MODULE 1
HISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY
DEFINING PSYCHOLOGY
Psychology is the academic and applied study of mental functions and behaviors. The word “psychology” comes from
two specific Greek words—psyche, which means “soul,” “life,” or “mind,” and logia, which means “the study of.”
Simply put, psychology is the study of the mind.
The overarching goal of psychology is to understand the behavior, mental functions, and emotional processes of
human beings.
This field ultimately aims to benefit society, partly through its focus on better understanding of mental health and
mental illness.
Most psychologists can be classified as social, behavioral, or cognitive scientists. Psychologists study many different
areas, including biological foundations, mental well-being, change and development over time, the self and others,
and potential dysfunctions.
They explore how psychological factors interact with biological and sociocultural factors to influence individual
development. Psychologists attempt to understand not only the role of mental functions in individual and social
behavior, but also the physiological and biological processes that underlie cognitive functions and behaviors.
BEHAVIOUR means any response or activity of an organism. It can either be simple or complex; overt or covert;
conscious or unconscious; voluntary or involuntary, rational or irrational.
GOALS OF PSYHCOLOGY:
•
•
•
•
To describe
Predict
Explain
Control mental processes and behavior
Psychologists study behavior through empirical methods which is based on collecting data and drawing conclusions
from that data and is separate from relying on intuition and speculation.
EARLY PHILOSOPHICAL IDEAS
The field of psychology emerged as a scientific discipline in the 19th century, but its roots go back to ancient
philosophy.
Many cultures throughout history have speculated on the nature of the mind, heart, soul, spirit, and brain. Philosophical
interest in behavior and the mind dates back to the ancient civilizations of Egypt, Greece, China, and India. Psychology
was largely a branch of philosophy until the mid-1800s, when it developed as an independent and scientific discipline
in Germany and the United States. These philosophical roots played a large role in the development of the field.
EARLY GREEK MEDICINE
From approximately 600 to 300 BC, Greek philosophers explored a wide range of topics relating to what we now
consider psychology. Socrates and his followers, Plato and Aristotle, wrote about such topics as pleasure, pain,
knowledge, motivation, and rationality. They theorized about whether human traits are innate or the product of
experience, which continues to be a topic of debate in psychology today. They also considered the origins of mental
illness, with both Socrates and Plato focusing on psychological forces as the root of such illnesses.
1
As many as 7,000 years ago, healers used trepanation (drilling holes into the skull) to address some conditions,
indicative that they believed the head and brain had some relationship to the mind.
Early Egyptians understood that the paralysis of the body was permanent and due to brain damage.
As early as 500 B.C., Greek physicians began to systematically dissect human bodies, concluding the brain was the
organ of memory, thinking, and understanding. That saw the connection of the brain to the sense organs. They
recognized the brain as the source of emotional problems.
PLATO (427-347 BC)
ARISTOTLE (385-322 BC)
Plato (427-347 B.C.) was one of the first philosophers to address the question,
“What is the mind?” Plato described the mind as having three parts that must be in balance: spirit, reason, and appetite.
He used the analogy of a team of horses to explain how these three parts work in concert. The horses (spirit and
appetite) are guided by driver (reason). This is akin to Freud’s tripartite model of the mind: the id (inborn aggressive
and sexual impulses), the ego (self), and the superego (conscience).
Plato argued on the nature side, believing that certain kinds of knowledge are innate or inborn and god gifted. He
classified people as gold, silver, brass or iron. Some must rule and some serve. He proposed measuring body parts.
(nature).
• Philosophers were split between dualism, the idea that the body and mind are different and separate (Pythagoras,
Socrates, and Plato), and monism, the idea that the body and mind are not separate (Democritus and Aristotle).
Aristotle was more on the nurture side, believing that each child is born as an “empty slate” or Tabula Rasa and that
knowledge was primarily acquired through learning and experience. (nuture).
Hippocrates, the father of modern medicine, proposed a theory in the fourth century BC that emotions had a
predominantly physiological basis and differences were due specifically to fluctuations in body fluids called
“humors.” He thought that there were four humors in the body, black bile, yellow bile, blood, and phlegm which were
associated with the commonly accepted four elements (earth, air, fire, water). When these humors were naturally and
properly balanced, people are healthy. When there is an imbalance among the humors, there is sickness and illness.
Socrates (469-399 BC)
Socrates questioned every assumption, doubted the obvious and ridiculed cant (rote belief) and pretension.
His
method of questioning to arrive at truth is called the “Socratic Method.” He believed that truth lies hidden in every
mind and the role of the teacher is to uncover it via discovery (led by questions of the teacher).
