Introduction
Some consider psychology a pseudoscience, but it is a science, nonetheless. Like all science specialties, the use of the scientific method is a staple when conducting research. But what is the scientific method, and why is it important in psychology? The scientific method is the sequence of actions from questions to drawing conclusions to test a hypothesis or achieve one or more research goals. The complete steps include stating a question to investigate, making predictions, gathering data, analyzing the data, and then lastly, drawing conclusions (Haig, 2019). Although research is fundamentally based on this method, some believe that the scientific method has little to do with science due to its limited application in their previous academic studies.
Importance of the Scientific Method
The scientific method should be integral to the discipline of psychology, journal entries, and endeavors to use psychological studies to solve pressing societal problems. According to Scholtz et al. (2020), many psychological papers lack rigor and integrity in the methodology used, which has consequences for predictive validity. This result shows the importance of applying and delineating the scientific method throughout the study. Authors have a valuable chance to improve study validity, broaden readers’ knowledge, and advance psychology and methodology by using a scientific approach.
Research Question
Social psychological research has been selected as a point of reference after identifying the principal subfields of study in psychology. In psychological research, Scholtz et al. (2020) found that social psychology was the most relevant out of the top 10 subjects studied using primarily quantitative research techniques. The idea of perceived autonomy and self-determination theory has been chosen as the emphasis of the subject after a review of current social psychology research. Therefore, the research question is as follows: How does perceived autonomy affect variations in psychological need satisfaction?
Scientific Method Applicability to the Research Question
The suggested research question entails repeatable scientific research that is widely accessible and ensures parsimony, accuracy, and impartiality. For instance, Ryan and Ryan (2019) based their approach on the self-determination theory in their study on the variance in perceived autonomy, guaranteeing parsimony, a concept intrinsic in scientific psychology studies. Thanks to the parsimony doctrine, researchers can use existing theories to explain their observations rather than an inquiry into new ones. Similarly, Costa et al. (2019) emphasize that the Self-Determination Theory (SDT) framework can be used to describe parental involvement that supports autonomy. The study provides a model that is hypothesized, investigates the relationships between the variables, and guarantees simplicity. The standard sampling procedure, which included informed consent, privacy, and confidentiality, assuring the ethical principle, is another example of how the scientific method can address the question, evident in this study (Costa et al., 2019). The articles successfully handle the social psychology research issue using a scientific approach that allows for implementing current theories, survey tools, ethical standards, and prediction models.
The scientific approach presupposes validity and appropriate measurement techniques. For instance, Costa et al. (2019) used the 8-item Psychological Control Scale, validated for the construct measures, to address the study topic. Similarly, Audet et al. (2021) used the balanced measure of the psychological needs scale (BMPN) to gauge initial levels of psychological need fulfillment and discontent. The research is also a five-wave prospective longitudinal one, which guarantees a clarity of purpose, validity, and the identification of changing trends over time (Audet et al., 2021). Therefore, it is clear that the scientific method is used to answer the study question using cross-sectional or longitudinal approaches and recognized scales to assess variables.
Findings
The peer-reviewed papers chosen to answer the specified research questions provide valid empirical findings for a range of demographic groups. For instance, the study by Ryan and Ryan (2019) indicates that homosexual and bisexual people can improve the satisfaction of both their autonomy and their need for competence and connectedness, promoting well-being. According to Audet et al. (2021), autonomous support from siblings showed greater objective progress, need fulfillment, and psychological well-being despite being much less prevalent than parental and peer assistance. In a similar vein, Costa et al. (2019) discovered that perceived control and autonomous support were partly responsible for the intergenerational link between parents’ and teenagers’ need for frustration. As a result, the studies’ effective integration of SDT-a comprehensive paradigm for examining human behavior, personality, and socialization-increased understanding of social psychological theory.
Credibility and Applicability of Sources
The currency, appropriateness, authority, and precision are the particular criteria for limiting the breadth of looking for scientific papers that are credible and applicable. Since all of the sources were released within the last five years, the requirements for currency were originally met. In accordance with Kiai (2019), publishing bias against null findings has caused a replication crisis in psychology. Since this would meet requirements for relevance and correctness, ensuring the papers were peer-reviewed and replicable was crucial. All of the sources were homogenous and frequently referenced, as shown in academic databases, suggesting their reproducibility and relevance.
Conclusion
The writers’ names and qualifications were disclosed, which helped establish their authority. For instance, William S. Ryan is a representative of the University of Toronto’s psychology school, demonstrating his expertise and authority (Ryan & Ryan, 2019). The applicability can be guaranteed by considering the keywords linked to the research question in the abstracts. For example, the terms autonomy support, self-determination theory, and need frustration in the paper by Costa et al. (2019) explicitly relate to the posed research question. Consequently, ensuring the credibility and applicability of the aforementioned sources was made possible by applying the exact criteria of currency, significance, authority, and accuracy.
References
Audet, É. C., Levine, S. L., Holding, A. C., Koestner, R., & Powers, T. A. (2021). A remarkable alliance: Sibling autonomy support and goal progress in emerging adulthood. Family Relations, 70(5), 1571–1582. Web.
Costa, S., Gugliandolo, M. C., Barberis, N., Cuzzocrea, F., & Liga, F. (2019). Antecedents and consequences of parental psychological control and autonomy support: The role of psychological basic needs. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(4), 1168–1189. Web.
Haig, B. D. (2019). The importance of scientific method for psychological science. Psychology, Crime & Law, 25(6), 527–541. Web.
Kiai, A. (2019). To protect credibility in science, banish “publish or perish.”Nature Human Behaviour, 3(10), 1017–1018. Web.
Ryan, W. B. F., & Ryan, R. M. (2019). Toward a social psychology of authenticity: Exploring within-person variation in autonomy, congruence, and genuineness using self-determination theory. Review of General Psychology, 23(1), 99–112. Web.
Scholtz, S. E., De Klerk, W., & De Beer, L. T. (2020). The use of research methods in psychological research: A systematised review. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 5. Web.