Given persistent problems (e.g., replicability), psychological research is increasingly scrutinised. Arocha (2021) critically analyses epistemological problems of positivism and the common population-level statistics, which follow Galtonian instead of Wundtian nomothetic methodologies and therefore cannot explore individual-level structures and processes. Like most critics, however, he focuses on only data analyses. But the challenges of psychological data generation are still hardly explored—especially the necessity to distinguish the study phenomena from the means to explore them (e.g., concepts, terms, methods). Widespread fallacies and insufficient consideration of the epistemological, theoretical, and methodological foundations of data generation—institutionalised in psychological jargon and the popular rating scale methods—entail serious problems in data analysis that are still largely overlooked, even in most proposals for improvements.

鉴于持续存在的问题（例如，可复制性），心理学研究受到越来越多的审查。Arocha (2021) 批判性地分析了实证主义的认识论问题和常见的人口水平统计，这些问题遵循高尔顿而非冯德的规范方法，因此无法探索个体水平的结构和过程。然而，像大多数评论家一样，他只关注数据分析。但是心理数据生成的挑战仍然很难探索——尤其是区分研究现象和探索它们的手段（例如，概念、术语、方法）的必要性。普遍存在的谬论和对认识论、理论、