4.2.3.1 - Features of science
Psychology is scientific when claims are exposed to evidence, replication and the possibility of being wrong. You will examine objectivity, empirical methods, replicability, falsifiability, theory construction and hypothesis testing, then explore paradigms and paradigm shifts. Applying these features to psychological research will help you distinguish a genuinely testable explanation from scientific-sounding language and evaluate how knowledge changes over time.
Objective, empirical evidence
Science is not just a collection of facts. It is a disciplined way of building knowledge from evidence. In AQA Psychology, the first two features to know are objectivity and the empirical method.
Objectivity
Objectivity means keeping personal bias, expectations and values from influencing the research process or the interpretation of findings.
An objective psychologist tries to make the study depend on the data, not on the researcher. This is why scientific research uses standardised procedures, operationalised variables, controlled conditions and clear scoring systems. If two researchers follow the same method, they should collect and interpret evidence in the same way.
Objectivity does not mean the researcher has no opinions at all. It means the design of the research reduces the chance that those opinions shape what happens. For example, a memory task scored by counting the number of correct words recalled is usually more objective than an unstructured interview about "how confident" someone felt, because the scoring rules are clearer.
Empirical method
The empirical method is the use of systematic observation or measurement to collect evidence, rather than relying on argument, authority, intuition or personal belief.
Psychology uses the empirical method when behaviour is observed, measured and analysed. A laboratory experiment on reaction time, a controlled observation of helping behaviour, a questionnaire with numerical stress scores and a brain-imaging study all gather evidence from the world rather than from speculation alone.
AO2 scenario: Dr Rahman investigates whether phone notifications affect concentration. She gives every participant the same proofreading task, uses the same time limit and counts the number of errors detected. The method is empirical because it collects measurable evidence. It is more objective because the task, instructions and scoring are standardised, so Dr Rahman's personal belief about phones should not decide the result.
A numerical score is not automatically objective. If Dr Rahman chooses which spelling errors count only after seeing who received notifications, her expectations can still shape the result. Pre-set scoring rules and a scorer unaware of the condition reduce that opportunity. Internal mental processes also have to be inferred from behaviour, self-report or biological measures: a precise score can still be a poor measure of concentration. Scientific judgement therefore checks both bias and what the score represents.
Replicability and falsifiability
A single study is rarely enough to establish a scientific claim. Science becomes stronger when procedures can be repeated and theories can be tested against evidence that might prove them wrong.
Replicability
Replicability is the extent to which a study or procedure can be repeated, ideally by other researchers, to check whether the same pattern of findings is obtained.
Replication matters because one result may be produced by chance, a biased sample, a flawed measure or an unrecognised extraneous variable. If several independent researchers use the same procedure and find a similar effect, confidence in the finding increases. If repeated attempts fail, the original claim may need to be questioned, refined or abandoned.
For replication to be possible, methods must be described precisely. A researcher should report who took part, how variables were operationalised, what materials were used, what instructions were given and how the data were analysed. The detailed structure of scientific reports is a separate AQA lesson, but the reason for that structure belongs here: science needs enough transparency for others to check the work.
Falsifiability
Falsifiability means that a theory or hypothesis is stated in a way that could, in principle, be shown to be false by evidence.
Karl Popper argued that scientific claims should be open to refutation. A theory does not become scientific because it sounds persuasive or because researchers can find examples that fit it. It becomes scientific when it makes risky, testable predictions that could fail.
Compare these two claims:
| Claim | Scientific status | Why |
|---|---|---|
| "Students who revise using spaced practice will recall more key terms than students who revise for the same total time in one session." | Falsifiable | A well-designed test could yield reliable evidence of no predicted advantage or of the opposite pattern. A non-significant result alone is not conclusive proof of no effect. |
| "People behave as they do because of hidden forces that always explain their actions somehow." | Unfalsifiable as worded | It is unclear what evidence would count against the claim. |
This is why psychologists usually say evidence supports a hypothesis rather than proves it. Future evidence may fail to replicate the finding or may reveal conditions under which the theory does not apply.
Evaluating replication: replication and falsification allow claims to be corrected. A failed replication does not automatically mean an original study was worthless. The effect may depend on context, measures, culture, sample or exact procedure. The scientific point is that claims must remain open to checking.
Theory construction and hypothesis testing
Science does not only collect observations. It organises observations into theories, then tests those theories through hypotheses.
Theory construction
Theory construction is the process of developing a systematic explanation for behaviour from evidence and using it to organise existing findings.
A theory is broader than a single finding. For example, the multi-store model of memory is a theory because it explains memory as a set of separate stores with different features. The cognitive approach is built from theories about mental processes such as schema, attention and memory. Theories help psychologists explain patterns and generate new research.
Hypothesis testing
Hypothesis testing is the process of deriving a specific, testable prediction from a theory and checking it against empirical evidence.
The process often works like this:
| Step | What the psychologist does | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Observation | Notices a pattern that needs explaining. | Students seem to remember better after spaced practice. |
| Theory construction | Proposes an explanation for the pattern. | A proposed explanation is that retrieving material after a gap strengthens later access to it. |
| Hypothesis | Writes a specific, testable prediction. | Students using spaced practice will recall more words than students using massed practice. |
| Empirical test | Collects objective data. | Participants learn word lists under controlled conditions. |
| Revision | Keeps, refines or rejects the theory. | If the prediction fails, the theory may need limits or changes. |
Continue this lesson.
You’re previewing NovaLearn without an account. Create a free account to read the rest.
Create free account