Applied psychology in science and research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v7i2.440Keywords:
psychology of scientific research, research on researchAbstract
The purpose of the current article is to stress the demand for a new discipline of applied psychology, the psychology of scientific research, through arguments of a deductive and inductive nature. In this line, we analyze the concepts of science and research in order to define the place of the new investigation area between already established domains of psychology, introduce a thematic selection as the bases of a new direction of inquiry and describe the main problematical issues to which this new field can provide novel solutions and knowledge; the interdisciplinary aspects of scientific research as subject of scientific investigation are also discussed.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Achter, J. A., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (1996), Multipotentiality among the intellectually gifted: "It was never there and already it's vanishing." Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 65-76.
Bachtold, L. M., & Werner, E. E. (1972). Personality characteristics of women scientists. Psychological Reports, 31, 391-396.
Backhaus, K. B., Stone, B. A., & Heiner, K. (2002). Exploring the relationship between corporate social performance and employer attractiveness. Business & Society, 41, 292-318.
Bacon, F. (1957). Noul organon, cartea I. Bucuresti: Editura Academiei R.P.R.
Balgiu, A. (2002). Stil cognitiv si creativitate în domeniul tehnic. Revista Română de Psihologie, t. 48, 3-4.
Balgiu, A. (2005). Factori de mediu si potențarea disponibilităților creative în tehnică. Revista de Psihologie, 51, 3-4, 183-197.
Baumgartel, H. (1957). Leadership Style as a Variable in Research Administration. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2, 344-360.
Bejat, M.. (1971). Talent, inteligență, creativitate. Bucuresti: Editura Stiințifică, 16-18.
Busse, T. V, & Mansfield, R. S. (1984). Selected personality traits and achievement in male scientists. The Journal of Psychology, 116, 117-131.
Caluschi, Mariana (1994), Inventica si scoala. Iasi: Editura BIT.
Campbell, D. T. (1990). Levels of Organization, Downward Causation and the Selection-Theory Approach to Evolutionary Epistemology. In G. Greenberg and E. Tobach (Eds.), Theories of the Evolution of Knowing, (the T. C. Schneirla Conference Series, Vol. 4), Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1-17.
Carcea M. I., & Iorga, M. (2008). Pentru o psihologie a cercetării stiințifice. Conferința Națională de Psihologie Industrială si Organizațională «Alexandru Rosca», Cluj-Napoca.
Ciobanu, G. N., & Teodor, V. (2002). Cercetări operaționale: optimizări în rețele: teorie si aplicații economice. Bucuresti: Editura Matrix Rom.
Chambers, J. A. (1964). Relating personality and biographical factors to scientific creativity. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 78, 1-20.
Cox, C. (1926). Genetic studies of genius: Vol. II. The early mental traits of three hundred geniuses. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Descartes, R. (1957). Discurs asupra metodei de a ne conduce bine rațiunea în a căuta adevărul în stiințe. Bucuresti: Editura Stiințifică.
Drăgănescu, M. (2001) Societatea informațională si a cunoasterii. Vectorii societății cunoasterii, In Filip Gh. F. (Ed.) Societatea informațională-societatea cunoasterii. Concepte, soluții si strategii pentru România. Bucuresti: Editura Expres.
Dunbar, K. (1993). Concept discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science, 17, 397-434.
Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg and J. Davidson (Eds.), Mechanisms of Insight. Cambridge, MIT Press.
Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: Online creativity and conceptual change in science. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith, and S. Vaid (Eds.), Conceptual Structures and Processes: Emergence, Discovery and Change. Washington, DC: APA Press.
Eiduson, B. T. (1962). Scientists: Their psychological world. New York: Basic Books.
Eysenck, H. J. (1995). Genius: The natural history of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Evan (1965). Conflict and performance in R&D organizations. Industrial Management Review, 7, 37-46.
Feist, G.J. (1993). A structural model of scientific eminence. Psychological Science, 4, 366-371.
Feist, G. J., & Barron, F. (1995, October). Do hostile and arrogant scientists become eminent or are eminent scientists likely to become hostile and arrogant? Paper presented at the annual conference of Society for Social Studies of Science, Charlottesville, VA.
Feist, G.J. (1995). Psychology of science and history of psychology: Putting behavioral generalizations to the test. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 119-123.
Feist, G., (2006). The Psychology of Science and the Origins of the Scientific Mind. Yale University Press, New Haven and London.
Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of the impact of personality on scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychological Review, 2, 290-309.
