A multidimensional analysis of the relations of basic and applied psychology

In an essay addressing the nature of the emergent field of applied cognitive science, Hoffman and Deffenbacher [Hoffman, R.R. and Deffenbacher, K.A., 1993. An analysis of the relations of basic and applied science. Ecological Psychology, 5, 315–352] argued that available distinctions between basic and applied science were inadequate for capturing the pertinent comparisons. Their multidimensional scheme extended Brunswik’s [Brunswik, E., 1956. Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments. Berkeley: University of California Press] notions of ecological validity and representativeness. It included ‘outward-looking’ dimensions according to which one can judge methods and settings in terms of their relevance to human experience, several ‘inward-looking’ dimensions referring to judgements of the relevance of research designs and hypotheses to theoretical matters and several ‘effectivity’ dimensions to describe research results in terms of ecological and epistemological utility. In this update, examples are taken from newer fields of research: cognitive systems engineering and naturalistic decision making. We conclude that a multidimensional scheme is still useful, to describe the diverse relations of cognitive sciences and applied cognitive/ergonomic sciences, and to capture the value judgements that are based on those relations.