Do you believe that articles written by clinical psychologists are not scholarly?
Many are not (including the one in question). It is not matter of who writes the article, or their academic qualifications, it is a matter of the methodology employed.
The terms we associate with "scholarly" are documented, thorough, rigorous, systematic, unbiased, and scientifically valid. Scholarly articles bear the hallmark of extensive footnotes and citations, and never get published without peer review and approval.
If this Psychologist has earned a Ph.D., she had to demonstrate the ability to do scholarly research. However, the article in question is not intended to be scholarly, as I'm sure she would be the first to acknowledge.
This is simply an opinion piece, as are the other pieces. None of them have the slightest scholarly standing.
BTW, I have an earned Ph.D. myself, so if this is a criteria for you, you should accept my opinions without question. ;-) |
