Is psychology is a science?

Question

Is psychology considered a science? Science is defined by evidence, measurement and irrefutable proof.

Does the field of psychology satisfy those requirements?

Ok, I have to take something back that a said. There's no such thing as irrefutable proof :) my wrong.

also my definition of "science' is very meager...so feel free to define it as you see it

When i asked this question, the main point I had in my mind was the "measurement" part of science.

You can measure people's heights and their weight. You can even measure blood pressure and lung volume.

Physicists can use measure how many electrons in an atom.

But...in psychology, how can you really measure people's emotions? But there is no "emotion-o-meter" to measure emotions and give us numbers.

The scientific method is used in psychology, but it's also used in everyday life. In diagnosing a computer hardware problem, you are forming a hypothesis about the program and set out to fix it. But is that a science?

EDIT (spelling):

you are forming a hypothesis about the proBLEM and set out to fix it. But is that a science?

Last addition :-)

It's possible to do experiments in psychology i.e. get a group of people and test their reactions against an event. A pattern of reactions may form, but in psychology there's no way to explain why that particular pattern has formed, except that it has.

Answer 1

Pseudo Science. Basket weaving can also be argued to be a science. Ever watch Curse of the Dragon? There's a guy in there who's a Bruce Lee historian. I didn't know you could make an entire career out of studying Bruce Lee's life then be called a historian on a legit documentary. I suppose I can call myself a Yahoo! Answers Scientist because I attempt to find evidence of this growing phenomenon and measure statistics of its growth and find irrefutable proof of it as a permanent part of our pop culture. I'm a Yahoology major. You can finish a Psych degree in 1 year. Science my foot.

Answer 2

"Is psychology is a science". Wow. Now I'm worried.

Of course it does. And by the way, science is not defined by irrefutable proof, it is defined by experiments that can be done again witih similar results- it's called validity and reliability.

There are tons of experiments (true and quasi) done in psychology. Smith, Glasser, and Miller in 1985 refuted a study done by Eysync- the latter said that the psychology was ineffective, and improvement was due to spontaneous recovery. The former researchers did a meta-analysis of hundreds of previous studies. The results showed that people who went through therapy showed significant (75%) improvement at 26 sessions, and more (85%) at 52 sessions.

Remember, when you are measuring emotions, etc of people, it won't be as hard a science as when you are testing chemicals, etc, so the results may not be as exciting to a skeptic, but we are working with PEOPLE here.

Yes, many many experiments satisify the requirements of evidence, measurement, and no science shows irrefutable proof, they just get closer and closer to confirming a hypothesis- if you read any journal, even the most conclusive study will say "more research is needed."

EDIT- There are measurements of emotions, even in individuals, such as galvanic skin responses. Lie detector tests measure the physiological responses to emotions.

Also, the way psychologists measure the "why" to emotions is by doing simple experiments using what they call "control groups" that usually leave out a condition applied to the experimental group.

You can manipulate these conditions until you find out why an emotion is caused. An example would be introducing 3 different types of people approaching a baby- i.e. their own mother, another female, and another male, and then observing which makes the baby cry, smile, or have no response either way. Then they can say why a baby cries, which is an indicator of emotion.

GDC is wrong- the science is much better than the scientist because it is reviewed by a group of his or her peers using the scientific method over and over again before it is accepted in the field. An example of very POOR science is gdc's estimating that 80% of psychologists/psychiatrists are messed up, etc. GDC is a perfect example of junk science, and he sounds like he would make a much better patient than a researcher *makes crazy sign, spinning finger near temple* KOO koo!

BILL- you're wrong about psychotherapy being an art only. There are two issues in this debate- efficacy vs. effectiveness. Efficacy is clinical proof using trials of different groups of patients that show demonstrable, statistically significant (if the theory is correct, and insignificant if not) results. Effectiveness is the art part- non clinical information offered by psychologists from what they've seen in an admittedly unrepresentative sample of their own patients.

The Null Hypothesis does not mean "I don't know." It means that your hypothesis is NOT true. The point of an experiment is to prove that the null hypothesis is not true. There is no way to prove that something does NOT exist because there is no way to truly look at ALL the data as it is always growing and changing. The accepted alternative is the null hypothesis- since you cant' say something is false, you CAN say it is NOT true, and offer a degree of certainly, usually 95%, in stronger cases 99%.

Answer 3

First of all, your premise that Science is defined by evidence, measurement and IRREFUTABLE proof is false. Scientific theories are often revised as new evidence arises, so by your definition, there isn't much that would qualify as science.

Here's what the American Heritage Dictionary says:
SCIENCE: Noun: .The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.

Science, by definition, limits itself to what can be observed, measured and verified. The scientific method is the tool by which scientists apply human reason and logic deductively to the material world to gain knowledge.

Psychology is the science of mind and behavior. And psychologists, like all scientists, use the scientific method to conduct studies and research. The basic process for conducting psychology research involves asking a question, designing a study, collecting data, analyzing results, reaching conclusions and sharing the findings. These findings are then put into practice wether it be in mental health therapy, an educational setting or in an industrial organization.

Psychology is a very broad discipline, stretching from the biological determinants of animal and human behavior through to the social psychology of intergroup relations. In some ways, I think it sits on the fence between the life sciences and the social sciences. Some of the specialties may be more like the "hard" sciences (ie. Neuropsychology, an interdisciplinary branch of psychology and neuroscience that aims to understand how the structure and function of the brain relate to specific psychological processes and overt behaviors) and some are more like the social sciences ( ie. Social Psychology, the study of social relationships, organizations, and the like.)