2
THE PHILSOPHICAL CONTEXT
René Descartes (1596–1650), a French mathematician and philosopher from the 1600s, theorized that the body and
mind are separate entities, a concept that came to be known as dualism. According to dualism, the body is a physical
entity with scientifically measurable behavior, while the mind is a spiritual entity that cannot be measured because it
transcends the material world. Descartes believed that the two interacted only through a tiny structure at the base of
the brain called the pineal gland.
Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), and John Locke (1632-1704) were English philosophers from the 17th century who
disagreed with the concept of dualism. They argued that all human experiences are physical processes occurring within
the brain and nervous system. Thus, their argument was that sensations, images, thoughts, and feelings are all valid
subjects of study. As this view holds that the mind and body are one and the same, it later became known as monism.
Today, most psychologists reject a rigid dualist position: many years of research indicate that the physical and mental
aspects of human experience are deeply intertwined. The fields of psychoneuroimmunology and behavioral medicine
explicitly focus on this interconnection.
• Christian Wolff (1679–1754) first popularized the term psychology to designate the study of mind. Wolff
divided the discipline between empirical and rational psychology. The data of mind that resulted from
observing ourselves and others constituted empirical psychology; rational psychology referred to the
interpretation of the data of empirical psychology through the use of reason and logic. *
• Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) denied the validity of any rational psychology. According to him,
empirical psychology of mental content could not, become a proper natural science because mental events
cannot be quantified (i.e., measured or weighed), and thus its data are neither capable of being described
mathematically nor subject to experimental manipulation.
• Johann Friederich Herbart (1776–1841) offered a system of psychology that was both empirical and
mathematical. In order to turn psychology into a true science, Herbart proposed that numbers could be
assigned to mental events of different intensities and a mathematical description of the relationship among
them could be formulated.
19TH CENTURY
Kant’s suggestion that psychology should utilize observations of human beings in their social environment,
the rescue by Fries of introspection as a method for observing internal events, Herbart’s suggestion that
psychological phenomena could, in principle, be described mathematically, and Beneke’s suggestion that
psychological experiments were possible contributed to the inception of scientific psychology.
THE SCIENTIFIC CONTEXT
The emerging natural sciences of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries became increasingly specialized as
knowledge increased and as opportunities for specialized teaching and research came into being in the German
3
universities (Ben-David, 1971). The study of physiology emerged as a discipline separate from anatomy as the
nineteenth century began. Studying intact physiological systems, in vivo or in vitro, accelerated the understanding of
the functional characteristics of those systems and built on the knowledge gained from the study of anatomy via
dissection. The methods and subject matter of physiology, especially sensory physiology, helped to provide the
scientific basis for psychology.
Sensory Physiology
The emerging natural sciences of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries became increasingly specialized as
knowledge increased and as opportunities for specialized teaching and research came into being in the German
universities.
The study of physiology emerged as a discipline separate from anatomy as the nineteenth century began. Studying
intact physiological systems, in vivo or in vitro, accelerated the understanding of the functional characteristics of
those systems and built on the knowledge gained from the study of anatomy via dissection.
Johannes Müller (1801–1858), the “Father of Physiology,” produced the classic systematic handbook (Handbuch
der Physiologie des Menschen, 1833–1840). Müller provided in the Handbuch was the law of specific nerve energies,
which stated that the mind is not directly aware of objects as such but can only be aware of the stimulation in the brain
conveyed by sensory nerves. The perceived qualities of stimulation depend upon the sense organ stimulated, the nerve
that carries the excitation from the sense organ, and the part of the brain that receives the stimulation.
Müller’s pupil, Hermann von Helmholtz (1821–1894) extended the law of specific nerve energies by theorizing that
qualities of stimuli within a sensory modality are encoded in the same way that they are encoded among modalities.
Hermann von Helmholtz (1821-1894) discovered that it took longer for participants to react when their toe was
touched than when their thigh was touched (because it is farther from the brain and the signal takes longer to
travel). This research contributed to a more scientific, less mystical view of the nervous system.
Psyhcophysics
Experiments on the sense of touch were carried out by the physiologist E. H. Weber (1795–1878), who distinguished
among the feelings of pressure, temperature, and the location of stimulation on the skin. Weber determined that there
was a threshold of sensation that must be passed before an increase in the intensity of any stimulus could be detected;
the amount of increase necessary to create sensation was the just-noticeable difference.
He further observed that the difference was a ratio of the total intensity of sensation, rather than an absolute figure;
thus, a greater weight must be added to a 100-pound load than to a 10-pound load for a man carrying the load to notice
the change. Similar observations were made on other senses, including sight and hearing. Weber also described a
terminal threshold for all senses, the maximum stimulus beyond which no further sensation could be registered.
Gustav Theodor Fechner was born on April 19, 1801, at Gross-Särchen, Lower
Lusatia. He earned his degree in biological science in 1822 at the University of
Leipzig. He was a mathematician ; and physicists. At the age of 5, Fechner was
fluent in Latin and began college at 16. He earned his medical degree by the young
age of 21. He also used the early years of his career to research electricity and
teach at Leipzig University.
