The four different modes of psychological explanation, and their proper evaluative schemas.

I apply Benjamin's (1941) taxonomy of common scientific "modes of explanation" to the psychological context. I argue that: (i) in a "naming" mode, generalizability is not necessary; (ii) in an "analysis," generalizability is desired; (iii) in a "causal ontology," generalizability is merely one of the means to an end (theory-challenge); (iv) in a "synthesis," generalizability is (eventually) critical. A better appreciation of the diversity in psychologists' modes of explanation is crucial for cogent meta-psychological discussions.