Paradigms and paradigm shifts | AQA A-Level Psychology Revision
- Revision Notes
- Aug 4
- 15 min read
Updated: 6 days ago
For 7182 specification, first teach in September 2025
AQA A-Level Psychology | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 50 minutes
Scientific knowledge does not remain fixed. Researchers collect evidence, test explanations and sometimes make major changes to the way a subject is understood. This Paradigms and paradigm shifts A-Level Psychology revision page explains what a scientific paradigm is, how evidence can contribute to a paradigm shift and how these ideas apply to psychology. Understanding paradigms helps show how theories, research methods and accepted explanations are connected within a scientific community.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Define a scientific paradigm.
Explain the features shared within a scientific paradigm.
Distinguish a paradigm from a theory or hypothesis.
Explain how findings that do not fit an existing paradigm may contribute to change.
Explain how a paradigm shift can occur.
Apply paradigms and paradigm shifts to psychology as a science.
Revision Notes 📚
What is a scientific paradigm?
A scientific paradigm is a shared framework used by a scientific community.
It includes generally accepted:
Assumptions about the subject being studied.
Concepts and explanations.
Research questions.
Methods of investigation.
Ways of collecting and analysing evidence.
Standards for judging whether an explanation is scientific.
A paradigm influences what scientists study and how they interpret their findings.
Researchers working within the same paradigm broadly agree about:
What should be investigated.
Which methods are appropriate.
What counts as acceptable evidence.
How results should be interpreted.
Which explanations currently appear most convincing.
A paradigm does not mean that every scientist agrees about every detail. Researchers may disagree about individual theories or findings while still sharing the same broad scientific framework.
Paradigms and scientific communities
A paradigm is shared by a group of researchers rather than belonging to one individual.
Scientific knowledge develops through activities such as:
Conducting investigations.
Reporting findings.
Replicating studies.
Challenging interpretations.
Reviewing research.
Constructing and testing theories.
Researchers communicate their evidence so that other scientists can examine it.
This connects paradigms with expert scrutiny of scientific research.
What does a paradigm contain?
A paradigm may include several connected elements.
Element | Meaning within a paradigm |
Assumptions | Basic ideas about the nature of the subject |
Concepts | Agreed terms used to describe what is being investigated |
Theories | Explanations used to account for findings |
Methods | Accepted ways of collecting evidence |
Measurements | Agreed ways of operationalising important variables |
Standards | Rules used to judge the quality of evidence |
Research questions | Problems considered important by the scientific community |
These elements influence each other.
For example, assumptions about human behaviour may affect:
Which variables researchers measure.
Whether experiments or observations are preferred.
How findings are explained.
What researchers consider convincing evidence.
Paradigms and research methods
A paradigm may influence the methods researchers believe are suitable.
Researchers might prefer:
Controlled experiments.
Observations of behaviour.
Questionnaires or interviews.
Correlational analysis.
Case studies.
Quantitative data.
Qualitative data.
The choice of method depends partly on what researchers believe can be studied scientifically.
For example, a framework that prioritises observable and measurable behaviour may favour experimental and observational methods. A framework concerned with individual experiences may place greater emphasis on detailed self-report data.
This does not automatically make one method scientific and another unscientific. The important questions are whether the method is appropriate, systematic and capable of producing evidence relevant to the research aim.
Paradigm, theory and hypothesis compared
A paradigm is broader than a theory or hypothesis.
Scientific idea | Meaning |
Paradigm | A shared framework of assumptions, concepts, methods and standards |
Theory | An organised explanation of behaviour or mental processes |
Hypothesis | A specific, testable prediction produced from an explanation |
Research finding | Evidence collected during an investigation |
A paradigm may contain several theories. Each theory may generate many hypotheses.
For example:
A paradigm provides the broad scientific framework.
A theory explains a particular pattern within that framework.
A hypothesis predicts what should happen in a specific investigation.
Empirical evidence is collected to test the prediction.
