Psychology: Is It Applied Enough?

Abstract

The question "Is psychology applied enough?" can be regarded in two ways. In the first place, it could refer to the distinction "pure versus applied science", and the reproach that modern scientific experimental psychology has little to offer to the practitioner. It is argued that this distinction has lost much of its topicality in modern science, and certainly with respect to psychology. In this sense "applied psychology" is an outmoded notion. Secondly, it could refer to the question whether psychology is utilised enough in dealing with the great many pressing problems in modern society. And it is shown that this question cannot be answered in the affirmative. Too often psychological aspects of problems escape notice and too often potential psychological contributions are neglected in governmental and organisational decision-making, also in cases where such a contribution would prove valuable indeed. A number of reasons for such a neglect are discussed and some ways of improvement are suggested.La question de savoir si la psychologie est suffisamment appliquée peut être abordée de deux façons. Elle peut d'abord renvoyer à la distinction entre science fondamentale et science appliquée et à la critique selon laquelle la psychologie expérimentale moderne a peu à offrir au praticien. Nous pensons que cette distinction a perdu beaucoup de son actualité, surtout en psychologie. Dans ces conditions, la « psychologie appliquée » est une notion désuète. Ensuite, cette question peut faire référence au fait de savoir si la psychologie est suffisamment exploitée dans le traitement des nombreux problèmes sociaux qu'il est urgent de résoudre. Il apparaît qu'il n'est pas possible de répondre par l'affirmative. Trop souvent, les dimensions psychologiques des problèmes passent inaperçues et les contributions potentielles de la psychologie sont négligées dans les décisions gouvernementales et organisationnelles, même quand cet apport serait manifestement précieux. On analyse les raisons de cette négligence et l'on suggère quelques pistes en vue d'une amélioration.

Bridging the divide in work and organizational psychology: evidence from practice

“…In this and other exchanges on the topic, the main criticism levelled at practitioners is that of disregarding the research literature and infrequently bringing scientific findings to their practice (e.g., Drenth, 2008). The issue was succinctly summarized by Garman (2011), who wrote that ".…”

Opposition to Immigration and (Anti‐)Environmentalism: An Application and Extension of the Social Dominance‐Environmentalism Nexus with 21 Countries in Europe

“…Against this backdrop, there have been calls for more research that examines how to encourage accelerated and significant changes in behaviors, organizations, and institutions to deliver effective mitigation and adaptation endeavors across the world (Pearson & Schuldt, 2018; Steg, 2018). Applications from psychology may provide relevant contributions to address these calls and help understand the features that may drive or hinder these endeavors (Drenth, 2008; Van Langue et al, 2018), which at the sociopsychological level may comprise a mixture of pursuit of self‐interest (i.e., perceived gains and losses for the self) and concern for others (e.g., other individuals, groups, generations, species, or entire ecosystems) (Bamberg & Möser, 2007; Panno et al, 2018). This work applies and extends knowledge on the social psychological features that may hinder or sustain environmental protection, drawing on recent findings and propositions from the social dominance‐environmentalism nexus.…”

Methodological Issues in Soccer Talent Identification Research

“…In the current position paper we discussed several methodological issues common in the soccer talent identification literature, and provided suggestions to improve the methodological quality and robustness of research practices in future talent identification studies. We hope that the general principles discussed here will also transfer to practical selection contexts, and we believe that researchers have an important responsibility to communicate the reliability and validity of talent identification procedures to the sports field [133]. Thinking critically about the methodology and design of studies in sports opens the door for innovative research that advances this exciting field, and hopefully leads to a more coherent scientific and practical framework for talent identification.…”