The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Review Paper : Psychology of the Scientist: An Evaluative Review
Abstract
Although the social processes in scientific inquiry have received extensive analysis, psychologists have devoted relatively little attention to the thoughts, feelings, and actions of the individual scientist. This neglect has resulted in an unfortunate failure to evaluate long held assumptions about scientist behaviour. This article reviews sociological, archival, and recent experimental evidence bearing on the psychology of the scientist. These data suggest that the correspondence between scientist behaviour and accepted scientific 'ideals' may be far less than has been presumed. After briefly reappraising those ideals, it is argued that psychological research - and particularly psychological theorizing- are critical to an adequate understanding and refinement of human factors in science.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“For instance, con fi rmatory bias -one's tendency to overweight con fi rmatory and underweight discon fi rmatory evidence -may lead scholars to depart from scienti fi c ideals such as objectivity and neutrality, and trigger resistance (Mahoney, 1979).”
From Unraveling scientific impact: Citation types in marketing journals (2015) · cites this paper as Mahoney, 1979
Citations
Cites
The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–180 of 180
Transforming psychology in the Netherlands I: why methodology changes
Dehue, T. (1991) · History of the Human Sciences · doi:10.1177/095269519100400302 · Cited by 8
Bias, incompetence, or bad management?
Ziman, J. M. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011742 · Cited by 8
Peer review and theCurrent Anthropologyexperience
Belshaw, C. S. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011237 · Cited by 8
When we practice to deceive: The ethics of a metascientific inquiry
Mindick, B. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011511 · Cited by 8
Scientific Truth in a Post-Truth Era: A Review*
Hagiopol, C., & Leru, P. M. (2024) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-024-00527-x · Cited by 9
Why the Studies of Science Need a Psychology of Science
Feist, G. J. (2006) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/1089-2680.10.2.183 · Cited by 7
Rethinking the Role and Status of Observation in Science Education
Hodson, D. (1996) · European Education · doi:10.2753/eue1056-4934280337 · Cited by 7
Sex Differences in Performance: Fact, Fiction or Fantasy?
Ussher, J. M. (1992) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-650353-1.50009-5 · Cited by 7
The quandary of manuscript reviewing
Whitehurst, G. J. “. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011699 · Cited by 8
Explaining an unsurprising demonstration: High rejection rates and scarcity of space
Beyer, J. M. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011250 · Cited by 7
Migration patterns and job satisfaction: evidence from European doctorate holders
Jewell, S. L., & Kazakis, P. (2020) · The Annals of Regional Science · doi:10.1007/s00168-020-01024-z · Cited by 6
A Student’s Scientific Mind: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Chokchai, O., & Pupat, P. (2018) · Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction · doi:10.32890/mjli2018.15.2.1 · Cited by 7
Conceptual Framework for Regulatory Benefits Assessment
Fischhoff, B., & Cox, L. A. (1986) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-4524-1_4 · Cited by 6
Motivational factors in departure of young scientists from Croatian science
Golub, B. (2002) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/a:1014881231075 · Cited by 6
Improving research on and policies for peer-review practices
Perloff, R. M., & Perloff, R. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011584 · Cited by 6
Clinical Psychology and Scientific Inquiry
Mahoney, M. J. (1981) · International Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1080/00207598108247420 · Cited by 6
Self-citationDeception in the study of the peer-review process
Fleiss, J. L. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011341 · Cited by 6
Lakens, D. (2025) · International Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.5334/irsp.1038 · Cited by 9
Perceptions of the Peer Review Process in Hospitality and Tourism
Deale, C. S., Lee, S., & Bae, J.-I. S. (2020) · Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education · doi:10.1080/10963758.2020.1729771 · Cited by 5
Content and Structure of Scientific Values
Demirutku, K., & Güngör, E. (2021) · Psikoloji Çalışmaları / Studies in Psychology · doi:10.26650/sp2019-0142 · Cited by 4
Personal Reflections on Theory and Psychology
Gigerenzer, G. (2015) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199390076.003.0012 · Cited by 5
The croatian scientific elite and its socio-professional roots
Golub, B. (1998) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02458408 · Cited by 5
Rejecting published work: It couldn't happen in physics! (or could it?)