Feist, G.J. & Barron, F. (2003). Predicting creativity from early to late adulthood: Intellect, potential, and personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 62-88.
Foucault, M. (1966). Les mots et les choses - une archéologie des sciences humaines. Paris: Gallimard.
Foucault, M. (1969). L'archéologie du savoir. Paris: Gallimard.
Gholson, B., & Houts, A. C. (1989). Toward a cognitive psychology of science. Social Epistemology, 3, 107-127.
Gorman, M. E., Gorman, M. E., Latta, R. M., and Cunningham, G. (1984). How disconfirmatory, confirmatory and combined strategies affect group problem-solving. British Journal of Psychology, 75, 65-79.
Gough, H. G., & Woodworth, D. G. (1960). Stylistic variations among professional research scientists. Journal of Psychology, 49, 87-98.
Helmreich, R. L., Spence, J. T., Beane, W. E., Lucker, G. W., & Matthews, K. A.(1980).Making it in academic psychology: Demographic and personality correlates of attainment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 896-908.
Helmreich, R. L., Spence, J. T., & Pred, R. S. (1988). Making it without losing it: Type A, achievement motivation and scientific attainment revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 495-504.
Hunter, S. T., Bedell, K. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2007). Climate for Creativity: A Quantitative Review. Creativity Research Journal, 19, 69-90.
Inhelder, B. and Piaget, J. (1958). The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood to Adolescence. New York: Basic Books.
Jehn, K. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 2, 256-282.
Klahr, D., &Dunbar K. (1988). Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science 12(1), 1-55.
Klahr, D., Fay, A. F., & Dunbar, K. (1993). Heuristics for scientific experimentation: A developmental study. Cognitive Psychology, 24(1), 111-146.
Kline, P., Lapham, S. L. (1992). Personality and faculty in British universities. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 855-857.
Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (1987). Science In Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass.
Lawrence, P.A. (2003). The politics of publication. Nature, 422, 259-261.
Leach, C. W., Ellemers, N., & Barreto, M. (2007). Group virtue: The importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 234-249.
Mahner, M., (2007). Demarcating science from nonscience. In Dov M. Gabbay, Paul Thagard & John Woods (Eds.) Handbook of the Philosophy of Science: General Philosophy of Science - Focal Issues (p.515-575).
Maslow, A. (1966). The psychology of science. New York: Harper & Row.
Nersessian, N. (1992). How do scientists think? In R. N. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive Models of Science: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 15 (p. 3-44). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Pavelcu, V. (1972). Motivația creației stiințifice. Revista de Psihologie, 2, 149-155.
Pitariu, H. D. & Budean, A. D. (2007). Cultura organizațională - modele si metode de intervenție. Cluj-Napoca: Editura ASCR.
Polányi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Popa, C. (1972). Teoria cunoasterii. Perspectivă semiotico-praxiologică asupra actului cunoasterii. Bucuresti: Editura Stiințifică.
Popescu-Neveanu, P. (1989). Psihologia scolară. Bucuresti: Centrul de multiplicare al Universității Bucuresti.
Roco, M. (1985). Stimularea creativității tehnicostiințifice. Bucuresti: Editura Stiințifică si Enciclopedică.
Roco, M. (1993). Creative personalities about creative personality in science, Revue Roumaine de Psychologie, 37, 1, 27-36.
Roco, M. (1996). Cercetare asupra persoanelor înalt creatoare din domeniul matematicii. Revista de Psihologie, 42, 1-2, 103-110.
Roe. A. (1952). The making of a scientist. Westport. CT: Greenwood Press.
Ryhammar, L., & Smith, G. (1999). Creative and other personality functions as defined by percept-genetic techniques and their relation to organizational conditions. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 4, 277-86.
Rosca, Al. (1972). Creativitatea. Bucuresti: Editura Enciclopedică Română.
Terman, L. M. (1955). Are scientists different? Scientific American, 192, 25-29.
Schmidt A., H., & Freeman, S. J. (2000). Corporate social performance and attractiveness as an employer to different job seeking populations. Journal of Business Ethics, 28, 243-253.
Schoon, I. (2001). Teenage job aspirations and career attainment in adulthood: A 17-year follow-up study of teenagers who aspired to become scientists, health professionals, or engineers. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25, 124-32.
