Framework supports researchers in utilizing psychological networks to study complex interactions in clinical and social psychology.
A psychological network approach enables studying psychological phenomena as networks of interacting elements by utilizing network psychometrics. This approach is gaining increasing popularity in different domains of empirical psychological research such as clinical and social psychology. Simultaneously, a scientific debate emerged on the added value and application of employing such an approach. The current paper contributes to this debate by providing an applied perspective on designing empirical studies that employ a psychological network approach and does so based on best practices in previous empirical psychological research. With a practical framework, we aim to support researchers who want to employ a psychological network approach to mitigate potential criticism in the design phase of their study. The framework can be summarized in three iterative steps. This paper describes each step in detail, including illustrative examples and practical considerations. First, researchers are recommended to evaluate their argumentation for adopting a psychological network approach and whether this is the best approach for their research aim. This approach is suitable for aims ranging from descriptive accounts of complex survey data to testing hypotheses about the network’s structure. Second, researchers should carefully evaluate which variables the psychological network should contain. Such decisions should be informed by previous research (e.g., theoretical frameworks). Third, researchers should consider which research design and type of data are optimal to answer their research questions as different designs provide different insights. Adopting a psychological network approach in accordance with the framework presented in this paper can further advance empirical psychological research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chambon et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: