What If Social Scientists Had Reviewed Great Scientific Works of the Past?

@article{Trafimow2009WhatIS,
  title={What If Social Scientists Had Reviewed Great Scientific Works of the Past?},
  author={David Trafimow and Stephen Rice},
  journal={Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science},
  year={2009},
  volume={4 1},
  pages={65-78}
}
One might question whether the great works in the history of science would get good reviews if subjected to the type of reviewing process to which psychologists are forced to submit their manuscripts. In some ways, behavioral scientists are too critical, and in other ways they are insufficiently so. To explore these issues, we imagine that great works from the history of nonsocial sciences were submitted for review in behavioral science journals and present simulated editor letters summarizing… CONTINUE READING
Recent Discussions
This paper has been referenced on Twitter 20 times over the past 90 days. VIEW TWEETS
7 Citations
22 References
Similar Papers

References

Publications referenced by this paper.
Showing 1-10 of 22 references

The ubiquitous Laplacian assumption: Reply to Lee and Wagenmakers

  • D. Trafimow
  • Psychological Review
  • 2005
1 Excerpt

Simply Einstein: Relativity demystified

  • R. Wolfson
  • New York: W.W. Norton
  • 2003
2 Excerpts

The universe in a nutshell

  • S. Hawking
  • New York: Bantam Books
  • 2001
1 Excerpt

Some tests of the distinction between cognitive and affective beliefs

  • D. Trafimow, P. Sheeran
  • Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
  • 1998
1 Excerpt

Similar Papers

Loading similar papers…