Shadish, W. R. (1989). The perception and evaluation of quality in science. In B. Gholson, W. R. Shadish, R. A. Neimeyer, & A. C. Houts (Eds.), Psychology of science: Contributions to metascience (pp. 383-426). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Simon, H. A. (1966). Scientific discovery and the psychology of problem solving. In R. Colodny (Ed.), Mind and cosmos (22-40). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Simonton, D. K. (1988b). Age and outstanding achievement: What do we know after a century of research? Psychological Bulletin, 104, 251-267.
Simonton, D. K. (1999). Creativity and genius. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality theory and research (p. 629-652). New York: Guilford Press.
Stoica-Constantin, A., (1992). Blocajele interne ale creativității. O încercare taxonomică. Revista de Psihologie, 39, 4.
Stoica-Constantin, A., s.a., (1993). Factori psihosociali ai evoluției creative. Revista de Pedagogie, 4-7.
Stoica-Constantin, A., Neamțu G., & Boncu, S., (1993). Inventatorul si blocajele interne ale creativității. Cercetare experimentală asupra creativității tehnice. Revista de Psihologie, 2, 123-129.
Stoica-Constantin, A., & Dorofte, T. (1999). Studiul de caz în cunoasterea personalității performante. Design metodologic. Revista de Psihologie, 45, 3-4, 235-247
Stoica-Constantin, A. (2004). Creativitatea pentru studenți si profesori. Bucuresti: Editura Institutul European.
Sternberg, R. J., & O Hara, L. A. (1999). Creativity and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (p. 251-272). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thagard, P. (1999). How scientists explain disease. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Trevelyan, R. (2001). The paradox of autonomy: A case of academic research scientists. Human Relations, 54, 4, 495-525.
Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. The Academy of Management Journal, 40, 658-672.
Tweney, R. D., Doherty, M. E. & Mynatt, C. A. (1981). On Scientific Thinking. New York: Columbia University Press.
Udell, G. G., Baker, K. G., & Albaum, G. S. (1976). Creativity: Necessary, but not sufficient. Journal of Creative Behavior, 10, 92-103.
Wang, C. W., Wu, J.J, & Horng, R.Y. (1999). Creative thinking ability, cognitive type and R&D performance, R&D Management, 29, 247-254.
Wellman, H. M., & S. A. Gelman. (1997). Knowledge acquisition in foundational domains. In D. Kuhn and R. S. Siegler, Eds., Handbook of Child Psychology, vol. 2 (p. 523-573). New York: Wiley.
Wilson, G. D., & Jackson, C. (1994). The personality of physicists. Personality and Individual Differences, 16,187-189.
Bachtold, L. M., & Werner, E. E. (1972). Personality characteristics of women scientists. Psychological Reports, 31, 391-396.
Backhaus, K. B., Stone, B. A., & Heiner, K. (2002). Exploring the relationship between corporate social performance and employer attractiveness. Business & Society, 41, 292-318.
Bacon, F. (1957). Noul organon, cartea I. Bucuresti: Editura Academiei R.P.R.
Balgiu, A. (2002). Stil cognitiv si creativitate în domeniul tehnic. Revista Română de Psihologie, t. 48, 3-4.
Balgiu, A. (2005). Factori de mediu si potențarea disponibilităților creative în tehnică. Revista de Psihologie, 51, 3-4, 183-197.
Baumgartel, H. (1957). Leadership Style as a Variable in Research Administration. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2, 344-360.
Bejat, M.. (1971). Talent, inteligență, creativitate. Bucuresti: Editura Stiințifică, 16-18.
Busse, T. V, & Mansfield, R. S. (1984). Selected personality traits and achievement in male scientists. The Journal of Psychology, 116, 117-131.
Caluschi, Mariana (1994), Inventica si scoala. Iasi: Editura BIT.
Campbell, D. T. (1990). Levels of Organization, Downward Causation and the Selection-Theory Approach to Evolutionary Epistemology. In G. Greenberg and E. Tobach (Eds.), Theories of the Evolution of Knowing, (the T. C. Schneirla Conference Series, Vol. 4), Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1-17.
Carcea M. I., & Iorga, M. (2008). Pentru o psihologie a cercetării stiințifice. Conferința Națională de Psihologie Industrială si Organizațională «Alexandru Rosca», Cluj-Napoca.
Ciobanu, G. N., & Teodor, V. (2002). Cercetări operaționale: optimizări în rețele: teorie si aplicații economice. Bucuresti: Editura Matrix Rom.
Chambers, J. A. (1964). Relating personality and biographical factors to scientific creativity. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 78, 1-20.
Cox, C. (1926). Genetic studies of genius: Vol. II. The early mental traits of three hundred geniuses. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Descartes, R. (1957). Discurs asupra metodei de a ne conduce bine rațiunea în a căuta adevărul în stiințe. Bucuresti: Editura Stiințifică.