However, he was forced to quit his professorship when4 he suffered severe eye
damage caused by staring directly at the sun too long, as part of a study on visual
afterimages. This setback, and the neurosis it caused him to suffer, eventually led
to his research of the mind and its relationship with the body. Fechner had believed
“that the phenomena of mind and body run in parallel”
Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850–1909). Inspired by the psychophysics of G. T. Fechner and
philosopher J. F. Herbart’s attempt to apply mathematics to mental representations,
Ebbinghaus used precise quantitative methods to investigate. He served as both the
experimenter and the subject of his investigations. In order to have relatively
homogeneous material to learn and to reduce the impact of any previous semantic
associations, such as occurred in his early experiments in learning and remembering
poetry, Ebbinghaus developed the “nonsense syllable,” largely pronounceable
consonant-vowel-consonant combinations. He created syllable lists of various lengths that
he learned and then later relearned after different lengths of time. The percentage of time
saved in relearning the lists became known as the “savings method” of memory .
Ebbinghaus found that the amount of time spent in relearning lists was greater for longer
lists
andRise
for longer
retention intervals.
The graph of his results became the standard curve
The
of Laboratories
in America
of forgetting, still reproduced in textbooks as a classic result. The curve showed that recall
of learned lists was perhaps 85% after one hour, approximately 50% after one day, and as
little as 15% after about six days. These findings stimulated a long tradition of memory
research
After publication of his monograph Über das Gedächtnis (On Memory), Ebbinghaus
established laboratories at several universities and attracted some American students,
but his time was increasingly devoted to a editing a journal and writing (Fuchs, 1997).
Leadership of memory research fell to Georg Elias Müller (1850–1931) at Göttingen
University.
Leadership of memory research fell to Georg Elias Müller (1850–1931) at Göttingen
University. Müller, a dedicated experimentalist, invented the memory drum, a mechanical
device for presenting one verbal stimulus at a time, used in conjunction with experiments
on serial list learning and list retention. The memory drum, modified subsequently by
Müller for research in paired associate learning became a standard piece of laboratory
equipment for studies of verbal learning and memory until replaced by the computer.
Müller’s research reports on his studies of memory extended from 1893 to 1917 and
included “the theoretical contributions of retroactive inhibition, perseveration, and
consolidation” Müller initiated what later was termed the interference theory of
5 of the interference among
forgetting, a position that argues that forgetting is a function
competing memories at the time that a particular memory is being retrieved and not a
function of a decay or loss of memory traces. The topic was not addressed directly by
Ebbinghaus, but the rapid forgetting that his retention curve recorded has been interpreted
as offering evidence of the role of interference in memory.
The Evolution of the Laboratory Experiment
In subsequent research in psychophysics and memory, the roles of experimenter and observer became separated in
order to eliminate, or control for, possible biases that might stem from knowledge of the experiment and the
expectations that might influence an observation, such as knowing the intensity o stimulus to be judged
quantitatively. Separating the role of experimenter from that of observer, interpolating “catch-trials” (in which no
stimulus was presented), and randomizing the presentation of stimuli became common practices in psychophysical
research and were adapted to other psychological experiments.
Data Treatment and Research Design
Early published reports of “even narrowly focused laboratory studies conducted with small samples were capable of
generating reams of detailed data; readers of journal reports were
sometimes confronted with tables of data that ran on for pages”
Summary data were presented not only in tables but also in graphic form. Graphs were a common form of data
summary in turn-of-the-century scientific reports [the forgetting curve of Ebbinghaus (1885) and the learning curve
of Thorndike (1898) were two influential examples of graphic representation]
Francis Galton (1822–1911) used scatter plots in which one set of scores was arranged as a function of another set,
such as the height and weight measures of a group of individuals. From such graphic plots evolved the regression
line, the steepness of which reflected the degree of relation between
two variables, and, in the hands of Karl Pearson (1857–1936), developed into the mathematical technique of
correlating variables and measuring the degree of their relationship by the coefficient of correlation
The advent of control groups
Other statistical procedures were employed to assess comparisons between different groups of individuals. Galton’s
research, for example, on the efficacy of prayer asked “whether those who pray attain their objects more frequently
than those who do not pray, but who live in all other respects under similar conditions” (Galton, 1872, p. 126, as
cited by Dehue, 2000). A control group was employed in educational research to assess the effects of transfer of
training (the influence of practice in one task on performance in another), and, despite arguments over whether
participants should be assigned to an experimental or control group at random or by matching individuals, the use of
control groups in psychological experiments became an integral part of research design.
The comparison of control and experimental group performances led to the use of statistical procedures for testing
the significance of any differences that might be obtained.
