Challenges and Critical Issues in Psychological Science

Science Funding and Global Contexts

In this day and age (the year is 2025) we cannot discuss scientific research without at least pointing at the recent developments in the USA (see Figure 6). We’ve all heard or read about this. There even have been EU-fundings freed to try to convince talented scientists from the US to come to Europe. It’s seen by some as an opportunity for the EU to overtake the US in its position as global scientific leaders. It’s also seen by others as new colonialism where the EU robs another country from its resources, i.e. their scientists.

Figure 6 One of the headlines about the recent science funding situation in the USA. (https://www.science.org/content/article/how-trump-administration-dismantling-science-u-s)

Psychology and the STEM Debate

Another threat may be particularly relevant for our own field: psychological science and psychological practice. There are many voices stressing the overwhelming importance of STEM (see Figure 7) as the primary force for progress and (economic) growth. Note that in Figure 7 STEM focuses on ‘the hard sciences’. Physicalists will favour STEM, but the more philosophically inclined individuals may display interesting standpoints. There are even strong physicalists out there who claim that psychology, sociology, etc. are much harder to do than e.g. physics. Physics is replete with well working models and equations, in psychology we do not have those, and perhaps we never will.

“STEM are called the hard sciences, but psychology is the harder _science!_😉” Nevertheless, research money seems to flow more easily and abundantly to STEM than to psychological sciences.

Figure 7 STEM, four areas of science and research (https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/stem-education-logo-with-icon-ornament-elements_17619658.htm#fromView=keyword&page=1&position=34&uuid=ceb8ff66-671f-4ba2-be25-ad45a1b5ac6e&query=Stem+diagram)