Drăgănescu, M. (2001) Societatea informațională si a cunoasterii. Vectorii societății cunoasterii, In Filip Gh. F. (Ed.) Societatea informațională-societatea cunoasterii. Concepte, soluții si strategii pentru România. Bucuresti: Editura Expres.
Dunbar, K. (1993). Concept discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science, 17, 397-434.
Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg and J. Davidson (Eds.), Mechanisms of Insight. Cambridge, MIT Press.
Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: Online creativity and conceptual change in science. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith, and S. Vaid (Eds.), Conceptual Structures and Processes: Emergence, Discovery and Change. Washington, DC: APA Press.
Eiduson, B. T. (1962). Scientists: Their psychological world. New York: Basic Books.
Eysenck, H. J. (1995). Genius: The natural history of creativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Evan (1965). Conflict and performance in R&D organizations. Industrial Management Review, 7, 37-46.
Feist, G.J. (1993). A structural model of scientific eminence. Psychological Science, 4, 366-371.
Feist, G. J., & Barron, F. (1995, October). Do hostile and arrogant scientists become eminent or are eminent scientists likely to become hostile and arrogant? Paper presented at the annual conference of Society for Social Studies of Science, Charlottesville, VA.
Feist, G.J. (1995). Psychology of science and history of psychology: Putting behavioral generalizations to the test. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 119-123.
Feist, G., (2006). The Psychology of Science and the Origins of the Scientific Mind. Yale University Press, New Haven and London.
Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of the impact of personality on scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychological Review, 2, 290-309.
Feist, G.J. & Barron, F. (2003). Predicting creativity from early to late adulthood: Intellect, potential, and personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 62-88.
Foucault, M. (1966). Les mots et les choses - une archéologie des sciences humaines. Paris: Gallimard.
Foucault, M. (1969). L'archéologie du savoir. Paris: Gallimard.
Gholson, B., & Houts, A. C. (1989). Toward a cognitive psychology of science. Social Epistemology, 3, 107-127.
Gorman, M. E., Gorman, M. E., Latta, R. M., and Cunningham, G. (1984). How disconfirmatory, confirmatory and combined strategies affect group problem-solving. British Journal of Psychology, 75, 65-79.
Gough, H. G., & Woodworth, D. G. (1960). Stylistic variations among professional research scientists. Journal of Psychology, 49, 87-98.
Helmreich, R. L., Spence, J. T., Beane, W. E., Lucker, G. W., & Matthews, K. A.(1980).Making it in academic psychology: Demographic and personality correlates of attainment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 896-908.
Helmreich, R. L., Spence, J. T., & Pred, R. S. (1988). Making it without losing it: Type A, achievement motivation and scientific attainment revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 495-504.
Hunter, S. T., Bedell, K. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2007). Climate for Creativity: A Quantitative Review. Creativity Research Journal, 19, 69-90.
Inhelder, B. and Piaget, J. (1958). The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood to Adolescence. New York: Basic Books.
Jehn, K. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 2, 256-282.
Klahr, D., &Dunbar K. (1988). Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science 12(1), 1-55.
Klahr, D., Fay, A. F., & Dunbar, K. (1993). Heuristics for scientific experimentation: A developmental study. Cognitive Psychology, 24(1), 111-146.
Kline, P., Lapham, S. L. (1992). Personality and faculty in British universities. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 855-857.
Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (1987). Science In Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass.
Lawrence, P.A. (2003). The politics of publication. Nature, 422, 259-261.
Leach, C. W., Ellemers, N., & Barreto, M. (2007). Group virtue: The importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 234-249.
Mahner, M., (2007). Demarcating science from nonscience. In Dov M. Gabbay, Paul Thagard & John Woods (Eds.) Handbook of the Philosophy of Science: General Philosophy of Science - Focal Issues (p.515-575).
Maslow, A. (1966). The psychology of science. New York: Harper & Row.
Nersessian, N. (1992). How do scientists think? In R. N. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive Models of Science: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 15 (p. 3-44). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Pavelcu, V. (1972). Motivația creației stiințifice. Revista de Psihologie, 2, 149-155.
Pitariu, H. D. & Budean, A. D. (2007). Cultura organizațională - modele si metode de intervenție. Cluj-Napoca: Editura ASCR.
Polányi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Popa, C. (1972). Teoria cunoasterii. Perspectivă semiotico-praxiologică asupra actului cunoasterii. Bucuresti: Editura Stiințifică.
