Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Incorrigible Science: A Conversation with James Lamiell

(Interviewed by Jack Martin, Simon Fraser University)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Dialogues at the Edge of American Psychological Discourse

Abstract

James Lamiell, in his interview, discusses his abiding concerns over the notion, by now thoroughly embedded within the research methods canon of contemporary mainstream scientific psychology, that knowledge of statistical patterns in population-level data is knowledge that is also scientifically informative about the psychological lives of individual persons. Located at the nexus of the philosophy of psychology, the history of psychology, and research methods in psychology, Lamiell’s work identifies the many historical points at which the confusions that result from this mistaken notion have been clearly articulated by critics but then ignored, or misunderstood, within psychology’s mainstream, revealing the discipline to be, in this crucial respect, effectively incorrigible. The result is neither good science nor ethically unquestionable professional practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Allport, G. W. (1966). Traits revisited. American Psychologist, 21, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowles, M. (1989). Statistics in psychology: An historical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grice, J. W. (1911). Observation oriented modeling: Analysis of cause in the behavioral sciences. New York: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (1981). Toward an idiothetic psychology of personality. American Psychologist, 36, 276–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (1982). The case for an idiothetic psychology of personality: A conceptual and empirical foundation. In B. A. Maher & W. B. Maher (Eds.), Progress in experimental personality research (Vol. 11, pp. 1–84). New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (1986a). Epistemological tenets of an idiothetic psychology of personality. In A. Angleitner, A. Furnham, & G. Van Heck (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe: Current issues and controversies (pp. 3–22). Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (1986b). What is nomothetic about “nomothetic” personality research?. The Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 6, 97–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (1987). The psychology of personality: An epistemological inquiry. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (1990a). Explanation in the psychology of personality. In D. N. Robinson & L. P. Mos (Eds.), Annals of Theoretical Psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 153–192). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (1990b). Let’s be careful out there. In D. N. Robinson & L. P. Mos (Eds.), Annals of Theoretical Psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 219–231). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (1997). Individuals and the differences between them. In R. Hogan, J. A. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 117–141). New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (1998). “Nomothetic” and “idiographic”: Contrasting Windelband’s understanding with contemporary usage. Theory and Psychology, 8, 23–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (2003). Beyond individual and group differences: Human individuality, scientific psychology, and William Stern’s critical personalism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (2010). William Stern (1871–1938): A brief introduction to his life and works. Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (2015). Statistical thinking in psychological research: In quest of clarity through historical inquiry and conceptual analysis. In J. Martin, J. Sugarman, & K. L. Slaney (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of theoretical and philosophical psychology: Methods, approaches, and new directions for social sciences (pp. 200–215). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (2016). On the concept of “effects” in contemporary psychological experimentation: A case study in the need for conceptual clarity and discursive precision. In R. Harré & F. Moghaddam (Eds.), Questioning causality: Scientific explorations of cause and consequence across social contests (pp. 83–102). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T., & Durbeck, P. (1987). Whence cognitive prototypes in impression formation? Some empirical evidence for dialectical reasoning as a generative process. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 8, 223–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T., Foss, M. A., Larsen, R. J., & Hempel, A. (1983). Studies in intuitive personology from an idiothetic point of view: Implications for personality theory. Journal of Personality, 51, 213–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Münsterberg, H. (1913). Psychology and industrial efficiency. Boston and New York: Houghton-Mifflin.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, T. R. (1986). The rise of statistical thinking: 1820–1900. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, W. (1900). Über Psychologie der individuellen Differenzen (Ideen zu einer “differentiellen Psychologie”) [On the psychology of individual differences (Toward a “differential psychology”)]. Leipzig: Barth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, W. (1911). Die Differentielle Psychology in ihren methodischen Grundlagen (Methodological Foundations of Differential Psychology). Leipzig: Barth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, W. (1921). Richtlinien für die Methodik der psychologischen Praxis [Guidelines for the methods of psychological practice]. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für angewandte Psychologie, 29, 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, W. (1929). Persönlichkeitsforschung und Testmethode [Personality research and the method of testing]. Jahrbuch der Charakterologie, 6, 63–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, W. (1933). Der personale Faktor in Psychotechnik und praktischer Psychologie [The personal factor in psychotechnics and practical psychology]. Zeitschrift für angewandte Psychologie, 44, 52–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike, E. L. (1911). Individuality. New York: Houghton-Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venn, J. (1888). The logic of chance. London/New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wundt, W. (2013). Psychology’s struggle for existence (J. T. Lamiell, Trans.). History of Psychology, 16, 197–211. doi:10.1037/a0032319

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Georgetown university, Washington, D.C, USA

    James Lamiell

Authors
  1. James Lamiell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James Lamiell .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Lesley University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA

    Heather Macdonald

  2. Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, USA

    David Goodman

  3. Lesley University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA

    Brian Becker

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lamiell, J. (2017). The Incorrigible Science: A Conversation with James Lamiell. In: Macdonald, H., Goodman, D., Becker, B. (eds) Dialogues at the Edge of American Psychological Discourse. Palgrave Studies in the Theory and History of Psychology. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59096-1_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation