The state and status of theory in psychological science

Read full text
Authors: Noah N'Djaye Nikolai van Dongen, Andreas Glöckner, Philipp Musfeld, Alexandra Sarafoglou, Denny Borsboom, Laura Francina Bringmann, Markus I. Eronen, Kyra Caitlin Evers, Willem E. Frankenhuis, E.I. Fried, Jonas M B Haslbeck, Marieke A. Helmich
+13 more Pritam Laskar, Caspar J. Van Lissa, Richard L. McElreath, Jason Nak, Freek Oude Maatman, Vencislav Popov, Donald J. Robinaugh, Anne M. Scheel, Han L. J. van der Maas, Leonhard Volz, Meike Waaijers, Andrea K. Wittenborn, Luiza Yuan
Cited by: 3

Abstract

Psychology’s theory problem, long noted since Meehl, persists: most theories are verbal, underspecified, and make weak predictions, so hypotheses rarely follow from theory and findings seldom constrain it. Historical empiricism and today’s incentives (novelty, significance, volume) favor flexible, low-risk, strategically vague theorizing, while reforms and training emphasize methods over theory construction and formal/computational modeling. The result is fragmented subfields, drifting constructs, and “effects” that don’t cumulate—fueling replication failures, post-hoc rationalization, and shallow applied progress. Improving epistemic design requires educating and rewarding precise, falsifiable theories.

Fields of Study & Subjects

Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology Philosophy and History of Science Mental Health Research Topics

Publication details

Publisher
Center for Open Science
Publication date
13 February 2026
Document type
Preprint