Popescu-Neveanu, P. (1989). Psihologia scolară. Bucuresti: Centrul de multiplicare al Universității Bucuresti.
Roco, M. (1985). Stimularea creativității tehnicostiințifice. Bucuresti: Editura Stiințifică si Enciclopedică.
Roco, M. (1993). Creative personalities about creative personality in science, Revue Roumaine de Psychologie, 37, 1, 27-36.
Roco, M. (1996). Cercetare asupra persoanelor înalt creatoare din domeniul matematicii. Revista de Psihologie, 42, 1-2, 103-110.
Roe. A. (1952). The making of a scientist. Westport. CT: Greenwood Press.
Ryhammar, L., & Smith, G. (1999). Creative and other personality functions as defined by percept-genetic techniques and their relation to organizational conditions. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 4, 277-86.
Rosca, Al. (1972). Creativitatea. Bucuresti: Editura Enciclopedică Română.
Terman, L. M. (1955). Are scientists different? Scientific American, 192, 25-29.
Schmidt A., H., & Freeman, S. J. (2000). Corporate social performance and attractiveness as an employer to different job seeking populations. Journal of Business Ethics, 28, 243-253.
Schoon, I. (2001). Teenage job aspirations and career attainment in adulthood: A 17-year follow-up study of teenagers who aspired to become scientists, health professionals, or engineers. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25, 124-32.
Shadish, W. R. (1989). The perception and evaluation of quality in science. In B. Gholson, W. R. Shadish, R. A. Neimeyer, & A. C. Houts (Eds.), Psychology of science: Contributions to metascience (pp. 383-426). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Simon, H. A. (1966). Scientific discovery and the psychology of problem solving. In R. Colodny (Ed.), Mind and cosmos (22-40). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Simonton, D. K. (1988b). Age and outstanding achievement: What do we know after a century of research? Psychological Bulletin, 104, 251-267.
Simonton, D. K. (1999). Creativity and genius. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality theory and research (p. 629-652). New York: Guilford Press.
Stoica-Constantin, A., (1992). Blocajele interne ale creativității. O încercare taxonomică. Revista de Psihologie, 39, 4.
Stoica-Constantin, A., s.a., (1993). Factori psihosociali ai evoluției creative. Revista de Pedagogie, 4-7.
Stoica-Constantin, A., Neamțu G., & Boncu, S., (1993). Inventatorul si blocajele interne ale creativității. Cercetare experimentală asupra creativității tehnice. Revista de Psihologie, 2, 123-129.
Stoica-Constantin, A., & Dorofte, T. (1999). Studiul de caz în cunoasterea personalității performante. Design metodologic. Revista de Psihologie, 45, 3-4, 235-247
Stoica-Constantin, A. (2004). Creativitatea pentru studenți si profesori. Bucuresti: Editura Institutul European.
Sternberg, R. J., & O Hara, L. A. (1999). Creativity and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (p. 251-272). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thagard, P. (1999). How scientists explain disease. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Trevelyan, R. (2001). The paradox of autonomy: A case of academic research scientists. Human Relations, 54, 4, 495-525.
Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. The Academy of Management Journal, 40, 658-672.
Tweney, R. D., Doherty, M. E. & Mynatt, C. A. (1981). On Scientific Thinking. New York: Columbia University Press.
Udell, G. G., Baker, K. G., & Albaum, G. S. (1976). Creativity: Necessary, but not sufficient. Journal of Creative Behavior, 10, 92-103.
Wang, C. W., Wu, J.J, & Horng, R.Y. (1999). Creative thinking ability, cognitive type and R&D performance, R&D Management, 29, 247-254.
Wellman, H. M., & S. A. Gelman. (1997). Knowledge acquisition in foundational domains. In D. Kuhn and R. S. Siegler, Eds., Handbook of Child Psychology, vol. 2 (p. 523-573). New York: Wiley.
Wilson, G. D., & Jackson, C. (1994). The personality of physicists. Personality and Individual Differences, 16,187-189.
Downloads
Published
2020-01-27
How to Cite
Carcea, M. I., & Hojbota, A. M. (2020). Applied psychology in science and research. Psihologia Resurselor Umane, 7(2), 70–82. https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v7i2.440
Issue
Section
Research articles
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal,it also allows for use of the work for non-commercial purposes and if others remix, transform or build upon the works found in this journal they must distribute the contributions under the same licence as the original.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See: The Effect of Open Access).
