Theory-driven science and naive empiricism in counseling psychology.

Abstract

Counseling psychologists' aversion to theory-driven science and their enthusiasm for naive empiricism impede scientific progress. For the scientist who endorses theory-driven science, causes are emergent entities that arise from the relations among the elements in events, all events are lawful, and the purpose of research is to test and evolve theories. For the scientist who endorses naive empiricism, the causes of events are the essences of the elements in events, only frequent events are lawful, and the purpose of research is to identify regularities from unbiased observations. The consequences of these differences are described in terms of the impossibility of unbiased observation, the importance of theory to give facts meaning, the role of research methods, and the way in which scientific products are applied. In theory-driven science, an unending cycle of discovery and testing creates and evolves theories of ever increasing scope that can guide counseling practice.