Is Psychology A Science?

Psychology was probably born in the 19th century, but it has been of interest to our society since the very beginning of human history. Throughout our time, we’ve asked: Why are we the way we are? What makes us human? What makes a person an individual? How can we explore something as vast and complex as a person? How are the mind, emotion and behaviour related?

In the pursuit of understanding these kinds of questions, many ask one simple yet complex question: is psychology a science?

This article suggests psychology may be considered a science through certain lenses, but acknowledges there are other perspectives that question its place as a science. It aims to review arguments for and against psychology being a science, such as:

Psychological research through the scientific method
Falsifiability
Objectivity
Quantifiability

What Is Psychology?

Psychology is regularly described as a social science that studies the mind and behaviour. As the American Psychological Association (APA) explains, psychology explores the relationship between the brain and behaviour, the environment and behaviour and the inner psychological processes (i.e. thoughts and emotions) [1].

‘Psychologists’, a broad term for those professionals who have completed training in at least one area of psychology, provide a variety of services and conduct numerous tasks as part of their role. They may assess individuals using psychometrics, including screening tools, measures of personality, intelligence, etc.; diagnose based on those screenings or observations; conduct research ranging from controlled experiments to naturalistic methods; and teach students and other professionals.

When people hear the word ‘psychology’ or ‘psychologist’, they may automatically imagine a therapy session. While therapy is a vital aspect of the discipline, psychology is much more than just therapy. It also involves empirical research and advanced statistical data analysis, which allow for evidence-based conclusions to be drawn.

Why Is Psychology Considered A Science?

Almost all definitions and explanations of psychology refer to the study of the human mind and behaviour as a science. The initial birthplace of psychology was Wilhelm Wundt’s laboratory, where he conducted psychological experiments using scientific methods available at the time [2]. There, he defined and tested hypotheses, measured and conducted structured observations, all of which, by modern standards, are considered scientific methods.

Since then, psychology has developed into a discipline with many fields of study, all requiring scientific methods, analysis and research to test hypotheses.

Here are some of the subfields of psychology as named by the APA:

Cognitive psychology and brain sciences.
Climate and environmental psychology.
Clinical psychology.
Counselling psychology.
Developmental psychology.
Experimental psychology.
Forensic psychology.
Health and rehabilitation psychology.
Organisational and industrial psychology.
Psychology of teaching and learning.
Quantitative psychology.
Social psychology.
Sport psychology.

What Is The Scientific Method?

We have addressed whether psychology is a science, and now we must consider another question: how is psychology a science? Psychology first emerged as a distinct study from philosophy as researchers began conducting experiments to test their hypotheses about humans’ behaviours. While philosophy relies on abstract reasoning and logic to debate the nature of reality, psychology differentiated itself as it began to use more scientific methods.

The fathers of psychology (i.e. Wilhelm Wundt, William James and John Watson) made observations, stated hypotheses and conducted experiments to test or refute those hypotheses. In essence, they relied on empiricism, and their theories were only accepted if supported by experimental evidence. Broadly speaking, this process remains the same today, underlining that psychology uses scientific methods and systematic research approaches to reach its conclusions.

As the University of Central Florida explains, psychologists and researchers conduct studies in five scientific steps [3]:

Making an observation.
Asking a question and formulating predictions (hypotheses).
Testing the hypothesis and collecting data.
Analysing the findings, summarising results and drawing conclusions.
Reporting and sharing the results.

Unlike physics or chemistry, where scientific facts and findings are always consistent, the social sciences work with tendencies and statistics. For example, in chemistry, two compounds will always, without exception, produce the same chemical reaction when combined. In psychology, however, that is rarely the case. Similar circumstances may lead to similar outcomes, but never the very same, as psychological realities are highly individual. With this in mind, psychology uses statistics to organise, analyse and interpret data, uncovering behavioural patterns.

And what about psychological processes that are entirely mental? Psychological constructs like personality traits, intelligence, mental disorders or introversion are measured using psychometrics. As psychologists Denny Borsboom and Dylan Molenaar note, psychometrics develops measurement tools by identifying observable indicators that represent theoretical concepts [4]. For example, to measure intelligence quotient (IQ), a theoretical concept, psychometricians developed IQ tests and IQ scores, or the so-called intelligence tests. When developing these tests, psychologists ensure that they specifically measure IQ and that the results are not influenced by unrelated variables like personality or gender.

Psychological research also includes and utilises meta-analyses and systematic reviews to summarise and compare scientific findings and draw more holistic conclusions. While a systematic review collects and presents a broad body of research in a comprehensive structure, a meta-analysis combines results from numerous studies on the same subject to determine whether they yield the same findings and reach the same conclusions. Meta-analyses and systematic reviews further support the argument for psychology as a science.