These stages build on theory construction and hypothesis testing.
Paradigms and objectivity
Scientific paradigms create shared standards for conducting and judging research.
These standards may include expectations about:
Operationalising variables.
Standardising procedures.
Controlling extraneous variables.
Analysing data.
Reporting findings.
Replicating research.
Shared standards may support objectivity because researchers do not judge evidence entirely according to their own personal preferences.
However, researchers working within a paradigm may also interpret evidence through its existing assumptions. This means that evidence which does not fit the accepted framework must be examined carefully rather than immediately ignored or accepted.
What is a paradigm shift?
A paradigm shift is a major change from one accepted scientific framework to another.
It involves more than altering one small part of a theory.
A paradigm shift may change:
The assumptions researchers accept.
The questions considered important.
The methods used to investigate them.
The way previous findings are interpreted.
The explanations accepted by the scientific community.
A shift therefore changes the general direction of scientific thinking within a field.
How can a paradigm shift occur?
A simplified process is:
Researchers work within an accepted paradigm.
The paradigm guides theories and investigations.
Most findings can be explained using the existing framework.
Some findings do not fit the accepted explanations.
These unexpected findings are investigated further.
Replications show that the problem cannot easily be dismissed.
Researchers propose alternative explanations.
The alternatives are tested empirically.
One alternative may explain both old and new evidence more effectively.
The scientific community gradually accepts a new framework.
Research questions, methods and interpretations change.
A paradigm shift is therefore normally connected to a body of evidence rather than one isolated result.
Findings that do not fit the paradigm
A result that does not match the prediction of an accepted theory does not immediately cause a paradigm shift.
Researchers may first consider whether:
The study contained a methodological weakness.
The variables were operationalised poorly.
The measure lacked reliability.
The measure lacked validity.
The sample was unsuitable.
An extraneous variable affected the findings.
The result occurred by chance.
The original theory requires only a limited modification.
The finding should be checked through further research and replication.
This is why consistent measurement across investigations and the accuracy of research conclusions matter to scientific change.
Repeated challenges to an existing paradigm
A paradigm becomes more seriously challenged when findings that do not fit it:
Occur repeatedly.
Are produced by different researchers.
Use suitable methods.
Are based on reliable measurements.
Cannot be explained by obvious methodological weaknesses.
Are supported across different samples or settings.
Researchers may then begin to question whether the existing framework can adequately explain the evidence.
Developing an alternative paradigm
A new paradigm must offer more than criticism of the existing one.
It should provide:
An alternative set of assumptions.
New or revised concepts.
Explanations of the unexpected evidence.
Testable theories.
Falsifiable hypotheses.
Suitable research methods.
Predictions that can be investigated empirically.
The alternative framework must itself remain open to scientific testing.
A new paradigm is not accepted simply because the existing one has limitations. Researchers need evidence showing that the alternative provides a useful scientific framework.
Acceptance by the scientific community
A paradigm is shared by a scientific community, so a paradigm shift requires wider acceptance.
Researchers may examine:
Whether the alternative produces testable predictions.
Whether findings can be replicated.
Whether it explains existing evidence.
Whether it accounts for evidence the old paradigm could not explain.
Whether its methods are appropriate.
Whether its concepts can be measured.
Whether it supports further useful research.
Acceptance may be gradual. Different researchers may adopt the new framework at different times.
Paradigm shifts and peer review
Peer review can contribute to scientific change by allowing experts to examine:
Research that challenges existing assumptions.
Alternative explanations.
New methods.
Unexpected findings.
Claims that a major change is required.
Reviewers may identify weaknesses, request further evidence or recommend revisions.
Peer review may therefore:
Protect science from weak claims.
Improve research that challenges accepted ideas.
Help communicate new evidence.
Encourage further testing.
However, researchers who already accept the existing paradigm may interpret new evidence cautiously. This means scientific change often requires strong, replicable findings rather than one persuasive argument.
