Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Theory of Causality and Modern Mainstream Psychology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Psychology of Scientific Inquiry

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Psychology ((BRIEFSTHEORET))

  • 397 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter, it is demonstrated that mainstream paradigmatic psychology, that is grounded with Cartesian–Humean primitive theory of causality, has several problems that directly follow from this causality theory. The problems that characterize the mainstream psychology are: (1) neglect of exceptions; (2) denial of emergence of novel forms; (3) the aim of science is to give names; (4) fragmentation; and (5) anything goes that is correlated.

I am not going to discuss the state of modern qualitative psychology. This science, as it was discussed in Chap. 3, is by definition a form of art, where particulars are dealt in terms of universals. Such particulars described in detail by the modern qualitative psychology may support deeper experiencing of the world but do not ground reliable and valid explanation; the latter is the aim of science.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    “Almost” I left there because I cannot be certain that more developed causality theory has not re-emerged somewhere.

  2. 2.

    More likely not discovered but created by the researchers.

References

  • Allik, J., & McCrae, R. R. (2002). A five-factor theory perspective. In R. R. McCrae & J. Allik (Eds.), The five-factor model of personality across cultures (pp. 303–322). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ardila, A. (2003). Culture in our brains: Cross-cultural differences in the brain-behavior relationships. In A. Toomela (Ed.), Cultural guidance in the development of the human mind (pp. 63–86). Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ardila, R. (1992). Toward unity in psychology: The experimental synthesis of behaviour. International Journal of Psychology, 27(5), 299–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arribas-Aguila, D., Abad, F. J., & Colom, R. (2019). Testing the developmental theory of sex differences in intelligence using latent modelling: Evidence from the TEA Ability Battery (BAT_7). Personality and Individual Differences, 138, 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.09.043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, R. L., Atkinson, R. C., Smith, E. E., Bem, D. J., & Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (1993). Introduction to psychology (11th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baye, A., & Monseur, C. (2016). Gender differences in variability and extreme scores in an international context. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 4(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-015-0015-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beller, S., & Bender, A. (2017). Theory, the final frontier? A corpus-based analysis of the role of theory in psychological articles. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(951), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00951.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S., & Looren de Jong, H. (1997). Theoretical issues in psychology. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benbow, C. P. (1988). Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability in intellectually talented preadolescents: Their nature, effects, and possible causes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11, 169–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benbow, C. P., & Stanley, J. C. (1983). Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability: More facts. Science, 222, 1029–1031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, D. A., Roy, E. J., Srull, T. K., & Wickens, C. D. (1988). Psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, J. W. (2003). Origins of cross-cultural similarities and differences in human behavior: An ecocultural perspective. In A. Toomela (Ed.), Cultural guidance in the development of the human mind (pp. 97–109). Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P. R. (2002). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and application (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brainerd, C. J. (1978). The stage question in cognitive-developmental theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2, 173–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brainerd, C. J. (1993). Cognitive development is abrupt (but not stage-like). Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 58(9), 170–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, N. R., Buskist, W., Martin, G. N., Hogg, M., & Abrams, D. (1997). Psychology. The science of behaviour. European adaptation. Harlow: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carruthers, P., Laurence, S., & Stich, S. (Eds.). (2005). The innate mind. Structure and contents. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology. A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daseking, M., Petermann, F., & Waldmann, H.-C. (2017). Sex differences in cognitive abilities: Analyses from the German WAIS-IV. Personality and Individual Differences, 114, 145–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engelsted, N. (2017). Catching up with Aristotle. A journey in quest of general psychology. Cham: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Essex, C., & Smythe, W. E. (1999). Between numbers and notions. A critique of psychological measurement. Theory and Psychology, 9(6), 739–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, H. J. (1997). Personality and experimental psychology: The unification of psychology and the possibility of a paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(6), 1224–1237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, R. S. (1993). Understanding psychology. International edition (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, E. J. (1994). Has psychology a future? Psychological Science, 5(2), 69–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gleitman, H., Fridlund, A. J., & Reisberg, D. (1999). Psychology (8th ed.). New York, NY: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, C. D. (2015). Why psychology isn’t unified, and probably never will be. Review of General Psychology, 19(3), 207–214. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grusec, J. E., Lockhart, R. S., & Walters, G. C. (1990). Foundations of psychology. Toronto: Copp Clark Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. F., Benbow, C. P., Geary, D. C., Gur, R. C., Hyde, J. S., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2007.00032.x.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Henriques, G. (2011). A new unified theory of psychology. New York, NY: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kimura, D. (1999). Sex and cognition. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Book.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, S. (1982). The nature and limits of psychological knowledge: Lessons of a century qua “science”. American Psychologist, 36, 257–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kukla, A. (1992). Unification as a goal for psychology. American Psychologist, 47, 1054–1055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh. The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindberg, S. M., Hyde, J. S., Linn, M. C., & Petersen, J. L. (2010). New trends in gender and mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 1123–1135. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021276.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Low, P., Panksepp, J., Reiss, D., Edelman, D., Van Swinderen, B., & Koch, C. (2012). The Cambridge declaration on consciousness. Retrieved from http://fcmconference.org/img/CambridgeDeclarationOnConsciousness.pdf

