This essay examines whether generalization is a necessary and sufficient condition for scientific research in Psychology, comparing qualitative and quantitative approaches. It argues that qualitative methods do not always aim for generalization but rather focus on rich descriptions and individual perspectives. Conversely, quantitative methods, rooted in a positivist framework, prioritize generalization based on empirical data. The validity of generalization as the sole criterion for scientific rigor is questioned, emphasizing other key factors such as parsimony, falsifiability, and efficiency. The conclusion suggests that generalization alone is not sufficient and that both approaches can complement each other within the scientific method. Continue reading Is generalization a necessary and sufficient condition for scientific research in Psychology?