Inferential statistics was unknown until the twentieth century: Student’s “t” test for comparing mean scores from
two groups appeared in 1908. Analysis of variance tests were devised in the 1920s but did not become a common
part of psychological research designs until the 1930s.
6
With the publication of his Experimental Psychology (1938), R. S. Woodworth “introduced a clear distinction
between experimental and correlational research”. The critical distinction made between the two kinds of research
was that only in experimental work could the cause of behavior be determined by manipulation of an independent
variable; the definition “provided one powerful rationale for the animal research of the thirties, forties, and fifties”
Standardization of Reports
The methodology of research and standards for analyzing and reporting results of experiments in keeping with
psychology’s status as a science is reflected in the standardization of the reports of experiments and the definition of
the experiment.
Psychological The model for reports of empirical research for publication in journals of the American Association
evolved from a six-and-a-half-page style sheet published in 1929 to the 1983 American Psychological Association
Publication Manual (3rd edition) that contained about 200 pages of rules for preparing a manuscript to the current
seventh edition of the manual
(2020) of 428 pages.
Mental philosophy had attempted to describe how mind worked, how its cognitive and conative processes operated
to produce volitional acts. American psychologists, imbued with the spirit of evolutionary theory, were focused on
the utility of mind and consciousness in the adaptation of species and individuals to the environment. This concern
with function (what is mind for? what is its function?—presumably, to
aid adaptation) was coupled with other aspects of function, namely, how mind works (how does it function?) and on
what mind depends (of what is mind a function? how complex must a nervous system be before mind becomes
possible?). These implicit and broad concerns for mental function in
psychology were made more explicit and embodied in a self conscious school of psychology by James
Rowland Angell (1869–1949) in response to the programmatic statement of E. B. Titchener (1867–1927), who
advocated a structural psychology. These schools of thought were but two among general systematic positions that
competed for dominance in psychology.
PSYCHOLOGY’S FIRST LAB
The emergence of laboratory psychology in the 19th century required two types of innovation. One involved the
development of apparatus and methods for the control and systematic variation of stimuli and the precise registration
of response; the other involved the creation of methods for the quantitative measurement of mental processes.
STRUCTURALISM
The founding of the first laboratory in experimental psychology has generally been to
German physician and physiologist Wilhelm Wundt (1832–1920). Wundt received his MD
degree from the University of Heidelberg in 1855. The natural sciences had become
legitimized as a proper field of study and were allied with medical training in the universities.
Research laboratories for scientific investigations were an accepted part of the university
structure, and careers in scientific research were made possible. Wundt, trained in physiology
7
as part of his medical education, pursued independent
research as a student and chose
physiology, not medicine, for his career.
Wundt had been engaged in psychological research for some time. As early as 1857, he
constructed an apparatus in his home to measure reaction time and began accumulating a
collection of instruments (kymographs, chronoscopes, tachistoscopes, and devices to
Edward B. Titchener, an English professor and a student under Wundt, expanded upon
Wundt’s ideas and used them to found the theory of structuralism. This theory attempted to
understand the mind as the sum of different underlying parts, and focused on three things: (1)
the individual elements of consciousness; (2) how these elements are organized into more
complex experiences; and (3) how these mental phenomena correlate with physical events.
Titchener attempted to classify the structures of the mind much like the elements of nature are
classified in the periodic table—which is not surprising, given that researchers were making
great advancements in the field of chemistry during his time. He believed that if the basic
components of the mind could be defined and categorized, then the structure of mental
processes and higher thinking could be determined. Like Wundt, Titchener used introspection
to try to determine the different components of consciousness; however, his method used very
strict guidelines for the reporting of an introspective analysis.
Structuralism was criticized because its subject of interest—the conscious experience—was not
easily studied with controlled experimentation. Its reliance on introspection, despite
Titchener’s rigid guidelines, was criticized for its lack of reliability. Critics argued that selfanalysis is not feasible, and that introspection could yield different results depending on the
subject.
Functionalism
As structuralism struggled to survive the scrutiny of the scientific method, new approaches to studying the mind
were sought. One important alternative was functionalism, founded by William James in the late 19th century.
8
In 1890 James published a highly influential, two-volume synthesis and summary of psychology, Principles of
Psychology. The books were widely read in North America and Europe, gaining attention and praise from Sigmund
Freud and Carl Jung in Vienna.
James then moved away from experimental psychology to produce more philosophical works (he is credited as one
of the founders of the school of American Pragmatism), although he continued to teach psychology until he retired
from Harvard in 1907.
James profoundly inspired and shaped the thinking of his students, many of whom (including Hall, Mary Whiton
Calkins, and E.L. Thorndike) went on to have prominent careers in psychology. He also advised an undergraduate
project on automatic writing by Gertrude Stein. William James is listed as number 14 on the American
Psychological Association’s list of the 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20 th century.
