On the demise of everyday memory.

The main charges that Benaji and Crowder (1989) made against everyday memory research are reviewed. First, by equating mental behavior with the actions of inert chemical processes, they have overlooked a critical difference; namely, living beings are active agents who not only adapt to contexts but also modify, select, and create them. Second, by equating the scientific method with the laboratory, Benaji and Crowder have misconstrued the core strategy of science, namely, "proof by disproof." Third, in asserting that no new principles have been discovered by everyday researchers, they have ignored substantial counter evidence. Fourth, although their claim that science is a search for invariant mechanisms is true, this does not imply that the processes to which the principles apply must be invariant. The search for principles that govern variation is a necessary scientific endeavor, one that requires the use of both laboratory and real-life investigations. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]