The Taboo Against Explicit Causal Inference in Nonexperimental Psychology.

Area of Science:

• Psychology
• Causal Inference
• Research Methodology

Background:

• Causal inference is a primary research objective, yet psychologists often avoid explicit causal questions using nonexperimental evidence.
• This avoidance creates a taboo against causal inference, negatively impacting study design, data analysis, and cumulative research.
• Implicit causal interpretations are common, but underlying assumptions remain unarticulated, limiting scientific rigor.

Purpose of the Study:

• To advocate for openly addressing causal assumptions and effects in nonexperimental psychology.
• To highlight the detrimental effects of the current taboo on psychological research and its practical applications.
• To encourage the adoption of recent methodological advances in causal reasoning and analysis.

Main Methods:

• This study presents a conceptual argument and critique of current practices in nonexperimental psychology.
• It reviews the consequences of avoiding explicit causal inference.
• It proposes a shift towards open discussion of causal assumptions and effects.

Main Results:

• The taboo against causal inference impairs study design, data analysis, and cumulative research.
• It creates a disconnect between findings and their interpretation, limiting policy relevance.
• Implicit causal interpretations without articulated assumptions reduce scientific transparency.

Conclusions:

• Nonexperimental psychologists should openly discuss causal assumptions and effects to improve research quality.
• Embracing recent methodological advances in causal reasoning is crucial for understanding underlying mechanisms.
• This shift will enhance the relevance of psychological research for theory, future studies, and policymakers.