Question

Your Aunt Laura decides to use her personal experiences to write a book about how people solve problems. She asks you if it might get published in a journal of psychology. You tell her that some psychologists might not classify her project as "psychology" because:

Answer 1

Aunt Laura's book may not be considered 'psychology' by professionals because it lacks the empirical methods and might not provide generalizable data required for peer-reviewed psychological journals.

Step-by-step explanation:

Your Aunt Laura's book, based on personal experiences about how people solve problems, might not be classified as "psychology" by some psychologists because it may lack empirical evidence and the rigorous methodologies that define scientific psychological research.

Psychological journals typically publish peer-reviewed articles that contribute to the field through systematic investigation, including experiments, observations, and data analysis.

These studies tend to assert causal relationships through controlled conditions that minimize the effects of bias and isolate the impact of the independent variable.

In contrast, Aunt Laura's anecdotal approach, while valuable for its narrative perspective, may not provide the replicable, generalizable data that psychologists and professional journals seek.

Answer 2

Aunt Laura decides to use her personal experiences to write a book about how people solve problems. She asks if it might get published in a journal of psychology. I tell her that some psychologists might not classify her project as "psychology" because while Aunt Laura's personal experiences with problem-solving could be insightful, they may not meet the criteria of empirical evidence required for publication in scientific psychology journals, which prioritize reproducibility and peer-reviewed research.

Step-by-step explanation:

If Aunt Laura decides to use her personal experiences to write a book about how people solve problems, it might not be classified as "psychology" within a scientific journal for several reasons. Science, particularly in psychology, relies heavily on empirical evidence that can be tested, replicated, and peer-reviewed.

While personal anecdotes can provide insightful illustrative examples, they do not constitute empirical evidence. Psychology research often entails controlled experiments, where variables can be manipulated and causal relationships examined.

For a piece of work to be considered within the field of psychology, it would typically follow the American Psychological Association (APA) guidelines for scientific writing, be subject to peer review, and aim to contribute to the body of knowledge in a measurable and verifiable manner. This process ensures that any findings are significant and can be generalized beyond the individual experiences.

Therefore, while Aunt Laura's experiences may provide rich qualitative data, they would likely not be publishable in a scientific journal on psychology without an empirical framework that includes hypothesis testing, controlled conditions, and an analytical approach that allows for broader generalizations.