Paradigm shifts and falsifiability
A scientific paradigm should contain theories that can be tested and potentially challenged.
If an explanation can account for every possible result, evidence cannot count against it. This makes meaningful scientific change difficult.
Falsifiability allows researchers to identify findings that would challenge a prediction.
For example, a clear hypothesis may predict that one condition will produce a higher score than another. If this difference does not occur, the prediction is not supported.
Repeated failures to support important predictions may contribute to the revision of a theory. If the difficulties affect the broader framework, they may contribute to a paradigm shift.
Paradigm shifts and replication
Replication is important because a major scientific change should not normally depend on one study.
Other researchers must be able to:
Repeat the procedure.
Examine whether the finding occurs again.
Test the explanation using different methods.
Investigate whether the result applies to other populations or settings.
If an unexpected result cannot be replicated, it provides weaker grounds for challenging a paradigm.
If it is reproduced repeatedly, the scientific community has stronger reasons to reconsider the accepted framework.
Paradigm shifts and theory construction
Paradigms, theories and evidence form a continuing process.
Stage | What happens? |
Existing paradigm | Researchers share assumptions and accepted methods |
Theory construction | Explanations are developed within the paradigm |
Hypothesis testing | Specific predictions are tested empirically |
Evidence | Findings support or challenge predictions |
Theory revision | Explanations may be altered |
Repeated difficulties | Existing theories may fail to explain important evidence |
Alternative framework | New assumptions and explanations are proposed |
Paradigm shift | The scientific community adopts a substantially different framework |
Not every unsupported hypothesis changes a theory. Not every changed theory produces a paradigm shift.
A paradigm shift is a much broader transformation.
Small scientific change and paradigm shifts
Scientific knowledge can change at different levels.
Modification of a hypothesis
A researcher changes a specific prediction.
Revision of a theory
An explanation is altered to account for new evidence.
Development of a new theory
An alternative explanation is proposed.
Paradigm shift
The shared assumptions, concepts, methods or standards of the field change substantially.
Students should avoid describing every new finding as a paradigm shift.
Applying paradigms to psychology
Psychology contains different approaches to explaining behaviour and mental processes.
These approaches may differ in their:
Assumptions about behaviour.
Explanations.
Preferred research methods.
Types of evidence.
Levels of analysis.
Interpretation of findings.
This means psychologists may not all work within one single, universally accepted framework.
Different psychological approaches may operate as distinct frameworks within the broader discipline.
Psychology and competing frameworks
One psychological approach may emphasise observable behaviour and environmental influences.
Another may focus on mental processes.
Another may examine biological processes.
These frameworks may ask different questions and use different methods, even when investigating a similar behaviour.
For example, different researchers might investigate performance by studying:
Observable responses to environmental conditions.
Attention, memory or decision-making.
Biological activity.
Individual experiences.
This diversity can make psychology less unified than a science built around one dominant paradigm.
However, it can also allow psychologists to investigate complex behaviour from several perspectives.
Does psychology have one scientific paradigm?
There are two broad possibilities to consider.
Psychology may lack one dominant paradigm
Different approaches may disagree about:
The main causes of behaviour.
What should be studied.
Which methods are most appropriate.
Which evidence is most valuable.
This suggests that psychology does not always operate within one shared framework.
Psychology still uses scientific processes
Psychological researchers may still use:
Empirical evidence.
Objective measurement.
Falsifiable hypotheses.
Replicable procedures.
Peer review.
Theory construction.
Statistical analysis.
Psychology can therefore use scientific methods even when psychologists disagree about the most appropriate broad explanation of behaviour.
Multiple paradigms and scientific status
The existence of different frameworks does not automatically mean that psychological research is unscientific.
A particular investigation may still be scientific if it:
Uses a clear research aim.
Produces a testable hypothesis.
Operationalises variables.
Collects empirical evidence.
Uses an appropriate method.
Controls relevant variables.
Reports the procedure clearly.
