Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for FREE ACCESS to this landmark database

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Theory & Psychology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Guimberteau, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Cognitive Psychology and the Study of Scientific Discovery1

Bernadette Guimberteau

Brooklyn College Of The City University Of New York

This article focuses on the validation and explanatory power of the predominant model of scientific discovery used in cognitive science. Two strategies of validation are identified: validation by reproduction and validation by convergence. It is argued that neither provides a sufficient approach to validation and that a more appropriate strategy would consist in testing the model against current scientific problems to try to generate new discoveries. Another contention of this article is that the explanatory power of the model can be increased by understanding cognitive differences between the small proportion of `discoverers' and the large number of scientists working on a given problem at a given time. This question can best be tackled by studying how experts acquire their expertise from fragmentary and complex knowledge and by understanding expert learning, a topic that has so far been neglected in the cognitive psychology of expertise.

Theory & Psychology, Vol. 1, No. 2, 223-244 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/0959354391012005


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Theory PsychologyHome page
J.-P. Courtial and L. Gourdon
Mapping the Dynamics of Research on Autism: Or the Cultural Logic of Science
Theory Psychology, October 1, 1999; 9(5): 579 - 604.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Theory PsychologyHome page
N.E. Wetherick
Reasoning and Rationality: A Critique of Some Experimental Paradigms
Theory Psychology, August 1, 1995; 5(3): 429 - 448.
[Abstract]