Because human behavior is dynamic and influenced by multiple interacting variables, questions have emerged regarding the usefulness of a science that relies heavily on experimental methodologies. A review of current scientific practices in psychology illuminates how the cognitive authority of the field exonerates the standard view of science. This is widely represented in the literature through the use of experimental methodology, or more specifically, the randomized controlled trial. A discussion regarding the usefulness of non-experimental methodology in light of the current health care climate's emphasis on accountability ensues. Accountability concerns of efficacy and clinical utility will be addressed, especially as current scientific practices tend to keep in the margins valuable data. Valuable information remains uncovered: due to statistical insignificance, too many interacting variables for which to control, or because it is too subjective to be considered legitimate. Additionally, the data revealed is the data of interest to the authorities in the field and often is influenced by the current political climate. This is portrayed by the current emphasis on accountability, or providing evidence of efficient, and cost-effective practices. Contains 26 references. (JBJ)