Allows conclusions to be scrutinised.
The scientific quality of a study should therefore be assessed using its method and evidence, not solely by whether all psychologists accept one explanation.
Changes within psychology
Psychological thinking can change when:
Existing explanations fail to account for findings.
Improved technology allows new measurements.
New methods produce different evidence.
Replications challenge accepted conclusions.
Alternative theories explain a wider range of findings.
Previously overlooked variables become measurable.
These changes may lead to:
Revised theories.
New research questions.
Different methods.
Greater emphasis on another level of explanation.
New interpretations of earlier research.
Not every change constitutes a complete paradigm shift. Some changes occur within an existing psychological framework.
Hypothetical example of a psychological paradigm shift
Imagine that most psychologists investigating a behaviour accept framework A.
Framework A assumes that:
Behaviour is explained mainly through one type of influence.
Only directly observable responses should be studied.
A particular experimental method provides the best evidence.
Researchers then repeatedly find that framework A cannot explain an important pattern.
A new framework, B, proposes that:
An additional process must be considered.
This process can be operationalised and measured.
New experiments produce replicable findings.
Framework B explains both the earlier evidence and the unexpected pattern.
If the scientific community begins using framework B to develop theories, methods and research questions, a paradigm shift may have occurred.
The example is general because a paradigm shift is identified by the scale of the scientific change, not by one named study.
Technology and paradigms
New technology may allow psychologists to collect evidence that was not previously available.
This could affect:
Which variables can be measured.
The precision of measurements.
The questions researchers can investigate.
The explanations considered plausible.
New technology alone does not create a paradigm shift. It contributes only if the resulting evidence changes the wider assumptions, theories and methods accepted by the scientific community.
Paradigms and research reports
Scientific change depends on clear communication.
Researchers should report:
Their theoretical reasoning.
The hypothesis.
The method.
The findings.
The analysis.
The conclusion.
Limitations and alternative explanations.
Without a clear report, other psychologists cannot properly evaluate, replicate or challenge the research.
This connects paradigms with the structure of a scientific report.
Strengths of paradigms in science
They provide a shared direction
Researchers have agreed concepts, questions and methods through which to investigate a subject.
They support communication
Scientists can discuss findings using shared terminology and standards.
They guide research
A paradigm helps determine which questions are important and how they may be investigated.
They allow theories to build on previous work
Researchers do not need to begin each investigation without an established framework.
They support cumulative knowledge
Findings can be connected to existing explanations and used to develop further hypotheses.
Possible limitations of paradigms
They may narrow research questions
Researchers may focus mainly on questions that fit the accepted framework.
Unexpected evidence may initially be dismissed
Findings that do not fit existing assumptions may be treated as errors before being examined fully.
Alternative methods may receive less attention
A dominant framework may favour particular ways of collecting evidence.
Researchers may interpret evidence through existing assumptions
The same finding may be understood differently depending on the framework used.
These limitations do not mean paradigms have no scientific value. They show why theories and assumptions must remain open to criticism and empirical testing.
Strengths of paradigm shifts
Paradigm shifts may:
Replace explanations that no longer fit the evidence.
Create new research questions.
Encourage the development of new methods.
Reinterpret previous findings.
Allow science to account for a wider range of evidence.
Demonstrate that scientific knowledge can be revised.
Difficulties with paradigm shifts
A claimed paradigm shift may be unconvincing if:
Evidence comes from only one study.
Results cannot be replicated.
Variables are not operationalised clearly.
The alternative explanation is not falsifiable.
The new framework does not produce testable predictions.
The existing paradigm can explain the finding after a limited revision.
The scientific community has not accepted the proposed framework.
A major claim requires strong evidence.
Paradigm or theory change?
When answering an exam question, ask how extensive the change is.
Scenario | Most appropriate description |
One prediction is changed | Hypothesis modification |
One explanation is adjusted | Theory revision |
A different explanation is proposed | New theory |
Shared assumptions, methods and interpretations change | Paradigm shift |
This distinction is particularly important in application questions.
