There is reasonable doubt as to the classification of psychology as a science in the minds of the lay person. This is mostly as a result of the overly simplified and logical manner in which psychology and indeed psychologists are represented by popular media.
As such, psychology is seen to be more of a subjective human-oriented art as opposed to an objective and exact science. This paper shall set out to make a case for psychology as a science. The arguments made by people who do not accept the status of psychology as a science shall also be presented and their due merits evaluated.
Science is defined as knowledge which emanates from factual evidence. This being the case, there are certain features which are fundamental to all sciences and they make up the scientific methods. They include the collecting of quantitative data under controlled conditions, objectivity as opposed to subjectivity and an establishment of general laws and theories after experimentation. An interesting consideration is that this laws apply universally and as such, there is the element of repeatability.
Proponents of psychology as a science contend that psychology uses the stated scientific methods to study both human and non-human behaviors in various settings. Studies such as the genetic theory of IQ involve carefully controlled scientific experiments which are not only objective but are also high reliable and verifiable.
As with other scientific experiment findings, psychology results are produced and made open to the public domain for the interest of furthering science. The findings are also presented over for peer review to ensure their critical analysis. This is in line with the requirements set forth for scientific findings.
There exist theories in the psychology field which have been proven time and time again. This is a concept that is common to science whereby prediction of future events can be made by derivations obtained from experimentation.
An example is the behaviourist theory of operant conditioning which proposes that behavior is learned through reinforcement. Since this theory is objective and quantifiable one can from this theory make predictions about learning. The concept of generalization which is core to science is therefore exhibited in psychology as well.
On the other hand the seeming lack of objectivity in most psychological endevour is advanced as the most common argument advanced by opponents of psychology as a science. This claim is affirmed by the labeling theory of schizophrenia which proposes that schizophrenia is not caused so much by biological factors but rather, diagnosis of the disease is a result of subjective factors. This is because the social construct and reality will play a big role in the diagnosis process therefore presenting psychology as a hugely subjective art.
Science requires that there by measurable concepts meaning that the phenomena should not only be perceivable through our senses but also quantifiable as data. Psychology fails in this count since unobservable behaviour such as feelings play a pivotal role in psychology. This is contrary to the methods of science which dictate that all data must be quantifiable.
This paper set out to reinforce the notion that psychology is a science. In light of the arguments presented in this paper, it can be stated that to some extent, those who propose that psychology is not a science are right in that psychology can never be an exact science given the dynamic nature of the human subject which psychology sets out to examine.
However, most of the other attributes of psychology reinforce the claim that psychology is indeed a fully-fledged science deserving the same merits as physics or any of the other “accepted” sciences. This being the case, we can authoritatively state that psychology is indeed a true science.