Moravcsik, M. J. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011535 · Cited by 5
Reviewer reliability: Confusing random error with systematic error or bias
Presser, S. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011602 · Cited by 5
Authorship and manuscript reviewing: The risk of bias
DeBakey, L. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011328 · Cited by 5
What’s Right and Wrong in Preclinical Science: A Matter of Principled Investigation
Smith, L. N. (2022) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2022.805661 · Cited by 4
The Career Core of Successful Scientific Leaders in Nursing – Their Motivators and Strategies
Garmy, P., & Forsberg, A. (2020) · Journal of Healthcare Leadership · doi:10.2147/jhl.s255093 · Cited by 4
Review bias: Positive or negative, good or bad?
Geen, R. G. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011353 · Cited by 4
Research on peer-review practices: Problems of interpretation, application, and propriety
Wilson, W. A. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011705 · Cited by 4
Responsibility in reviewing and research
Tax, S., & Rubinstein, R. A. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011663 · Cited by 4
Making the plausible implausible: A favorable review of Peters and Ceci's target article
Millman, J. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x0001150x · Cited by 4
Judging document content versus social functions of refereeing: Possible and impossible tasks
Griffith, B. C. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011407 · Cited by 4
Truth and Credibility in Science
Shapin, S. (2015) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.85039-4 · Cited by 4
Haven, T. L., Tijdink, J. K., Pasman, H. R. W., Widdershoven, G. A. M., & Bouter, L. M. (2019) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/7d4qz · Cited by 4
A comparison of canid depredation research published in journal and gray literature
Plotsky, K., Alexander, S. M., Draper, D. L., & Musiani, M. (2022) · Human Dimensions of Wildlife · doi:10.1080/10871209.2022.2043492 · Cited by 3
Starbuck, W. H. (2014) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-09785-5_1 · Cited by 3
Ignorance-Based Instruction in Higher Education
Stocking, S. H. (1992) · Journalism & Mass Communication Educator · doi:10.1177/107769589204700306 · Cited by 3
Scientific communication: So where do we go from here?
Hartley, J. R. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011419 · Cited by 3
Peer review: Prediction of the future or judgment of the past?
Louttit, R. T. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x0001147x · Cited by 3
Computer-assisted referee selection as a means of reducing potential editorial bias
Bernard, H. R. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011249 · Cited by 3
Reliability, bias, or quality: What is the issue?
Nelson, K. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011547 · Cited by 3
Self-Talk, Dramatic Expression, and Constructivism
Joyce-Moniz, L. (1988) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-73393-2_13 · Cited by 3
Carrasco, C. L., & Belli, S. (2023) · Journal of Organizational Change Management · doi:10.1108/jocm-09-2021-0278 · Cited by 2
Análise do Comportamento como uma Psicologia da Ciência
Guazi, T. S., Laurenti, C., & Córdova, L. F. (2021) · Revista Brasileira de Análise do Comportamento · doi:10.18542/rebac.v17i2.11015 · Cited by 2
Gordon, R. A. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011390 · Cited by 2
Peer review and the structure of knowledge
Blissett, M. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011262 · Cited by 3
Biases, decisions and auctorial rebuttal in the peer-review process
Palermo, D. S. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011560 · Cited by 2
Sexing the Phallocentric Pages of Psychology: Repopulation is Not Enough
Ussher, J. M. (1994) · Theory & Psychology · doi:10.1177/0959354394043003 · Cited by 2
Cognitive relativism and peer-review bias
Gordon, M. D. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011389 · Cited by 2
Gorman, M. E. (2008) · Social Studies of Science · doi:10.1177/0306312706088564 · Cited by 2
2004: A scenario of peer review in the future
Porter, A. L. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011596 · Cited by 2
The Effect of Self-Monitoring on Academics’ Engagement with Industry
Tartari, V. (2013) · Academy of Management Proceedings · doi:10.5465/ambpp.2013.11673abstract · Cited by 2
Perceived Risks of Radionuclides: Understanding Public Understanding
