Abstract

Although the technique of corresponding regressions proposed and illustrated by Chambers might very well constitute an important and highly useful methodological development, this commentary draws attention to the fact that explanation is, finally, a theoretical endeavor. Thus, the absence of the technique of corresponding regressions cannot properly be viewed as responsible for the heretofore prevailing bias among psychological researchers in favor of material- and efficient-cause explanations, nor can future applications of the technique be expected, in and of themselves, to dissolve that bias. Methodological advances do not - and should not - settle theoretical issues. To hold otherwise is to fall prey to that very theory-method confound Chambers himself - quite properly - deplores