Search strategy for building version 0.0 of the textbook

Version 1.0.0

1. Rationale for the Search Approach

This literature search aims to assemble a representative, interdisciplinary corpus of theoretical, methodological, and pedagogical works relevant to the creation and evaluation of scientific theories in psychology. This corpus will serve as the evidence base and initial content for developing the textbook and generating Delphi survey materials.

A systematic, transparent search strategy is used to:

Prevents idiosyncratic or convenience selection of sources.
Aligns with open-science norms of reproducibility and traceability
Mirrors systematic review methodology adapted to conceptual domains.
Provides a defensible foundation for expert consensus rounds.

2. Databases and Repositories

Type	Database	Rationale
Psychological and Behavioral Science	PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection	Comprehensive indexing of psychological theory and methodology journals.
Philosophy and Epistemology	PhilPapers	Coverage of philosophy of science, abduction, explanation, and model evaluation.
Interdisciplinary / Quantitative	Scopus	Broad reach across cognitive science, modeling, and computational disciplines.
Pedagogy and Education	ERIC	Identifies literature on teaching scientific reasoning, modeling, and theory.
Open-Science and Preprints	PsyArXiv, OSF Registries	Captures emerging theoretical works not yet published.

Using multiple databases mitigates disciplinary bias and captures both conceptual and empirical traditions contributing to theory methodology.

3. Search Terms and Syntax

Search strings combine conceptual clusters using Boolean operators:

(“theory development” OR “theory construction” OR “theory formation” OR “theorizing”)
AND (“psychology” OR “psychological science” OR “behavioral science”)
OR (“scientific explanation” OR “abduction” OR “explanatory power” OR “theory choice”)
OR (“formal model*” OR “computational model*” OR “mathematical psychology”)
OR (“model evaluation” OR “model comparison” OR “model validation”)
OR (“theory education” OR “teaching theory” OR “theoretical reasoning” OR “research training”)

Searches will be adapted to each database’s syntax. A search-log spreadsheet will record date, database, query string, number of hits, and filters applied.

Rationale for term selection:
The terms reflect the main dimensions of the Delphi project:

Theory creation → “theory development,” “theory construction”, “theory formation”, “theorizing”, “abduction,” “scientific explanation.”
Formalization → “formal model,” computational model,” “mathematical psychology.”
Evaluation → “model evaluation, “explanatory power,” “theory choice,” “model comparison,” “model validation.”
Pedagogy → “teaching theory,” “theoretical reasoning,” “research training.”

4. Search Limits and Filters

Publication years: 1950–present (to capture classical and modern eras).
Languages: English (primary teaching and consensus language).
Document types: Peer-reviewed articles, book chapters, books, preprints.
Discipline filters: Psychology, cognitive science, philosophy, and education.

5. Screening and Selection Procedure

A two-stage screening procedure follows PRISMA recommendations:

Stage 1 – Title/Abstract Screening

The PI screens all search results for potential relevance.

Stage 2 – Full-Text Screening

Remaining items are assessed against inclusion/exclusion criteria (see below).

A PRISMA flow diagram will summarize the process from identification to inclusion.

6. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

Criterion	Justification
Addresses theory creation, specification, evaluation, or teaching in psychology or related sciences.	Ensures conceptual relevance to theorizing practice.
Presents explicit methodological, philosophical, or pedagogical argumentation.	Focuses on conceptual tools required by theorists.
Published in a credible scholarly outlet (book, peer-reviewed, or recognized preprint).	Ensures academic quality.
Provides generalizable insights (not case-specific descriptions).	Necessary for textbook abstraction.

Exclusion Criteria

Criterion	Rationale
Empirical papers or theoretical papers that contain no explication of theory development/assessment methodology	Outside the methodological synthesis scope.
Opinion pieces without methodological or philosophical grounding.	Lack conceptual rigor.
Non-English sources (unless identified as seminal by experts).	Practical translation constraint.
Redundant or derivative publications.	Avoids over-representation.

7. Data Extraction and Coding

For each included source, extract:

Bibliographic details (APA 7th).
Primary focus (e.g., theory construction, model evaluation, pedagogy).
Level of analysis (conceptual, formal, meta-scientific).
Relevance tags to Delphi phases 1–6 (see Project Description).

This yields an annotated evidence map feeding into the Version 0.0 outline.

8. Quality Assurance and Transparency

All search logs, inclusion/exclusion decisions, and coding spreadsheets will be openly shared on OSF.
Deviations from protocol will be documented in Project Description updates and the logbook.

9. Expected Output

Annotated Bibliography (~50 sources).
Evidence Map linking topics to Delphi phases.
Summary Report describing the search process

3.5.9 Phase-Linked Creation of Version 0.0

Each Version 0.0 phase is developed in preparation for the corresponding Delphi phase (see Preregistration):

Version 0.0 Phase	Inputs	Output
0.1. Tasks	Evidence map on theorist roles/outputs	Tasks & Outputs List v0.0 (incl. delegation notes)
0.2. Skills	Competency literature; pedagogy sources	Competency Matrix v0.0 (tasks × skills; teachability)
0.3. Topics/ToC	Concept maps; dependency analyses	Table of Contents v0.0 (sections/chapters/LOs)
0.4. Content	Canonical texts; worked examples	Chapter Outlines v0.0 (sections, readings, examples)
0.5. Assignments	Assessment & pedagogy literature	Assignment Bank v0.0 (mapped to skills & chapters)
0.6. Evaluation	Rubrics & validity frameworks	Evaluation Matrix & Rubrics v0.0

Outputs are versioned (v0.0-x → v0.1-x …) with changelogs that trace revisions to literature evidence and Delphi feedback.