Jerzy BRZEZIŃSKI (2014). On What Is Important When We Think of Psychology in Poland. Annals of Psychology, 17 (3), 495-515.


Abstract: The author takes up the problem of the condition of psychology as an academic discipline. He narrows down the scope of his reflections to answering four questions concerning the context of the country in which psychology is developed - in this case: Poland. The author answers Question 1 - Does it make sense to speak of any specificity of research carried out by psychologists in Pol­and? - in the negative. In his opinion, it is possible (and advisable) to speak of the cultural context of psychological practice but not research practice. Psychological cognition is intersubjective and has a global character. The author's answer to Question 2 - Should psychologists publish (also) in their native language and should they publish their work also in Poland? - is positive. In the context of Question 3 - What indices are used (or should be used) to determine a psychologists position in world science? - the author comments critically on the practice of overusing various not always well thought-out bibliometric indices and is in favor of increasing the role of peer review assessments. Answering Question 4 - What conclusions should we draw from the scientific pathologies that have come to light and what should our reaction to those pathologies be? - the author suggests that psychologists should make their raw data available and share them with other researchers so as to make external replications of empirical studies possible.

Keywords: psychology, scientific research, publishing, replications, misconduct in science.





Gian Vittorio CAPRARA (2014). Comments on Jerzy Brzezinski Article. Annals of Psychology, 17 (3), 521-524.


Abstract: There is substantial agreement on the relevance of the questions raised by Jerzy M. Brzeziński and on the proposed answers. The common use of English in international scientific communication should not lead to neglecting the proper media of diffusing psychological knowledge in local lan-guages. The current concern for assessing the quality of psychological research and research insti-tutions should be accompanied by an equal concern for proper criteria to assess the quality of psychological practice and of practitioner education. The criteria of evaluating both research and practice should be grounded on solid psychological theories.

Keywords: diffusion of knowledge, assessment of research and practice.



Dariusz DOLIŃSKI (2014). Not Everything Can Be Decreed. Annals of Psychology, 17 (3), 529-532.


Abstract:The struggle against pathology in the form of plagiarism or data falsification is undoubtedly neces-sary. However, limiting such efforts to building a system of control will turn this struggle into a cops-and-robbers game played by controllers and dishonest scientists. In this kind of game, the robbers will prevail sooner or later. Institutional solutions should therefore lead to building a sys­tem enabling open access to raw data and making it possible to publish results in which no statisti-cally significant differences were found between conditions. What is even more important is organ-ic work in the academic community and the realization that dishonesty will hit all of us.

Keywords: scientific misconduct, FFP (fabrication, falsification, plagiarism), morality.



Janusz GRZELAK (2014). Polish or World Psychology? Annals of Psychology, 17 (3), 543-551.



Psychology is an intersubjectively communicable and global science, not a national one. However, it is not a universal science, since the knowledge accumulated in it is contextual knowledge, de­pendent on the social system and on culture. Therefore, the global character of psychology does not consist in discovering universal truths but, above all, in using methods that enable the replica-tion of results in a given culture as well as universal, global access to them. Such access is possible thanks to the common language. Consequently, one of the important elements of science policy is ensuring that the knowledge accumulated by Polish psychologists is made available in congress languages, mainly in English. In Poland and in many other countries, support for English-language publication is strongly correlated with the parametrization of scientific output. Still, parametriza-tion has its drawbacks. It promotes empirical and fragmentary studies and may decrease the stan­dard and the number of theoretical ones. Different tools are therefore needed to make knowledge available worldwide: a change of publication policy is needed. The article concludes with two points that invite a debate on the mobility of academic staff and the structure of science in Poland.

Keywords: psychology, scientific research, publishing, intersubjectivity.



Michał HARCIAREK (2014). Polish Psychologists are Not Geese and Have a Tongue of Their Own. Annals of Psychology, 17 (3), 559-564.


Abstract: Jerzy Brzeziński's article "On What Is Important When We Think of Psychology in Poland," open-ing this issue of Annals of Psychology, has served as background for the discussion on the potential idiosyncrasy of research conducted by psychologists in Poland as well as on the issue of publishing their scientific works in Polish. I agree with the Author that psychological research, in contrast to psychological practice, has a global character. Thus, speaking about any Polish specificity in this regard seems meaningless, especially when it comes to broadly considered neuroscience. I also agree with the opinion expressed by Jerzy Brzeziński that, in addition to publishing our research results in English, we should additionally write books and scientific articles in Polish. Nonetheless, I believe such works should rather have the status of academic textbooks or review articles, pre-dominantly written by experienced researchers, not by graduate or Ph.D. students.

Keywords: psychology in Poland, publishing in Polish, neuroscience.



Wiesław ŁUKASZEWSKI (2014). What do We Think About and What do We Not Think About? Annals of Psychology, 17 (3), 573-580.