Applying paradigms and paradigm shifts to a scenario
Consider the following scenario:
Psychologists have traditionally explained a behaviour using theory A. Several well-controlled investigations produce results that theory A cannot explain. The findings are replicated by different researchers. Theory B is then developed, produces testable predictions and explains both the original findings and the new evidence. Researchers increasingly use theory B to guide their methods and research questions.
This scenario may describe a paradigm shift because:
The existing explanation faces repeated challenges.
The findings are replicated.
An alternative framework is proposed.
The alternative is testable.
It explains a wider range of evidence.
Researchers begin using it to guide future work.
A single investigation producing an unexpected result would not be enough.
Paradigms and paradigm shifts A-Level Psychology revision: command words
Define
Give the precise meaning of a paradigm or paradigm shift.
Explain
Show how or why a paradigm influences research, or how a shift occurs.
Apply
Use information from the scenario to identify shared assumptions, unexpected evidence or scientific change.
Distinguish
Show the difference between a theory change and a paradigm shift.
Discuss
Present a balanced account of how paradigms support science and how they may limit scientific change.
Answering an application question
A strong answer should identify the stages shown in the scenario.
For example:
The repeated findings that cannot be explained by the existing framework challenge the accepted paradigm. Because the findings have been replicated and the alternative explanation produces testable predictions, researchers may gradually adopt the new framework. If this changes the shared assumptions, methods and interpretations used by psychologists, it represents a paradigm shift.
This is stronger than stating only:
The paradigm changed because the theory was wrong.
The stronger answer explains the evidence, replication, alternative framework and scientific community.
Planning a strong extended response
A developed answer about paradigms and psychology could include:
A definition of a scientific paradigm.
The assumptions, methods and standards it contains.
An explanation of how paradigms guide research.
A distinction between a theory and a paradigm.
An explanation of unexpected findings.
The importance of replication.
The development and testing of an alternative framework.
Acceptance by the scientific community.
Application to competing psychological approaches.
A reasoned conclusion about psychology’s scientific status.
Key Words 🔑
Key word | Student-friendly definition | How it may be used in an exam |
Scientific paradigm | A shared framework of assumptions, concepts, methods and standards used by a scientific community. | Explain how accepted ideas guide psychological research. |
Paradigm shift | A major change from one accepted scientific framework to another. | Apply repeated challenges and the acceptance of an alternative framework to a scenario. |
Scientific community | Researchers who develop, test, evaluate and communicate scientific knowledge. | Explain why a paradigm must be shared rather than held by one individual. |
Assumption | An underlying idea accepted within an explanation or framework. | Identify how approaches may begin with different views of behaviour. |
Theory | An organised explanation that accounts for evidence and generates predictions. | Distinguish a specific explanation from a wider paradigm. |
Hypothesis | A clear and testable prediction about the outcome of an investigation. | Explain how a theory or paradigm is tested empirically. |
Empirical evidence | Evidence collected through systematic observation or measurement. | Explain how accepted explanations may be supported or challenged. |
Falsifiability | The requirement that a scientific claim can be tested and potentially shown to be incorrect. | Explain why an alternative framework must remain open to challenge. |
Replicability | The extent to which a study is described clearly enough for another researcher to repeat it. | Explain how unexpected findings can be checked. |
Replication | Repeating an investigation using the same or a comparable procedure. | Explain why one unusual finding is usually insufficient for a paradigm shift. |
Objectivity | Basing scientific decisions on evidence rather than personal opinion. | Explain how shared methods and standards support scientific judgement. |
Peer review | Assessment of research by experts in the same or a related field. | Explain how new findings and explanations are scrutinised. |
Theory construction | Developing and refining explanations using evidence. | Explain the relationship between findings, theories and paradigms. |
Scientific change | The revision of hypotheses, theories or wider frameworks in response to evidence. | Distinguish minor changes from a paradigm shift. |
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Defining a paradigm as a single theory.
