This thread initiated by Ekaterina Damer has sparked numerous suggestions from psychologists on Twitter.<\/p>\n
Here are the majority of the suggestions, along with their recommenders in parentheses. I have not read these, but I wanted to gather them in one location. Comments are welcome if you have additional recommendations.<\/p>\n
– (Iris van Rooij) [\u201cHow does it function?\u201d vs. \u201cWhat are the principles?\u201d Two views on psychological explanation](https:\/\/pdfs.semanticscholar.org\/f5b1\/b05e8313aee94ccd98e80eab3ec56dbd2c97.pdf). Robert Cummins<\/p>\n
– (Ed Orehek) [Theory Development in Social Personality Psychology: Personal Insights and Lessons Acquired: A Special Issue of Personality and Social Psychology Review](http:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/abs\/10.1207\/s15327957pspr0802_1)<\/p>\n
– (Djouria Ghilani) [Personal Insights on Theory and Psychology](http:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/abs\/10.1177\/0959354310378184). Gerd Gigerenzer<\/p>\n
– [Selected\u2009Works of Barry N. Markovsky](https:\/\/works.bepress.com\/barry_markovsky\/)<\/p>\n
– (essentially everyone, but Tal Yarkoni articulated it this way) Meehl stated nearly everything there is to convey about this:
\n – [Theory-testing in psychology and physics: A methodological contradiction](http:\/\/meehl.umn.edu\/sites\/g\/files\/pua1696\/f\/074theorytestingparadox.pdf)
\n – [Evaluating and modifying theories: The approach of Lakatosian defense and two principles that justify it](http:\/\/meehl.umn.edu\/sites\/g\/files\/pua1696\/f\/147appraisingamending.pdf)
\n – [Why summaries of research on psychological theories tend to be vague](http:\/\/meehl.umn.edu\/sites\/g\/files\/pua1696\/f\/144whysummaries.pdf)
\n – (By the way, [PsychBrief](https:\/\/twitter.com\/PsyBrief) has been examining Meehl and offers detailed summaries here: [Paul Meehl on philosophy of science: video lectures and papers](http:\/\/psychbrief.com\/meehl-videos-papers\/))<\/p>\n
– (Burak Tunca) [What Theory is Not](http:\/\/haas.berkeley.edu\/faculty\/papers\/stawtheory.pdf) by Robert I. Sutton & Barry M. Staw<\/p>\n
– (Joshua Skewes) Valerie Gray Hardcastle\u2019s \u201cHow to construct a theory in cognitive science\u201d.<\/p>\n
– (Randy McCarthy) Chapter 1 of Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2015). Theory and explanation in social psychology. Guilford Publications.<\/p>\n
– (Kimberly Quinn) McGuire, W. J. (1997). [Creative hypothesis generation in psychology: Some beneficial heuristics](http:\/\/sing.stanford.edu\/cs303-sp11\/papers\/mcguire_hypothesis_gen.pdf). Annual review of psychology, 48(1), 1-30.<\/p>\n
– (Dani\u00ebl Lakens) Jaccard, J., & Jacoby, J. (2010). Theory Construction and Model-building Skills: A Practical Resource for Social Scientists. Guilford Press.<\/p>\n
– Fiedler, K. (2004). 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
– (Tom Stafford) Roberts and Pashler (2000). [How convincing is a good fit? A commentary on theory evaluation](https:\/\/cloudfront.escholarship.org\/dist\/prd\/content\/qt5vt0z72k\/qt5vt0z72k.pdf)<\/p>\n
From the dialogue, it is evident that the theory crisis will be as diverse and full of disagreement as the methods crisis.<\/p>\n
**Updates 16 August 2018**<\/p>\n
– (Richard Prather) Simmering et al (2010). [To Model or Not to Model? A Conversation on the Role of Computational Modeling in Developmental Science](https:\/\/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/pmc\/articles\/PMC3103214\/)<\/p>\n
– (Brett Buttliere: we established a Facebook group to discuss theory) [Psychological Theory Discussion Group](https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/groups\/153619768802306\/about\/)<\/p>\n
– (Eric Morris) Wilson, K. G. (2001). [Some remarks 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) [The<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
This thread initiated by Ekaterina Damer has sparked numerous suggestions from psychologists on Twitter. Here are the majority of the suggestions, along with their recommenders in parentheses. I have not read these, but I wanted to gather them in one location. Comments are welcome if you have additional recommendations. – (Iris van Rooij) [\u201cHow does […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":375149,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"Default","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[176],"class_list":["post-375148","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\/375148","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=375148"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/375148\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/375149"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=375148"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=375148"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wolfscientific.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=375148"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}