Fischhoff, B., & Svenson, O. (1988) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-1610-3_33 · Cited by 2
“Influence” in Historical Explanation: Mary Morgan’s Traveling Facts and the Context of Influence
Mata, T. J. F. (2018) · Research in the history of economic thought and methodology · doi:10.1108/s0743-41542018000036b006 · Cited by 1
How do social scientists reach causal inferences? A study of reception
Avenburg, A., Gerring, J., & Seawright, J. (2022) · Quality & Quantity · doi:10.1007/s11135-022-01353-5 · Cited by 1
Some procedural obscurities in Peters and Ceci's peer-review study
White, M. J. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011687 · Cited by 1
Westrum, R. (1982) · Science Communication · doi:10.1177/107554708200300309 · Cited by 1
Designing peer review for the subjective as well as the objective side of science
Mitroff, I. I. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011523 · Cited by 1
Referee report on an earlier draft of Peters and Ceci's target article
Scott, W. A. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011651 · Cited by 1
Reliability and validity of peer review
Zeaman, D. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011730 · Cited by 1
Criterion problems in journal review practices
Cone, J. D. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011304 · Cited by 1
Epistemic Beliefs and Their Developmental Relationship to Post-Positivist Psychology
Salner, M. (1988) · Recent research in psychology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-3902-4_7
"Validity of attention deficit disorder: A second look": Reply.
Rubinstein, R. A. (1985) · American Journal of Orthopsychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1939-0025.1985.tb03466.x
Neural Substrate of Cognition and Literacy: Biology as Wish Fulfillment?
Hiscock, M. (1989) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-5748-3_3
Reflections on Paranormal Communication: A Zetetic's Perspective
Truzzi, M. (1981) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1981.tb34482.x
Experimenter and reviewer bias
Witt, J. C., & Hannafin, M. J. (1982) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00011717
Integration, Emergence, and the Structure of Scientific Progress
Mahoney, M. J. (1984) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-2733-2_8
Self-citationGabryś, B. J., & Langdale, J. A. (2011) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139015561.006
A Journey into Hope—Discovering Partial Solutions
Starbuck, W. H. (2006) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199288533.003.0004
Creating Better Social Science
Starbuck, W. H. (2006) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199288533.003.0001
A Journey into Disillusionment—Discovering Problems
Starbuck, W. H. (2006) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199288533.003.0002
Starbuck, W. H. (2006) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199288533.003.0003
Press, S. J., & Tanur, J. M. (2001) · Wiley series in probability and statistics · doi:10.1002/9781118150634.biblio
(2006) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199288533.002.0003
(2006) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199288533.002.0006
(2006) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199288533.002.0005
Bell, S. J., & Wang, S. (2026) · Big Data & Society · doi:10.1177/20539517261447575
Montuori, A. A. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-01047-6_6
Psychology’s RenaissancePreprint
Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2022) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints)
Why Does Methodology Change Over Time?: A Theoretical View and its Implications
Dehue, T. (1993) · Recent research in psychology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-2746-5_47
Metadata
- Authors
- Mahoney, M. J.
- Corresponding author
- Mahoney, Michael J.
- ORCID
- Mahoney, Michael J.
- Venue
- Social Studies of Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1979-08
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 349-375
- ISSN
- 0036-8539 (ISSN-L)
- 0306-3127
- 1460-3659
- OpenAlex
- W2046898120
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 38.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Social Studies of Science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › General Psychology › Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Research, Science, and Academia
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- scientific ideal, scientific personality, psychology of science
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review