Naturalizing the normative and the bridges between is and ought

Katinka J P Quintelier, Daniel M T Fessler

Research output: Contribution to JournalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Elqayam & Evans (E&E) suggest descriptivism as a way to avoid fallacies and research biases. We argue, first, that descriptive and prescriptive theories might be better off with a closer interaction between is and ought. Moreover, while we acknowledge the problematic nature of the discussed fallacies and biases, important aspects of research would be lost through a broad application of descriptivism.

LanguageEnglish
Pages266
Number of pages1
JournalBehavioral and Brain Sciences
Volume34
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011

Fingerprint

trend
Research
interaction
Fallacies
Descriptivism
Interaction
Prescriptive
Descriptive

Cite this

@article{01dbc6bc99f9436ca8578bc394413fa4,
title = "Naturalizing the normative and the bridges between is and ought",
abstract = "Elqayam & Evans (E&E) suggest descriptivism as a way to avoid fallacies and research biases. We argue, first, that descriptive and prescriptive theories might be better off with a closer interaction between is and ought. Moreover, while we acknowledge the problematic nature of the discussed fallacies and biases, important aspects of research would be lost through a broad application of descriptivism.",
author = "Quintelier, {Katinka J P} and Fessler, {Daniel M T}",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1017/S0140525X11000525",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "266",
journal = "Behavioral and Brain Sciences",
issn = "0140-525X",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "5",

}

Naturalizing the normative and the bridges between is and ought. / Quintelier, Katinka J P; Fessler, Daniel M T.

In: Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 34, No. 5, 2011, p. 266.

Research output: Contribution to JournalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Naturalizing the normative and the bridges between is and ought

AU - Quintelier, Katinka J P

AU - Fessler, Daniel M T

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Elqayam & Evans (E&E) suggest descriptivism as a way to avoid fallacies and research biases. We argue, first, that descriptive and prescriptive theories might be better off with a closer interaction between is and ought. Moreover, while we acknowledge the problematic nature of the discussed fallacies and biases, important aspects of research would be lost through a broad application of descriptivism.

AB - Elqayam & Evans (E&E) suggest descriptivism as a way to avoid fallacies and research biases. We argue, first, that descriptive and prescriptive theories might be better off with a closer interaction between is and ought. Moreover, while we acknowledge the problematic nature of the discussed fallacies and biases, important aspects of research would be lost through a broad application of descriptivism.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80055009636&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80055009636&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S0140525X11000525

DO - 10.1017/S0140525X11000525

M3 - Review article

VL - 34

SP - 266

JO - Behavioral and Brain Sciences

T2 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences

JF - Behavioral and Brain Sciences

SN - 0140-525X

IS - 5

ER -