ABSTRACT
Science advances by the discovery of paradigms (Kuhn, 1962,1974), which direct experimentation, serve to produce agreement on major theories, and guide the training of students. It is well known that such paradigms are almost unknown in the social sciences (Barnes, 1982), and in particular in the study of personality where the existence and use of thousands of quite different questionnaires and concepts attests to its absence, as does the existence of dozens of theories having very little in common (Hall & Lindzey, 1985). There is not even agreement on the meaning of the term personality. Where agreement on such fundamental points is missing, it becomes important to try and discover what criteria might be used to discover which theoretical scheme comes closest to forming a paradigm in this field. I have tried to do just that in a recent publication (H. J. Eysenck, 1991a). I have also argued for the possibility of such a paradigm (H. J. Eysenck, 1983a).