Built on structuralism’s concern with the anatomy of the mind, functionalism led to greater concern with the
functions of the mind, and later, to behaviorism.
Functionalism considers mental life and behavior in terms of active adaptation to the person’s environment. James’s
approach to psychology was less concerned with the composition of the mind and more concerned with examining
the ways in which the mind adapts to changing situations and environments. In functionalism, the brain is believed
to have evolved for the purpose of bettering the survival chances of its carrier by acting as an information processor:
its role is essentially to execute functions similar to the way a computer does.
Mental philosophy had attempted to describe how mind worked, how its cognitive and conative processes operated to
produce volitional acts. American psychologists, imbued with the spirit of evolutionary theory, were focused on the
utility of mind and consciousness in the adaptation of species and individuals to the environment. This concern with
function (what is mind for? what is its function?—presumably, to aid adaptation) was coupled with other aspects of
function, namely, how mind works (how does it function?) and on what mind depends (of what is mind a function?
how complex must a nervous system be before mind becomes possible?). These implicit and broad concerns for mental
function in psychology were made more explicit and embodied in a selfconscious
school of psychology by James Rowland Angell (1869–1949) in response to the programmatic statement of E. B.
Titchener (1867–1927), who advocated a structural psychology.
James Rowland Angell, (born May 8, 1869, Burlington, Vt., U.S.—died March 4,
1949, Hamden, Conn.), psychologist and university president who rebuilt and
reorganized Yale University in the 1920s and ’30s. A son of educator James Burrill Angell, the
young Angell studied psychology at the University of Michigan under John Dewey, at Harvard
University under William James and Josiah Royce, and at the Universities of Berlin and Halle.
Angell is said to have transformed functionalism from a movement into a working school,
despite his protestations that the movement was too broad to be embodied within any single
framework. In 1904, he wrote a highly successful book called Psychology: An Introductory
Study of Structure and Functions of Human Consciousness. Within four years, it went through
four editions, evidence of the growing popularity of functionalism.. His most important
contribution to functionalist psychology was his 1906 presidential address to American
Psychological Association entitled "The Province of Functional Psychology." In this speech,
he made three major points, drawing the battle lines between functionalism and structuralism.
First, functionalism studies mental operations, not mental elements. Second, functionalism
views consciousness
in terms ofencompassed
its utility, mediating
an organism's
needs and
Angell’s
approach to psychology
the broad between
range of interests
and methods
thatthe
had developed in
psychology
since
1879
and
reflected
the
influence
that
evolutionary
theory
exerted
on
psychology
pressures of its environment. And third, functionalism regards mind and body as an inseparable in the United
States.
unit. The science of mind was pursued in the laboratory; mind was its subject matter, and many methods were
available for its study. Psychophysical experiments, research on the connections between physiology, especially the
nervous system, and mental processes, and direct observation of others, including children and animals, provided
9
data that could supplement the results of introspection under laboratory conditions. The use of a variety of methods
would, in Angell’s view, supplement the results of the direct observations of mind that introspection provides.
Functional psychology was interested in how mind worked (i.e., how it functioned) and on its functional relation to
the physiological substrate (i.e., on what did mind depend) and its purpose (i.e., its use or function) and was less
concerned the content of mind.
Structuralism’s reliance on introspection eventually proved unscientific. Functionalism’s emphasis on the scientific
study of the adaptive functions of behaviors and mental processes advanced the study of psychology as a science.
Mary Whiton Calkins (1863–1930) attempted to reconcile the differences between the
structural and functional psychologies by proposing a psychology of the self that
possesses both conscious contents and mental functions. Calkins had begun her study of
psychology unofficially at Harvard with William James and Josiah Royce in 1890; Clark
University professor Edmund Sanford tutored Calkins privately in experimental
psychology. In 1891, Calkins established the first psychological laboratory at a women’s
college at Wellesley College, one of the first 12 laboratories in the United States. She
developed the paired associate technique for the study of verbal learning and memory
and published papers on her research and on experiments conducted with students in the
Individual
WellesleyDifferences
laboratory
Like James, G. Stanley Hall (1844–1924) was impressed by the impetus given to the new
psychology by the results from experiments on sensory physiology. Hall, while preparing for
the ministry, studied theology and philosophy in Germany and found that science was relevant
to these pursuits, especially scientific empiricism.
At Clark University, G. Stanley Hall established a graduate program in psychology that attracted
students in numbers sufficient to make Clark a leader in psychology after its opening in 1889.
