A critique of using the labels confirmatory and exploratory in modern psychological research

Abstract

Psychological science is experiencing a rise in the application of complex statistical models and, simultaneously, a renewed focus on applying research in a confirmatory manner. This presents a fundamental conflict for psychological researchers as more complex forms of modeling necessarily eschew as stringent of theoretical constraints. In this paper, I argue that this is less of a conflict, and more a result of a continued adherence to applying the overly simplistic labels of exploratory and confirmatory. These terms mask a distinction between exploratory/confirmatory research practices and modeling. Further, while many researchers recognize that this dichotomous distinction is better represented as a continuum, this only creates additional problems. Finally, I argue that while a focus on preregistration helps clarify the distinction, psychological research would be better off replacing the terms exploratory and confirmatory with additional levels of detail regarding the goals of the study, modeling details, and scientific method.