Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Commentaries

No. 2 (2022)

“E pluribus unum”? From colors to psychology

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/rpc2-2022oa14836
Submitted
October 28, 2022
Published
2023-01-24

Abstract

The commentary deals with multiplicity vs unity in psychology, contrasting the compartmentalization of psychology as several different disciplines.
The problem has significant repercussions on the professional level, given that the psychologist under Italian law is authorized to work in all fields of the psychological profession, except psychotherapy for which specialist training is required. Possible unifying criteria, epistemology and methods common to the entire psychological science are sought. The applicative aspects for training, in light of the new norms on the qualifying degree in psychology, are discussed.

References

  1. Bosio A. C., Graffigna G., Barello S. (2021). Uno scenario transdisciplinare per la salute: nuovo paradigma per la psicologia e gli psicologi? Psicologia della Salute, 24(2), 17-32.
  2. Brehm, S. S. (1976). The application of social psychology to clinical practice. Washington: Hemisphere-Wiley.
  3. Burns, E. A. (2019). Theorising Professions. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
  4. Di Nuovo, S. (2020). Searching for models for psychological science: A possible contribution of simulation. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 54, 701-709.
  5. Di Nuovo, S. (2021). Why to use ‘idiographic’ approaches in psychological research? Yearbook of Idiographic Science – Vol. 10 (edited by Sergio Salvatore and Jaan Valsiner). Rome: Firrera and Liuzzo.
  6. Green, C. D. (2015). Why psychology isn’t unified, and probably never will be. Review of General Psychology, 19(3), 207-214.
  7. Henriques, G. R. (2011). A new unified theory of psychology. New York: Springer.
  8. Nicolescu, B. (ed.) (2008). Transdisciplinary: theory and practice. New York: Hampton.
  9. Petocz, A., McKay, N. (2013). Unifying psychology through situational realism. Review of General Psychology, 17(2), 216-223.
  10. Saks, M. (2016). A review of theories of professions, organizations and society: The case for neo-Weberianism, neo-institutionalism and eclecticism, Journal of Professions and Organization, 3(2): 170-187.
  11. Sandage, S. J., Cook, K. V., Hill, P. C., Strawn, B. D., Reimer, K. S. (2008). Hermeneutics and psychology: A review and dialectical model. Review of General Psychology, 12(4), 344-364.
  12. Staats, A. W. (1999). Unifying psychology requires new infrastructure, theory, method, and a research agenda. Review of General Psychology, 3(1), 3-13.
  13. Wilson, E. O. (1998). Consilience: the unity of knowledge. New York: Vintage.
  14. Yanchar, S. C., Slife, B. D. (1997). Pursuing unity in a fragmented psychology: Problems and prospects. Review of General Psychology, 1(3), 235-255.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...