This discussion thread, sparked by Ekaterina Damer, has elicited a wide array of suggestions from psychologists on Twitter. Below is a summary of those professional recommendations, including the names of their respective contributors. Although I have not individually assessed these resources, this compilation acts as a unified reference point. You are welcome to contribute your own suggestions in the comments.<\/p>\n
1. (Iris van Rooij) Robert Cummins’ research: [\u201cHow does it work?\u201d vs. \u201cWhat are the laws?\u201d Two views of psychological explanation.](https:\/\/pdfs.semanticscholar.org\/f5b1\/b05e8313aee94ccd98e80eab3ec56dbd2c97.pdf)<\/p>\n
2. (Ed Orehek) Perspectives from [Theory Construction in Social Personality Psychology: Personal Experiences and Lessons Learned](http:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/abs\/10.1207\/s15327957pspr0802_1)<\/p>\n
3. (Djouria Ghilani) Gerd Gigerenzer’s insights: [Personal Reflections on Theory and Psychology](http:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/abs\/10.1177\/0959354310378184)
\n – [Selected\u2009Works of Barry N. Markovsky](https:\/\/works.bepress.com\/barry_markovsky\/)<\/p>\n
4. (Tal Yarkoni’s recommendation) Significant Meehl publications:
\n – [Theory-testing in psychology and physics: A methodological enigma](http:\/\/meehl.umn.edu\/sites\/g\/files\/pua1696\/f\/074theorytestingparadox.pdf)
\n – [Evaluating and revising theories: The strategy of Lakatosian defense and two principles that underlie it](http:\/\/meehl.umn.edu\/sites\/g\/files\/pua1696\/f\/147appraisingamending.pdf)
\n – [Reasons why summaries of research on psychological theories can be difficult to interpret](http:\/\/meehl.umn.edu\/sites\/g\/files\/pua1696\/f\/144whysummaries.pdf)<\/p>\n
– Comprehensive summaries by [PsychBrief on Meehl\u2019s scientific philosophy](http:\/\/psychbrief.com\/meehl-videos-papers\/)<\/p>\n
5. (Burak Tunca) Critical review by Robert I. Sutton & Barry M. Staw: [What Theory is Not](http:\/\/haas.berkeley.edu\/faculty\/papers\/stawtheory.pdf)<\/p>\n
6. (Joshua Skewes) Valerie Gray Hardcastle\u2019s guide: \u201cHow to build a theory in cognitive science.\u201d<\/p>\n
7. (Randy McCarthy) Detailed examination of theory: Chapter 1 from Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2015). Theory and explanation in social psychology. Guilford Publications.<\/p>\n
8. (Kimberly Quinn) William J. McGuire’s strategies: [Creative hypothesis generating in psychology: Some effective heuristics](http:\/\/sing.stanford.edu\/cs303-sp11\/papers\/mcguire_hypothesis_gen.pdf)<\/p>\n
9. (Dani\u00ebl Lakens) Manual by Jaccard, J., & Jacoby, J.: Theory Construction and Model-building Skills: A Practical Guide for Social Scientists. Guilford Press.<\/p>\n
10. Fiedler, K. reflections on theory development: “Tools, toys, truisms, and theories: Some reflections on the innovative cycle of theory development.” Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(2), 123\u2013131.<\/p>\n
11. (Tom Stafford) Review by Roberts and Pashler (2000): [How convincing is a good fit? A commentary on theory testing](https:\/\/cloudfront.escholarship.org\/dist\/prd\/content\/qt5vt0z72k\/qt5vt0z72k.pdf)<\/p>\n
12. **Updates 16 August 2018:**<\/p>\n
– (Richard Prather) [Simmering et al (2010): To Model or Not to Model? A Discussion on the Role of Computational Modeling in Developmental Science](https:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pmc\/articles\/PMC3103214\/)<\/p>\n
– (Brett Buttliere: Discussion) [Psychological Theory Discussion Group](https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/groups\/153619768802306\/about\/)<\/p>\n
– (Eric Morris) Ken G. Wilson’s review: [Some notes on theoretical constructs: types and validation from a contextual behavioral perspective](http:\/\/www.ijpsy.com\/volumen1\/num2\/23\/some-notes-on-theoretical-constructs-types-EN.pdf)<\/p>\n
– (Michael P. Grosz) Denny Borsboom’s evaluation: [Theoretical Amnesia](http:\/\/osc.centerforopenscience.org\/2013\/11\/20\/theoretical-amnesia\/)<\/p>\n
– (Ivan Grahek) Fiedler (2017) on evidential strength: [What Constitutes Strong<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
This discussion thread, sparked by Ekaterina Damer, has elicited a wide array of suggestions from psychologists on Twitter. Below is a summary of those professional recommendations, including the names of their respective contributors. Although I have not individually assessed these resources, this compilation acts as a unified reference point. You are welcome to contribute your […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":374294,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"Default","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[176],"class_list":["post-374293","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-source-mindhacks-com"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/374293","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=374293"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/374293\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/374294"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=374293"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=374293"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=374293"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}