In this article, Coleman comments on a scholarly review that uses a theoretical perspective to link research. Ericsson and colleagues propose a framework for studying exceptional performance and evaluating the evidence on that basis. Coleman contends that their theory is narrower than it should be because it accepts only one research paradigm as its foundation. Alternate views of science and reality exist (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). The theoretical map created by the authors is less than the territory. Adherence moves researchers to study limited notions of talent. Moreover, Ericsson is not studying those individuals who advance and redefine a domain. A science of exceptional performance should study them. The authors do not rule that out. Yet, it is unlikely that their theory would move researchers in that direction because original work is irreproducible. Their system lumps exceptional performers together in a domain. Researchers study the central tendency of groups because the original experts cannot meet the theoretical standards of reproducibility. This is too limiting.