We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
Email Signup | RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article


Cattell RB. Am. Psychol. 1948; 3(6): 193-198.


(Copyright © 1948, American Psychological Association)






The demand has been often reiterated that the sciences of man should overtake or at least reach equivalent development to the physical sciences. Two broad sources of resistance are: (1) internal methodological difficulties, and (2) resistance of those professions or studies already performing in some manner the tasks which social science shall ultimately take over. The view that social science cannot be unbiased can be fought only by social scientists themselves in adopting a definite and high standard of what is acceptable. The basic fact that needs emphasis is that discussions and conclusions involve two distinct sets of principles: (1) those concerned with moral values or ultimate social goals, and (2) those concerned with the actual prediction of how individuals and groups act. The social scientist may campaign freely for whatever he wants as a citizen but not as a scientist. The historical situation is that social sciences "are called to the bar of public reckoning." There is need for men having greater rather than less integrity in comparison with that demanded in research in the physical sciences. Social scientists should present the facts. The religious, political, or moral goals or values of which the social scientist has availed himself in arriving at a recommendation should be indicated. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley