Is it worth discussing (or is it necessary to discuss) various aspects of practicing psychology in Poland?

Responding to the comments submitted in the discussion, the author addresses two issues. The first issue concerns the possible peculiarities of psychological research and the transfer of its results to the sphere of social practice. This refers particularly to the publication of psychological works in the language of a given country (in this case, Poland) despite the fact that psychology effectively communicates in English. The author therefore reminds his distinction between two levels of doing psychology. The first level is scientific research. Psychology is an empirical science and has an intersubjective character. The second level is psychological practice. Practice is derivative to the achievements of psychology regarded as a science. What is more, only scientific achievements make actions undertaken in the sphere of psychological practice sensible (as well as ethical). The author voices his opposition to various popular works of pulp psychological literature. The second issue addressed is scientific misconduct, increasingly (and excessively) widespread in the research practice of psychologists, which includes: HARKing, p-hacking, hiding negative results, ghostwriting, guestwriting, etc. The author also comments on the new publication-related initiative aimed at combatting the phenomenon of HARKing – pre-registration. The author stresses that what is important in eradicating misconduct is formative work with graduate and doctoral students, aimed at instilling in them the ethical norms of research work.