"There are many sciences, and it would be valuable, if not essential, to have the principles and practices consistent. We would not want the criteria for what "counts" as knowledge to vary as a function of quite different ways of going about obtaining that knowledge. This consistency is more important than ever because much of research on a given topic involves the collaboration of scientists from many different fields to address a question. They must speak the same language, share the same underlying values about how to obtain knowledge, and agree on procedures and practices (e.g., statistical evaluation, reporting data that do and do not support a particular hypothesis). Consistency also is critical within any given scientific discipline. For a given science (e.

g., psychology), we would want consistency throughout the world in what the standards are for obtaining scientific knowledge- the accumulation of knowledge from all individuals in a given field requires this level of consistency. Science "says" essentially, these are our goals (e.g., describe, understand, explain, intervene where needed, possible, and desirable) and these are our means (use of theory, methodology, guiding concepts, replication of results). Science is hardly a "game" because so many of the tasks we have are serious. Yet there are rules, and there are enormous benefits from following them among all sciences and scientists"--.