How do scientists and pseudoscientists differ with regard to the ...

[oliviahorn72]

How do scientists and pseudoscientists differ with regard to the evidence that they will accept to support their ideas?
 
  What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

Why can we say that very different psychological theories can each be valid?
 
  What will be an ideal response?

[jasonq]

Answer to Question 1

Ideally, scientists continually revise their ideas based on empirically based evidence. In addition, they are willing to develop theories to accommodate new findings, to update their methods to improve on the quality of research, and to question new information critically.
On the other hand, pseudoscientists rely on flimsy and questionable evidence; they are not willing to question information that supports their ideas. At the same time, the avoid contradictory information that fails to support their ideas. In addition, pseudoscientists show a resistance to change in their ideas and they are unlikely to seek further development of theory; in fact they tend to avoid testing their ideas critically.

Answer to Question 2

Not all theories attempt to explain the same types of behavior. Some theory is applied to abnormal behavior, some to the development of intelligence, some to normal thought processes. A single theory will not be applicable to all these different domains.

[oliviahorn72]

Excellent

[cici]

Gracias!