Psychology Is Not A Science

For some members of the general public, psychology using scientific methods does not necessarily make it a science. They tend to argue that psychology is not a science based on two aspects. Firstly, the initial idea of science comes from exact natural sciences like physics or chemistry. Secondly, what the general public spontaneously considers to be psychology is social psychology. Social psychology explores society and the interconnection between society and the individual. As it is primarily based on medians, wider populations and broad tendencies, social psychology may seem less scientific.

Even within psychological academic circles, some experts agree and argue against psychology being a scientific field. In his article “Why psychology cannot be an empirical science”, psychologist Jan Smedslund argues that many psychological processes are irreversible and thus make lasting changes in individuals and human psychology in general [5]. Furthermore, in his opinion, an infinite number of influential factors are interconnected in numerous ways, many of which cannot be measured or controlled during research.

Exactly during that process, conducting research, comes with three factors that may lead us to suggest psychology is not a science:

Falsifiability
Objectivity
Quantifiability

Falsifiability

Falsifiability, or untestability, is an essential aspect of scientific studies. First proposed by Karl Popper in 1935, falsifiability is the ability of a statement or hypothesis to be proven wrong in order for it to be considered scientific. Falsifiability does not dive into whether a hypothesis is wrong or right; it simply means that with the right measurement and testing, the hypothesis can be proven wrong sometime in the future. Although it sounds counterintuitive to establish a hypothesis as valid only if it can be proven wrong at some point, falsifiability is important because it allows room for further research and improvement.

Freud’s theory of the id, ego and superego exemplifies an unfalsifiable theory or hypothesis. He observed his patients; this theory was the closest he came to explaining why specific psychological processes and behaviours occur. However, in reality, there is no way to test these aspects of the personality, and thus either prove or disprove them.

Many psychological concepts and theories are unfalsifiable. Examples include Maslow’s hierarchy of needs or Rogers’ self-actualisation theory. Although they sound logical, there is no way to establish whether all people strive to become their best selves or whether they first need basic needs met before moving on to higher needs like love.

Objectivity

Leonard S. Newman has written extensively on the factors contributing to the general population’s belief that psychology is not a science. One aspect he mentions is the wider population’s ‘preferred beliefs’ [6]. When looking for reasons behind certain behaviours, laypeople, he says, prefer dispositional factors (i.e. individual tendencies) to situational and contextual factors (e.g. societal influence).

In one research study, experts interviewed participants on their opinions about people who committed some form of violence (wrongdoers). Half the participants heard about dispositional factors that influence violence (e.g. dishonesty), while the other half heard about situational factors (e.g. poverty) that may prompt someone to be violent. Although all participants blamed and held the wrongdoers accountable, they believed that the researchers were trying to absolve the wrongdoers of responsibility when only situational factors (e.g. poverty) were discussed.

These findings are important on two levels and have broad implications for psychological research in general. People tend to react differently based on emotions (often subjective and irrational), and even if the results across populations are all unified, they can’t be attributed to the completely same reasons. This raises the question: can such findings be objective? People may not have feelings about gravity, but they certainly have feelings about violence.

Quantifiability

Psychologist Scott O. Lilienfeld, in a paper titled “Public scepticism of psychology: Why many people perceive the study of human behaviour as unscientific”, discusses another possible source of public scepticism toward psychological scientific research [7]. He addresses the issue of quantifiability and the challenge of deriving natural laws and absolute truths from psychological research. He underlines that psychological studies typically present findings in percentages and tendencies. For example, a study may report that between 15% and 25% of children experience adverse psychological effects following their parents’ divorce. Firstly, the result is expressed as a range, not as a concrete number. Secondly, the finding applies to a portion (i.e. 15% to 25%), not all children. By comparison: if gravity were only true 15% to 25% of the time, would it still be considered a scientific fact?

The complexity of the individual human psyche and the constant inner changes in perception and emotional states, makes psychological findings difficult to quantify and generalise to the extent of being considered as a scientific fact.

Final Thoughts: Is Psychology A Science

Whether psychology is a science depends on the methods used in its research. The techniques employed in psychology research are scientific in nature, and the research itself aims to control circumstances and variables that may affect the outcome. This methodological rigour makes psychology a science, and many of its findings and conclusions can be considered scientific.

Nonetheless, the human psyche is complex, constantly changing, and influenced by many external factors and trends, making psychological research susceptible to criticism. Unlike other sciences, psychology must often repeat studies to determine whether its findings still hold true; unlike the need to re-test whether “gravity” remains a fact.