Are there any frameworks to evaluate the quality of a theoretic concept in cognitive science (ideally with references)?

For social sciences I found the following:
Gerring, J. (1999). What makes a concept good? A criterial framework for understanding concept formation in the social sciences. Polity, 31(3), 357-393.


closed as primarily opinion-based by Chris Rogers, Seanny123, AliceD Mar 4 '18 at 23:23

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ At the end of the day isn't it still an opinion though? Is Gerring's evaluation method widely accepted and used in peer reviewing? $\endgroup$ – Spero Apr 21 '17 at 7:51
  • $\begingroup$ I think you are right! I guess there is always a huge subjective, creative part in the definition of a concept. Though I think it would be helpful to at least have some (maybe highly controversial) vocabulary to discuss about the value of a concept. I unfortunately don't know much about Gerring's definition. $\endgroup$ – thando Apr 21 '17 at 8:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I would not confound social sciences (and most definitely not 'concept building' in social sciences) with arguably the more scientific perspective typically adopted in the cognitive sciences. I would consider any concept which evolves through applying the scientific method 'good', or at the very least useful. $\endgroup$ – Steven Jeuris Apr 21 '17 at 8:28
  • $\begingroup$ My experience in cogsci tells me to always check if the sample set used in a study is biased. Just a few minutes ago I found a study showing that majority of stalkers are predatory and violent. Their sample set was obtained from police files. Needless to say that the more aggressive stalkers get reported to cops more frequently therefore the sample set is biased. $\endgroup$ – Spero Apr 21 '17 at 9:34
  • $\begingroup$ I think this is a great question. Psychologists should perhaps replace the term ,,theoretic concept'' with the more familiar term ,,psychological construct''. Obviously there are some great, useful and popular constructs such as IQ, Extraversion (as in Big5) or autism. But why are these constructs useful and popular as opposed to, say, the legion of one-off constructs that are daily invoked in the psychological literature? $\endgroup$ – matus Apr 21 '17 at 14:39