Is experimental psychology science?

quote:

---

i know it's silly to claim art is a science. that's why i said it. and now you're the one spouting vulgarity. and so did she. look. i don't care whether you agree with me or not but that is no reason to treat me like dirt.

​

fuck you.

---

You reap what you sow, brennakimi.

quote:

---

Changes in Brain Function
Studies show that the brains of children with ADHD may function differently than those of other children. These children may have an imbalance of chemicals in the brain that help to regulate behavior.

---

But linking brain activity and chemicals to behavior...that's...PSYCHOLOGY!!!...at least it is according to everybody except for Brennakimi.

quote:

---

what? oh please. i've never criticized anyone in this discussion, i only asked you to leave me alone. which you have yet to do.

---

You know a good way to stop reading someone's responses to you?Stop reading the responses they write to you.

quote:

---

i dunno. why don't you ask your husband...

---

You dunno?Then shut up about your uninformed opinion of experimental psychology.Seriously.

quote:

---

i'll answer the second first since it's easier. why would a child with a history of bed wetting affect this.

---

I wasn't clear.I am talking about adults with a history of childhood pants wetting.

quote:

---

well, bed wetting can result from and certainly contributes to anxiety. this can manifest itself in anxiety about success. this could lead him to do badly on any test immaterial of his age. how many old people wet their pants? think about that.

---

Lots of old people are incontinent due to things like muscle weakness and prostate problems.Lots of pants wetting in children is caused by similar undeveloped muscles.But the rest of your supposition about "test anxiety" is self-selected selected against because the vast majority of subjects in such experimental trials are volunteers.

quote:

---

why do old people and young people score differently on memory tests? easy. because old people aren't learning anymore and so their brains don't respond as quickly.

---

But why do you automatically assume that there is a difference between young and old subjects in ALL memory tasks?There isn't.Some seniors do just as well as younger subjects on certain memory tasks.See. You don't know what you are talking about. Just using your "common sense" and the psych 101 class from Freshman year somehow isn't enough.What a surprise that must be to you.

quote:

---

try doing the same test on people in school and people who have been out for six months. i think you'll be surprised at the result.

---

But Psychology isn't science, so the results are completely meaningless because we can't control for ANYTHING AT ALL, right?

quote:

---

The "uncertainty" in quantum mechanics results from a mathematical necessity having to do, I believe, with something called Planck's Constant. There's no problem in regard to scientific method in quantum mechanics.

---

But what I was responding to was the following statment by Brennakimi:

quote:

---

"by calling it a science, you are limiting the brain to specific, easily predicted, unchanging patterns. and i can't agree with that."

---

The point in bringing up QM and the other examples is that it is quite unpredictable and complex and uncertain, yet nobody denies that these fields are not science, or "soft" science.Let's ignore the quantum mechanics example for now.What about the other two examples I gave?

quote:

---

In Psychology, matters are somewhat different. We are not talking about mathematical necessities when we speak of the difficulty of controlling variables. It's a practical matter.

---

That is also true of mutations in Biology and weather phenomena in Meterology.

quote:

---

However, originally, on the other thread, what I was saying was that "soft science" is not science. So I would say now, having learned a little more, that to the extent that psychology uses soft science, it is not a science. To the extent that psychology uses hard science (isolatable physical evidence --studies of some part of the brain, for example), then it's science.

​

This is not to say that soft science is not valuable. It may be very valuabe.

---

So, do you classify Genetics/Biology or Meterology as "soft science"?But anyway, regardless of your opinion, very good science has been as is currently being done in Psychology even when the brain is not being studied.Have you heard of Elizabeth Loftus? She is a research Psychologist which is famous for her groundbreaking work on false memory. Her most famous study involved the implantation of false memories in people and the surprise was how easy it is to do so in a significant percentage of the study participants.You can read about her work hereShe doesn't study the brain. She does behavioral research Psychology.So according to you, is all of her work maybe to be viewed as "iffy" or "soft"?

quote:

---

The abstract looked to me like there was physical evidence that had been isolated properly so that the scientific method could be used.

​

When I get a chance, I am going to study the example that Schraf provided and see if I can come up with something more definite and knowledgable to say. So far my ideas have been rather vague.

​

ABE: maybe I'll learn something.

---

That would be awesome, RR, thanks.

I agree completely.