Edit: But not all science involves "measuring." I think your definition of science is just too narrow and you are putting too much emphasis on one part of the process. In biology there is much that is observed but is not "measured". Even in chemistry and physics, we have theories and we know certain reactions take place because we can observe them, but we don't necessarily always know why they happen. Not everything can be measured in that sense. As someone else, said, just because you cannot explain an observed phenomenon does not mean you are being unscientific.

Answer 4

You said "A pattern of reactions may form, but in psychology there's no way to explain why that particular pattern has formed, except that it has."

... which is irrelevent. The purpose of science is to "find stuff out". Because you cannot explain an observed phenomenon does not mean you are being unscientific. At the beginning of every science there are many observations and very few things explained. In fact it would be unscientific to say that you could explain something when you do no yet have all the facts. Part of the scientific process is the collection of facts and observations, even before you can explain them. Later on, when new technology and methodology becomes available, perhaps as a result of the *science* of psychology, then some explanations might be forthcoming.

Answer 5

The tests and measurements slice of the pie of psych. is a quasi science; at best.

And psychotherapy is an ART, that some have tried to trick others into believing is a science.

With the advent of: social learning theory, wherein bandura and walters and bandura and ross - set out to prove that modeling causes aggression - psychology as a science was mortally wounded. As posted: science strives to 'find stuff out' from the null hypothesis; which equals "I do not know", "I am searching for the truth" using research, methodology, unbiased experimentation and so forth.

And even test and measures (read, psychometrics) is very loosely scientific, by the way. As many of the questions are arbitrary, that is: I am making a test to measure temperaments. To do so, I send my proposed questions to a bunch of my colleagues and they tell me if they think my questions are valid - for what I want to measure.

Personally, psychology, as a field, is dead. Which saddens me! The unconscious WAS the last great Frontier and the mind and consciousness has been reduced to neurons firing or misfiring; because of a 'chemical imbalance'... Yuck.

It would be such a stride of evolution if young and bright people got together and resuscitated psychology; and placed her back into her rightful position as the way to increased relational ability, improved mental health overall and a major remedy of mental and emotional wounding(s).

Answer 6

Not at all if you mean applied psychology the psychology experiments yes some of them are scientific but the real world psychology like diagnosis and treatment NO WAY Clinicians rely purely on their SUBJECTIVE perception in order to label someone ''mentally ill'' that's why you get DIFFERENT diagnosis and treatments for the same symptoms a very common occurrence in counseling and in practicing psychiatry as well There is NO way to be 100% correct about something that is so fluid, emotions and thoughts change so do moods, and the minds of the ''experts'' interpreting the data is mainly the "tool" or filter used for diagnosis instead of running lab exams as they would do with a REAL science like medicine

Answer 7

Yes, psychology is a science, but I disagree with your definition of what science is. Science is the study of something. In this case psychology studies the mind. Science studies, generally speaking, through the scientific method, which is the process of forming hypotheses and then finding evidence to support or disprove the hypotheses. It is usually not possible to prove something through the scientific method, only support a hypothesis. There is always the possibility that another, better hypothesis will come along, and they regularly do. Scientists are continually working to refine and test their hypotheses. I wouldn't call that irrefutable proof. If we knew everything completely, all scientists would be out of jobs. Scientists keep working so that we can find out how things work when we don't already know how they work. The mind is definitely something we don't understand yet, so we need psychology to help us understand it better.

Answer 8

sci·ence

sci·ence [s ənss]
(plural sci·ences)
n
1. study of the physical world: the study of the physical world and its manifestations, especially by using systematic observation and experiment (often used before a noun)
2. branch of science: a branch of science of a particular area of study
the life sciences

3. knowledge gained from science: the knowledge gained by the study of the physical world
4. systematic body of knowledge: any systematically organized body of knowledge about a specific subject
the social sciences

5. something studied or performed methodically: any activity that is the object of careful study or that is carried out according to a developed method
treated me to a lecture on the science of dressing for success



[14th century. Via Old French from Latin scientia , from scient- , present participle stem of scire “to know,” ultimately “to discern,” from an Indo-European word meaning “to cut.”]

Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

It is a science although I have known many working in the field who want to call it an art. I also found that they didn’t know much about psychology or any other thing. Many of them are professors in universities and their students.

The science of psychology is no better than the scientist. I have found many, many poor research studies and very mentally sick psychologist and psychiatrists. I estimate that about 80% of all who enter the field of psychology are seriously mentally sick and are trying to cover up, rationalize their mental sickness.

Answer 9

If you wish to make persons to accomplish anything but in the same time maybe not to share with them what they need to do then you'll need a plan like Black Ops Hypnosis, a on line plan you will think it is here https://tr.im/IPDMo and which will coach you on how to utilize hypnosis without your partner know.
 
Black Ops Hypnosis it'll teach you the hypnosis technique. With this specific method you will have a way to hypnotize your self and others about you for the benefit.

Answer 10

nothing is science unless its problems can be researched
psychiatry is science because its been structured by human interest,
psychology is the conscience of human ability
but its not science because it doesnt go beyond food , water and air