1Universitatea Babeş-Bolyai din Cluj-Napoca
In this article I answer to the reviews of Iacob (2015) and Cernat (2015). While I have little so say about the review of Iacob (2015), which is a rigorous and a professional one, correctly pointing both the strengths/novelties and the potential limitations of the book, the review of Cernat (2015) reflects a lack of objective approach, serious errors in understanding psychological methodology, and even an unfortunate confusion of science and ideology (e.g., criticizing the presentation of data published in top journals indexed in Web of Science articles, because of the supposed ideology of the authors, even if the explanation of data in the book was incompatible with supposed ideology of the authors of the data). From an educational point of view, I argue that science and ideology should be separated and that in a scientific approach it is important to follow the best practices in the field, as they are promoted by the relevant paradigms in the field. Generally speaking, having a limited understanding of the best practices in the field of psychological research, but a strong ideological option, may lead one to erroneously evaluate a study in terms of major „errors/distortions”, etc., with negative ethical implications for science (e.g., generalization of such labels to many major studies in the field, which used the same standard research paradigm).
Psychology of Romanians, Reviews of psychology
Full article access Total downloads: 926 (Distinct clients:112)