In its first decade, 30 of the 54 doctorates in psychology awarded in the period were earned at
Clark (White, 1992). In his laboratory of psychology, Hall fostered the experimental methods
that he had learned in Germany and appointed E. C. Sanford (1859–1924) to supervise the
experimental work. Hall’s primary interest lay in developmental psychology; his recapitulation
theory of development reflected the nineteenth-century view that the course of development of
an individual parallels the stages of human evolution. Thus, “every child, from the moment of
conception to maturity, recapitulates, . . . every stage of development through which the human
race from its lowest animal beginnings has passed” (Hall, 1923, p. 380).
Although the theory was later discredited, it served a useful purpose in stimulating research.
instincts, and attitudes, (b) the small child’s activities and feelings, (c) control of emotions and
will, (d) development of the higher faculties, (e) individual differences, (f) school processes and
practices, and (g) church processes and practices” (White, 1992, p. 29). Much of Hall’s research
on childhood and that of his students culminated in his two-volume Adolescence (1904).
Francis Galton, a cousin of Darwin, contributed to the history of psychology through his measures of
physical and mental characteristics of individuals who visited his Anthropometric Laboratory.
The measures of physical characteristics such as head size, arm length, height and weight, and performance
characteristics such as reaction time and sensory acuity, used by Galton and adapted from the tasks of the
psychological laboratories, were employed as mental tests of intelligence. Head size, for example was
(falsely) assumed to indicate brain size and intellectual capacity,
10 and speed of responses and visual acuity
were assumed to indicate adaptability and survival capability. The term intelligence came to be used to
designate differences among individuals in their capacity for such complex behaviors as reasoning and
problem solving rather than to denote differences among species in adapting to the environment, the more
common use of the term in the nineteenth century.
James McKeen Cattell, who had studied with Hall at Johns Hopkins before earning his PhD with Wundt, like Galton,
he theorized that such tasks as reaction time, sensory acuity, memory, and apprehension spans would reveal an
individual’s intellectual abilities. His attempt to relate scores on these tasks to academic performance demonstrated
little relationship between the performance scores on the laboratory tests to academic performance in courses at
Columbia (Sokal, 1987) but nevertheless represents an early effort to measure the intelligence of individuals.
Gender Differences in intelligence
Galton’s study of sex differences in psychological characteristics reflected social and cultural views of the capabilities
and proper roles for women and men rather than differences that could be attributed to evolutionary forces. This bias
was common at the time and addressed by the research of one of James R. Angell’s graduate students, Helen Bradford
Thompson. Her dissertation, completed at the University of Chicago in 1900 and later published as The Mental Traits
of Sex (1903), was the first systematic, experimental investigation of sex differences in motor ability, sensations,
intellect, and affect. Careful, detailed analysis of the results led to her conclusion that “the psychological differences
of sex seem to be largely due, not to difference of average capacity, nor to difference in type of mental activity, but to
differences in the social influences brought to bear on the developing individual from early infancy to adult years”.
Animal Psychology
C. Lloyd Morgan (1852–1936) Morgan emphasized the importance of observation and encouraged parsimony in
interpreting observations of animal behavior (Morgan, 1890–1891, 1896).
Morgan employed experimental methods and observation in naturalistic settings and hypothesized that animals
learned through association of ideas, in accord with the philosophical tradition of associationism that described how
the human mind operated. Although we can know our own consciousness, we can only infer consciousness in
others, including animals; for Morgan, the criterion for inferring consciousness in animals is “circumstantial
evidence that the animal . . . profits by experience”
In his studies of animal psychology over the years, Morgan attempted to describe animal behaviour in objective
terms and without anthropomorphisms. He studied animal behaviour for its own sake, without regard to the mental
evolution of man, and applied what has come to be called the principle of parsimony: in Morgan’s words (An
Introduction to Comparative Psychology, 1894)
11
E. L THORNDIKE
At Clark, research in animal behavior attempted to describe the animal mind and to study the development of the
nervous system. The work at Clark proceeded in the spirit exemplified by Morgan and by E. L. Thorndike (1874–
1949), who, in 1898, had insisted that “experiment must be substituted for observation and the collection of
anecdotes”
Thorndike’s dissertation, Animal Intelligence (1898), signaled a major shift from a subjective, introspective,
anecdotal study of animals to an objective, quantitative experimental approach with an emphasis on learning.
Thorndike’s emphasis on controlled observation was welcomed by Morgan, who advanced “the hope that
comparative psychology has passed from the anecdote stage to the higher plane of verifiable observation, and that it
is rising to the dignity of science”.
Thorndike brought methodological innovations in animal and human experimentation. Carefully described behavior
with proper experimental and control conditions. Thorndike’s theory of learning is called connectionism. He
described it as the association between sense impressions and impulses to action. Earlier on, associationism
proposed linking of one idea with another Functional analysis of responses (R) in the context of stimuli (S) lead
Thorndike to propose that S-R connection was neural in nature.