Why this is incorrect:A paradigm is a wider framework containing assumptions, methods, concepts and standards. It may include several theories.
How to improve:Describe the paradigm as the shared scientific framework within which theories are developed.
Mistake: Saying that one unexpected finding automatically creates a paradigm shift.
Why this is incorrect:The result may be caused by a methodological weakness or chance and should be investigated further.
How to improve:Refer to repeated findings, replication and the development of a convincing alternative framework.
Mistake: Treating every revision of a theory as a paradigm shift.
Why this is incorrect:A theory may be modified while the broader scientific framework remains unchanged.
How to improve:Reserve “paradigm shift” for changes to shared assumptions, methods and interpretations.
Mistake: Saying that a new paradigm is accepted only because the old one has weaknesses.
Why this is incorrect:The alternative must also produce testable explanations and account for the available evidence.
How to improve:Explain how the new framework is examined through empirical research.
Mistake: Ignoring the role of the scientific community.
Why this is incorrect:A paradigm is shared. One researcher changing their opinion does not create a paradigm shift.
How to improve:Explain how evidence, replication, peer review and wider acceptance contribute to change.
Mistake: Describing a paradigm shift as an immediate event.
Why this is incorrect:Acceptance may occur gradually as evidence is collected, replicated and debated.
How to improve:Describe the stages leading from unexpected findings to wider adoption.
Mistake: Claiming that psychology is unscientific simply because it contains different approaches.
Why this is incorrect:Psychological investigations can still use empirical evidence, objective procedures, falsifiable hypotheses and replication.
How to improve:Distinguish disagreement between broad frameworks from the scientific quality of individual studies.
Mistake: Claiming that the existence of different approaches has no effect on psychology’s scientific status.
Why this is incorrect:Different assumptions and methods may make psychology less unified than a subject with one dominant framework.
How to improve:Present a balanced account of both scientific methods and competing psychological perspectives.
Mistake: Using a named example without explaining why it represents a paradigm shift.
Why this is incorrect:The example alone does not demonstrate understanding.
How to improve:Identify the accepted framework, repeated challenges, alternative explanation and change in scientific practice.
Mistake: Explaining only that “science changes”.
Why this is incorrect:The response does not explain the specific process through which a paradigm shift occurs.
How to improve:Refer to unexpected evidence, replication, theory development, testing and acceptance by the scientific community.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
Define a scientific paradigm. (2 marks)
Question 2
State one feature that may be shared by researchers working within the same paradigm. (1 mark)
Question 3
Explain one difference between a scientific theory and a scientific paradigm. (2 marks)
Question 4
Explain why one study producing an unexpected result is not normally sufficient to cause a paradigm shift. (3 marks)
Question 5
A research finding does not support a prediction from an accepted theory.
Explain two checks researchers should make before concluding that the existing paradigm is seriously challenged. (4 marks)
Question 6
Explain how replication may contribute to a paradigm shift. (3 marks)
Question 7
Researchers develop a new explanation that accounts for evidence the existing framework cannot explain. However, the new explanation cannot be tested or potentially shown to be incorrect.
Explain why this is unlikely to provide a suitable new scientific paradigm. (4 marks)
Question 8
Psychologists studying the same behaviour use different assumptions, methods and types of evidence.
Explain how this could be used to argue that psychology does not operate within one dominant paradigm. (4 marks)
Question 9
A new framework is proposed after several replicated studies challenge the existing explanation. The framework produces falsifiable hypotheses and leads researchers to adopt different methods and research questions.
Explain why this may represent a paradigm shift. (6 marks)
Question 10
Discuss paradigms and paradigm shifts in relation to psychology as a science. In your answer, refer to:
Shared assumptions and methods
Theory construction and hypothesis testing
Unexpected evidence
Replication and peer review
Competing psychological approaches
Scientific change
(8 marks)
Comments