Jacobucci Ross
Department of Psychology, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, United States.
Front Psychol. 2022 Dec 13;13:1020770. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1020770. eCollection 2022.
Psychological science is experiencing a rise in the application of complex statistical models and, simultaneously, a renewed focus on applying research in a confirmatory manner. This presents a fundamental conflict for psychological researchers as more complex forms of modeling necessarily eschew as stringent of theoretical constraints. In this paper, I argue that this is less of a conflict, and more a result of a continued adherence to applying the overly simplistic labels of and . These terms mask a distinction between exploratory/confirmatory and . Further, while many researchers recognize that this dichotomous distinction is better represented as a continuum, this only creates additional problems. Finally, I argue that while a focus on preregistration helps clarify the distinction, psychological research would be better off replacing the terms exploratory and confirmatory with additional levels of detail regarding the goals of the study, modeling details, and scientific method.
心理科学正在经历复杂统计模型应用的增加,同时,重新聚焦于以验证性方式应用研究。这给心理研究者带来了一个基本冲突,因为更复杂的建模形式必然会避开同样严格的理论约束。在本文中,我认为这与其说是一种冲突,不如说是持续坚持应用过于简单化的标签的结果。这些术语掩盖了探索性/验证性建模之间的区别。此外,虽然许多研究者认识到这种二分法的区别更好地表示为一个连续体,但这只会产生更多问题。最后,我认为虽然关注预注册有助于澄清这种区别,但心理研究最好用关于研究目标、建模细节和科学方法的更多详细层次来取代探索性和验证性这两个术语。