administrative Data," IZA Policy Papers 199, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Briony Swire-Thompson & David Lazer, 2022. "Reducing Health Misinformation in Science: A Call to Arms," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 124-135, March.
    5. Peter Kardos & Ádám Kun & Csaba Pléh & Ferenc Jordán, 2023. "(How) should researchers publicize their research papers before peer review?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 2019-2023, March.
    6. Robert Kirkby, 2023. "Quantitative Macroeconomics: Lessons Learned from Fourteen Replications," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 61(2), pages 875-896, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:jpepsi:v:24:y:2018:i:2:p:9-30:n:1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.