165
Writing as Critical Thinking
advantage of their local resources because they remain unaware of their existence or because
they do not know how to locate and use them. Thus we believe that an essential component
of critical reading and writing is learning to use a library’s reference resources, periodicals,
and book holdings effectively.
Interpreting Claims
Ultimately, writing in psychology is about persuasion, convincing readers that some
particular hypothesis and its supporting data suggest that people act, think, or feel one
way for a discernible reason. Building a case for a psychological theory involves rallying
supporting evidence in the form of experiments and their results. Findings from earlier
studies guide the design and execution of subsequent research efforts in an ongoing cycle.
The foundation of this empirical process lies in the claims author-researchers offer, the
arguments for or against a particular rationale for the occurrence of behavior. Written
claims and arguments in psychology are about advocating and presenting ideas to per-
suade, surprise, intrigue, co-opt, or even excite an audience of readers (e.g., Spellman,
DeLoache, & Bjork, 2007).
Written arguments come in three basic types: emotional (pathos), ethical (ethos), and
logical (logos). Arguments from the heart have no place in science; thus students need
to recognize emotional tugs, appeals that lack solid empirical support (e.g., “Women
are better primary caregivers of children than men because they are naturally nurtur-
ing”). Ethical arguments are character-based and often involve authority relationships
or touch on matters of trust, integrity, or credibility. Ethics is certainly an important
part of psychological research, notably in the relationship between researcher and
research participant, but arguments in psychology should be authoritative in the sense
of reliability and credibility, not mere source (e.g., “IQ results obtained in an Ivy
League lab are apt to be more trustworthy than those found in a research center at an
underfunded public university”).
Naturally, scientific claims in psychology should be logical and based on facts and
reason. Such claims should be based on clear, testable hypotheses and supported by peer-
reviewed evidence found in the existing psychological literature. The purpose of most
claims or arguments is to persuade, preferably with supporting evidence (i.e., empirical
data, citations). Few, if any, ideas in psychology do not have some grounding in prior
research. Spellman and her colleagues (2007), for example, identified five categories of
frequent claims in psychology (see Table 14.1).
Any classroom discussion of research claims should evaluate them from a variety of
perspectives. When reading an argument, students should consider the claim’s author, that
is, by asking about the researcher’s intention. Additionally, students should reflect on the
intended audience. Who are they? Why should they be interested in the findings? These
and related questions are obvious to instructors, less so to students. We believe that stu-
dents will benefit from learning to recognize these claim types as they learn to navigate the
psychological literature. In turn, they can use the categories shown in Table 14.1 to craft
their own claims in lab reports, review papers, and other writing exercises (see also Spellman
et al., 2007; Stoloff & Rogers, 2002).