Defining psychology: Is it worth the trouble?
Version of Record online: 6 OCT 2004
Copyright © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Journal of Clinical Psychology
Special Issue: Defining Psychology: Articles and Commentaries on a New Unified Theory (Part 1)
Volume 60, Issue 12, pages 1249–1253, December 2004
How to Cite
Lilienfeld, S. O. (2004), Defining psychology: Is it worth the trouble?. J. Clin. Psychol., 60: 1249–1253. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20067
- Issue online: 4 NOV 2004
- Version of Record online: 6 OCT 2004
Henrique's thoughtful effort (this issue) to define psychology suffers from at least three shortcomings: (a) “psychology” is almost certainly an inherently fuzzy concept that resists precise definition; (b) attempts to define psychology are likely to hamper rather than foster consilience across scientific disciplines; and (c) Henriques incorrectly diagnoses the cause of the scientist–practitioner gap and hence offers an incorrect prescription. The sources of this gap lie not in intractable definitional disputes, but in fundamentally different approaches to acquiring knowledge. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Psychol.