In what way does Kelly compare humans to scientists?

Kelly compares humans to scientists primarily through the process of hypothesizing, testing, and revising constructs. He posits that individuals operate similarly to scientists in that they create mental frameworks or constructs to make sense of their experiences and to predict future events. Just as scientists formulate hypotheses based on observations, individuals generate constructs based on their interactions with the world around them.

When these constructs are put to the test through experiences, they help shape our understanding and reactions. If the predictions made using these constructs do not hold true, individuals are likely to revise their constructs, akin to how a scientist may alter a hypothesis based on new data. This iterative process of creating, testing, and refining is a core aspect of Kelly's Personal Construct Theory, highlighting the dynamic nature of human understanding and adaptation.

The other choices do not accurately reflect Kelly's view. For instance, the notion that humans do not change over time contradicts the foundational idea of his theory that individuals are always adapting and refining their models of the world. Similarly, saying they rely on intuition rather than experimentation overlooks the systematic approach Kelly emphasizes in developing and revising constructs. Lastly, the idea that they only observe without making predictions fails to recognize the active role individuals play in engaging with their environment through hypoth