Abstract
AbstractBeginning in 2011, public scandals and high‐visibility critiques of research methods in psychology fed a broader “replication crisis”: foundational experiments could not be replicated, and statistical methods in social psychology demonstrated vulnerability to fraud and manipulation. Even well‐intended researchers following accepted psychological protocols—zombie methodologies—could unintentionally produce false positives. In response, social psychologists have called for greater sensitivity to cultural diversity, a deeper consideration of social context, and more methodological reflection. The contrast with anthropology is dramatic, highlighting some of the strengths of our field: methodological versatility, appreciation of human variability, theoretical creativity, and a solid foundation for synthetic, interdisciplinary collaboration grounded in our tradition of holism. The human sciences are an important audience for anthropologists, as the example of cognitive science shows.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