Thorndike’s theory consists of three primary laws: (1) law of effect – responses to a situation which are followed by
a rewarding state of affairs will be strengthened and become habitual responses to that situation, (2) law of readiness
– a series of responses can be chained together to satisfy some goal which will result in annoyance if blocked, and
(3) law of exercise – connections become strengthened with practice and weakened when practice is discontinued. A
corollary of the law of effect was that responses that reduce the likelihood of achieving a rewarding state (i.e.,
punishments, failures) will decrease in strength.
BEHAVIORISM
Ivan Pavlov (1849–1936) , in full Ivan Petrovich Pavlov, Russian physiologist known chiefly for his development
of the concept of the conditioned reflex. In a now-classic experiment, he trained a hungry dog to salivate at the
sound of a metronome or buzzer, which was previously associated with the sight of food. He developed a
similar conceptual approach, emphasizing the importance of conditioning, in his pioneering studies relating human
behaviour to the nervous system.
12
Pavlov’s research on the physiology of digestion that earned him theNobel Prize in 1904 involved a method of
“sham feeding” in which a fistula, or tube, in the esophagus prevented food placed in the mouth of the dog from
reaching the stomach. A In the course of these second tube inserted into the stomach was used to collect gastric
juices. experiments, Pavlov noted that gastric secretions occurred not only in response to food in the mouth but also
merely to the sight of food, or of the assistant who usually fed the animal. He called these “psychic secretions.” By
using a fistula that could collect salivary secretions for the studies on digestion, Pavlov’s student Stefan Vul’fson
noted that not only did the salivary glands respond differently to different substances placed in the mouth, for
example, sand, wet food, dry food, but, unlike other digestive organs, they showed the identical response when the
dog was teased by only the sight of the substance.
While researching the digestive function of dogs, he noted his subjects would salivate before the delivery of
food.2 In a series of well-known experiments, he presented a variety of stimuli before the presentation of food,
eventually finding that, after repeated association, a dog would salivate to the presence of a stimulus other than food.
Pavlov termed this response a conditional reflex. Pavlov also discovered that these reflexes originate in the cerebral
cortex of the brain.
One of Pavlov's earliest publications was his 1897 text The Work of the Digestive Glands, which centered on his
physiology research. Later works that focused on his discovery of classical conditioning include his 1927
book Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological Activity of the Cerebral Cortex and Lectures on
Conditioned Reflexes: Twenty-five Years of Objective Study of the High Nervous Activity (Behavior) of
Animals which was published one year later.
Ivan Pavlov may not have set out to change the face of psychology, but his work had a profound and lasting
influence on the science of the mind and behavior. His discovery of classical conditioning helped establish the
school of thought known as behaviorism.
JOHN B WATSON
John B. Watson, in full John Broadus Watson, (born January 9, 1878, Travelers Rest, near Greenville, South
Carolina, U.S.—died September 25, 1958, New York, New York), American psychologist who codified and
publicized behaviourism, an approach to psychology that, in his view, was restricted to the objective, experimental
study of the relations between environmental events and human behaviour. Watsonian behaviourism became the
dominant psychology in the United States during the 1920s and ’30s.
His first major work, Behavior: An Introduction to Comparative Psychology, was published in 1914. In it he argued
forcefully for the use of animal subjects in psychological study and described instinct as a series of reflexes
activated by heredity. He also promoted conditioned responses as the ideal experimental tool. In 1918 Watson
ventured into the relatively unexplored field of infant study. In one of his classic experiments—and one of the most
controversial in the history of psychology—he conditioned fear of white rats and other furry objects in “Little
Albert,” an orphaned 11-month-old boy.
13
Gestalt Psychology
A response to the introspective analysis of consciousness advocated by Titchener and the behavioral analysis of J. B.
Watson came in the form of an approach to psychology that arose in Germany at about the same time that
behaviorism had arisen in the United States. The term gestalt, translated as “whole” or “configuration,” referred to
an organized entity that was different from the sum of its constituent parts.
Gestalt psychology is a school of thought that looks at the human mind and behavior as a whole. When trying to
make sense of the world around us, Gestalt psychology suggests that we do not simply focus on every small
component.
Instead, our minds tend to perceive objects as part of a greater whole and as elements of more complex systems.
This school of psychology played a major role in the modern development of the study of human sensation and
perception.
Originating in the work of Max Wertheimer, Gestalt psychology formed partially as a response to the structuralism
of Wilhelm Wundt.
While Wundt was interested in breaking down psychological matters into their smallest possible part, the Gestalt
psychologists were instead interested in looking at the totality of the mind and behavior. The guiding principle
behind the Gestalt movement was that the whole was greater than the sum of its parts.
