I can't believe that I have to explain to an allegedly working scientist that a sample of professors who happen to frequent one cafe, at one university, is not statistically significant.
What is your position then? That nothing can be learned about human behavior by applying the scientific method? That there's no inherent patterns or cause and effect behind how humans act? Or just that not one single psychologist in the history of the field has yet successfully performed an experiment that has demonstrated such, or even made an attempt in good faith to do so?
Certainly, it's much harder to remove all confounding variables from psychological experiments. That doesn't mean that there's nothing to be learned about human behavior by applying the scientific method.
What is your position then? That nothing can be learned about human behavior by applying the scientific method? That there's no inherent patterns or cause and effect behind how humans act? Or just that not one single psychologist in the history of the field has yet successfully performed an experiment that has demonstrated such, or even made an attempt in good faith to do so?
Certainly, it's much harder to remove all confounding variables from psychological experiments. That doesn't mean that there's nothing to be learned about human behavior by applying the scientific method.