  • Luria, A. R. (1974). Ob istoricheskom razvitii poznavatel’nykh processov. Eksperimental’no-psikhologicheskoje issledovanije. Moscow: Nauka.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luria, A. R. (1979). Jazyk i soznanije. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo Universiteta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahn, H. (2010). Vygotsky’s methodological approach: A blueprint for the future of psychology. In A. Toomela & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Methodological thinking in psychology: 60 years gone astray? (pp. 297–323). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1996). Toward a new generation of personality theories: Theoretical contexts for the five-factor model. In J. S. Wiggins (Ed.), The five-factor model of personality (pp. 51–87). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1999). A five-factor theory of personality. In A. Lawrence & O. P. J. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 139–153). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michell, J. (2000). Normal science, pathological science and psychometrics. Theory and Psychology, 10(5), 639–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michell, J. (2010). The quantity/quality interchange: A blind spot on the highway of science. In A. Toomela & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Methodological thinking in psychology: 60 years gone astray? (pp. 45–68). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, D. G. (1995). Psychology (4th ed.). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Premack, D. (1976). Intelligence in ape and man. Hillsdale, MI: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roediger, H. L., Capaldi, E. D., Paris, S. G., Polivy, J., & Herman, C. P. (1996). Psychology. Fourth edition. Minneapolis, MN: West Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1992). What is an “explanation” of behavior? Psychological Science, 3(3), 150–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, D. J. (2014). The value of direct replication. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(1), 76–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613514755.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. E., Nolen-Hoeksema, S., Fredrickson, B. L., Loftus, G. R., Bem, D. J., & Maren, S. (2003). Atkinson and Hilgard’s introduction to psychology. Fourteenth edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stam, H. J. (2004). Unifying psychology: Epistemological act or disciplinary maneuver? Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60(12), 1259–1262. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20069.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stam, H. J. (2015). The neurosciences and the search for a unified psychology: The science and esthetics of a single framework. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1467), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2001). Unified psychology. American Psychologist, 56(12), 1069–1079.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Teitelbaum, P., & Pellis, S. M. (1992). Toward a synthetic physiological psychology. Psychological Science, 3(1), 4–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomasello, M., & Call, J. (1997). Primate cognition. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toomela, A. (2003). Culture as a semiosphere: On the role of culture in the culture-individual relationship. In I. E. Josephs (Ed.), Dialogicality in development (pp. 129–163). Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toomela, A. (2008). Variables in psychology: A critique of quantitative psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 42(3), 245–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-008-9059-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Toomela, A. (2015). Vygotsky’s theory on the Procrustes’ bed of linear thinking: Looking for structural-systemic Theseus to save the idea of ‘social formation of mind’. Culture and Psychology, 21(3), 318–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toomela, A. (2016a). Kultuur, kõne ja Minu Ise. (Culture, speech, and My Self). Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toomela, A. (2016b). What are higher psychological functions? Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 50(1), 91–121.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Toomela, A. (2018). Vygotskian (but only partly Vygotsky’s) understanding of special education. Educacao: Revista Quadrimestral. Porto Alegre, 41(3), 347–361. https://doi.org/10.15448/1981-2582.2018.3.31795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tulviste, P. (1988). Kul’turno-istoricheskoje razvitije verbal’nogo myshlenija. Tallinn: Valgus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vauclair, J. (2003). Would humans without language be apes? In A. Toomela (Ed.), Cultural guidance in the development of the human mind (pp. 9–26). Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veresov, N. (2010). Forgotten methodology: Vygotsky’s case. In A. Toomela & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Methodological thinking in psychology: 60 years gone astray? (pp. 267–295). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1934). Myshlenije i rech. Psikhologicheskije issledovanija. (Thinking and speech. Psychological investigations.). Moscow: Gosudarstvennoje Social’no-ekonomicheskoje Izdatel’stvo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S., & Luria, A. (1994). Tool and symbol in child development. (Originally written in 1930). In R. V. D. Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 99–174). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S., & Luria, A. R. (1930). Etjudy po istorii povedenija. Obezjana. Primitiv. Rebjonok. Moscow-Leningrad: Gosudarstvennoje Izdatel’stvo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, H. M., & Gelman, S. A. (1992). Cognitive development: Foundational theories of core domains. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 337–375.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, H. M., & Gelman, S. A. (1998). Knowledge acquisition in foundational domains. In D. Kuhn & R. S. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology. Fifth edition. Volume 2: Cognition, perception, and language (pp. 523–573). New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. V., & Tulviste, P. (1992). L. S. Vygotsky and contemporary developmental psychology. Developmental Psychology, 28(4), 548–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wynn, K. (1992). Addition and subtraction by human infants. Nature, 358, 749–750.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Natural Sciences and Health, Tallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia

    Aaro Toomela

Authors
  1. Aaro Toomela
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Toomela, A. (2019). Theory of Causality and Modern Mainstream Psychology. In: The Psychology of Scientific Inquiry. SpringerBriefs in Psychology(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31449-1_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation