2014CyberLeninK (CyberLeninka)Requires access

International psychology and scientific psychology: at the crossroads for the future of psychology

Robert J. Taormina

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The discipline of psychology as a science and the newly emerging field of international psychology are at a crossroads in terms of a conflict that has developed in their views. By means of comparative analysis, this article examines how the proponents of international psychology describe their area, how that description conflicts with the concept of psychology as a science, and what that conflict means for the development of psychology as an overall discipline. The analysis reveals weaknesses in the way international psychology has presented itself, and in the objectives it proposes, which, if followed, could lead to failure in achieving those objectives, and in collateral damage to the way psychology is regarded by researchers outside the field of psychology. This article ends with several prescriptions for the future of international psychology, including suggestions for revising the way international psychology should be conceived, such as regarding its relationship with cross-cultural psychology to be complementary rather than disparate, that it should adjust its objectives to be more attainable, and, especially, that it should accept rather than reject psychology as a science.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The discipline of psychology as a science and the newly emerging field of international psychology are at a crossroads in terms of a conflict that has developed in their views. By means of comparative analysis, this article examines how the proponents of international psychology describe their area, how that description conflicts with the concept of psychology as a science, and what that conflict means for the development of psychology as an overall discipline. The analysis reveals weaknesses in the way international psychology has presented itself, and in the objectives it proposes, which, if followed, could lead to failure in achieving those objectives, and in collateral damage to the way psychology is regarded by researchers outside the field of psychology. This article ends with several prescriptions for the future of international psychology, including suggestions for revising the way international psychology should be conceived, such as regarding its relationship with cross-cultural psychology to be complementary rather than disparate, that it should adjust its objectives to be more attainable, and, especially, that it should accept rather than reject psychology as a science.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The discipline of psychology as a science and the newly emerging field of international psychology are at a crossroads in terms of a conflict that has developed in their views. By means of comparative analysis, this article examines how the proponents of international psychology describe their area, how that description conflicts with the concept of psychology as a science, and what that conflict means for the development of psychology as an overall discipline. The analysis reveals weaknesses in the way international psychology has presented itself, and in the objectives it proposes, which, if followed, could lead to failure in achieving those objectives, and in collateral damage to the way psychology is regarded by researchers outside the field of psychology. This article ends with several prescriptions for the future of international psychology, including suggestions for revising the way international psychology should be conceived, such as regarding its relationship with cross-cultural psychology to be complementary rather than disparate, that it should adjust its objectives to be more attainable, and, especially, that it should accept rather than reject psychology as a science.

Key concepts: International psychology, Cross-cultural psychology, Asian psychology, Consulting psychology, Critical psychology, Community psychology, Theoretical psychology, Sport psychology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
International psychology and scientific psychology: at the crossroads for the future of psychology — Research Paper | ScholarLens