Abstract: Jerzy Brzeziński presented many important problems that should provoke community debate on psychological research practices in Poland. In the present article, a few other problems are dis-cussed: (1) first, elitism and a caste system in the publication process, accompanied by disdain for good research monographs; (2) second, the lack of self-criticism and modesty on the one hand and the "publish or perish" philosophy on the other, resulting in the submission of manuscripts that do not meet scientific standards; (3) third, the stylistic level of manuscripts, and even published pa-pers, does not meet academic standards; (4) fourth, researchers' focus on science bibliometrics, instead of focus on scientific discovery; (5) fifth, in some research scientists observe participants' imagination instead of measuring psychological mechanisms in behavior.

Keywords: the language of psychology, scientific discoveries, parametric evaluations.



Katarzyna MARKIEWICZ (2014). The Virtual Sphere of Contemporary Psychology. Annals of Psychology, 17 (3), 587-591.


Abstract: Professor Brzeziński's paper provokes two conclusions. The first one concerns the argumentation, which is matter-of-fact, competent, and therefore difficult to argue with. The second conclusion concerns the question of what is important in our thinking about Polish psychology. Nowadays, taking a local point of view on any scientific discipline raises considerable doubts - especially as the work of both researchers and practicing psychologists is evaluated in accordance with universal and international standards. This is a consequence of changes that we have experienced during the last decades in many fields, including the way of conducting research. As pointed out by Professor Brzeziński, those standards certainly enable objective and standardized evaluation of university teachers, but they also create a possibility of cheating and other misconduct in research work. One of the reasons is the fact that parametric criteria are suitable for evaluating manual labor rather than research work. A remedy might be the possibility of publishing research papers in open-access websites, provided that they are peer-reviewed.

Keywords: virtual space of research, time comfort, intellectual effort, multiauthor publications.



John NEZLEK (2014). The Importance of Norms and Values. Comments on Jerzy Brzezinski Article. Annals of Psychology, 17 (3), 599-602.


Abstract: I think Prof. Brzeziński has described some important issues facing Polish psychology and other disciplines. Moreover, I think that many of the issues he raises such as the rise of bibliometrics and honesty in conducting research apply to all countries and disciplines, not just Poland and psychol­ogy. In my comments I describe my broad agreement with the Professor's evaluations. The only difference between us is that I think that solutions to the problems science (and academia in gener­al) face need to emphasize the roles of values and norms more than the Professor described. Aca-demia is in danger of being conceptualized as just another service business, a view that I think portends very poorly for the future. Noting this, I suspect he will agree with what I suggest, and that this difference is not one of substance, just relative emphasis.

Keywords: bibliometrics, research integrity, norms for conducting research.



Santo F. Di NUOVO (2014). On Research in Psychology: Publication, Evaluation, Prevention of Pathologies of Science. Annals of Psychology, 17 (3), 609-613.


Abstract: Is it possible to find any specificity of research carried out by psychologists in their own country, justifying publication also in their native language? The question posed by Brzeziński (2014) requires considering different types of psychological research: studies regarding universal issues have to be diffused in a shared scientific format and in an international language, while studies regarding specific applicative aspects, linked to particular contexts, can be published in a language easily accessible to the psychologists living in a specific country. This kind of research and publi-cation, if conducted with correct methodology, should not be considered of secondary scientific value. As regards the question of what indices should be used to determine a psychologist's posi-tion in world science, I will discuss the assumption of "objectivity" in this kind of evaluation: objectivity is very difficult to obtain using numeric criteria, while pre-determined scientific and teaching criteria and thresholds could be more suitable to achieve a full evaluation for habilitation or for other scientific or academic purposes. As regards reactions to scientific pathologies such as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism of data, meta-analysis based on cumulative research on research could permit to detect unexpected outliers and to discover "file drawer effects," allowing replications and enhancing respect for scientific rules and ethics.

Keywords: scientific research, publication, evaluation, falsification, meta-analysis.






Jerzy BRZEZIŃSKI (2014). Is It Worth Discussing (or Is It Necessary to Discuss) Various Aspects of Practicing Psychology in Poland? Annals of Psychology, 17 (3), 631-645.


Abstract: Responding to the comments submitted in the discussion, the author addresses two issues. The first issue concerns the possible peculiarities of psychological research and the transfer of its results to the sphere of social practice. This refers particularly to the publication of psychological works in the language of a given country (in this case, Poland) despite the fact that psychology effectively communicates in English. The author therefore reminds his distinction between two levels of doing psychology. The first level is scientific research. Psychology is an empirical science and has an intersubjective character. The second level is psychological practice. Practice is derivative to the achievements of psychology regarded as a science. What is more, only scientific achievements make actions undertaken in the sphere of psychological practice sensible (as well as ethical). The author voices his opposition to various popular works of pulp psychological literature. The second issue addressed is scientific misconduct, increasingly (and excessively) widespread in the research practice of psychologists, which includes: HARKing, p-hacking, hiding negative results, ghostwrit-ing, guestwriting, etc. The author also comments on the new publication-related initiative aimed at combatting the phenomenon of HARKing - pre-registration. The author stresses that what is im­portant in eradicating misconduct is formative work with graduate and doctoral students, aimed at instilling in them the ethical norms of research work.

Keywords: psychology, practice, publishing, ethics.


Autor: Karol Juros
Ostatnia aktualizacja: 25.02.2015, godz. 22:53 - Karol Juros