The development of this area of psychology was influenced by a number of thinkers, including Immanuel Kant,
Ernst Mach, and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
There were a number of thinkers who had an influence on Gestalt psychology. Some of the best-known Gestalt
psychologists included
Max Wertheimer: (born April 15, 1880, Prague—died Oct. 12, 1943, New Rochelle, N.Y., U.S.), Czech-born
psychologist, one of the founders, with Kurt Koffka and Wolfgang Köhler, of Gestalt psychology (q.v.), which
attempts to examine psychological phenomena as structural wholes, rather than breaking them down into
components.
Wertheimer received his Ph.D. from the University of Würzburg in 1904, developing a lie detector for the objective
study of testimony and devising a method of word association as part of his doctoral dissertation. He then carried out
research in various areas at Prague, Berlin, and Vienna, becoming particularly interested in the perception of
complex and ambiguous structures. He discovered that feebleminded children can solve problems when they can
grasp the overall structures involved, and he began to formulate the ideas that would later take root
in Gestalt psychology.
While on a train trip in 1910, Wertheimer became intrigued by the phenomenon of perception of motion and stopped
at Frankfurt long enough to buy a toy stroboscope with which to test his ideas. He noted that two lights flashed
through small apertures in a darkened room at short intervals would appear to be one light in motion; this perception
of movement in a stationary object, called the phi phenomenon, became a basis for Gestalt psychology. He studied
the phi phenomenon with two assistants, Wolfgang Köhler and Kurt Koffka. Convinced that the segmented
approach of most psychologists to the study of human behaviour was inadequate, Wertheimer, Köhler, and Koffka
formed the new Gestalt school.
Kurt Koffka: (born March 18, 1886, Berlin, Germany—died November 22, 1941, Northampton, Massachusetts,
U.S.), German psychologist and cofounder, with Wolfgang Köhler and Max Wertheimer, of the Gestalt school
of psychology. Koffka conducted much experimental work, but he is perhaps best known for his systematic
application of Gestalt principles to a wide range of questions. One of his major works 1921; The Growth of the
14
Mind), applied the Gestalt viewpoint to child psychology and argued that infants initially experience organized
wholes in the barely differentiated world about them.
Wolfgang Kohler: Also a key founding figure in the history of the Gestalt movement, Kohler also famously
summarized Gestalt theory by saying, "The whole is different than the sum of its parts." He was also known for his
research on problem-solving, his criticisms of the introspection used by the structuralists to study the human mind,
and his opposition to behaviorism.
In the 1920s, German psychologist Wolfgang Kohler was studying the behavior of apes. He designed some simple
experiments that led to the development of one of the first cognitive theories of learning, which he called insight
learning.
In this experiment, Kohler hung a piece of fruit just out of reach of each chimp. He then provided the chimps with
either two sticks or three boxes, then waited and watched. Kohler noticed that after the chimps realized they could
not simply reach or jump up to retrieve the fruit, they stopped, had a seat, and thought about how they might solve
the problem. Then after a few moments, the chimps stood up and proceeded to solve the problem.
In the first scenario, the problem was solved by placing the smaller sticks into the longer stick to create one very
long stick that could be used to knock down the hanging fruit. In the second scenario, the chimps would solve the
problem by stacking the boxes on top of each other, which allowed them to climb up to the top of the stack of boxes
and reach the fruit.
Learning occurs in a variety of ways. Sometimes it is the result of direct observation; other times, it is the result of
experience through personal interactions with the environment. Kohler called this newly observed type of learning
insight learning. Insight learning is the abrupt realization of a problem's solution. Insight learning is not the result of
trial and error, responding to an environmental stimulus, or the result of observing someone else attempting the
problem. It is a completely cognitive experience that requires the ability to visualize the problem and the solution
internally - in the mind's eye, so to speak - before initiating a behavioral response
The neo Behaviorist: Guthrie, Toleman, and Hull
Edwin Ray Guthrie, (born January 9, 1886, Lincoln, Neb., U.S.—died April 23, 1959, Seattle, Wash.), American
psychologist who played a major role in the development of the contiguity theory of learning, a classical account of
how learning takes place.
Guthrie argued on philosophical grounds that the simple association in time of an external stimulus and a behavioral
response was sufficient for an animal or human subject to connect the two mentally. This view contrasted with that
of other psychologists who felt that some form of reinforcement, either positive or negative, was necessary to
establish the association between stimulus and response. Guthrie also denied the reinforcement
theorists’ contention that the association must be repeated several times before it is established as a behavioral
pattern; on the contrary, only a single incident was enough for the association to be learned, he argued. Guthrie
gathered experimental data to support his theory and presented his views in The Psychology of Learning (1935).
EDWARD CHACE TOLMAN (1886–1959)
15
In contrast to E. R. Guthrie’s molecular approaches to learning, Edward Chace Tolman (1886–1959) offered a molar
theory of the psychology of learning. Edward Tolman argued that humans engage in this type of learning everyday
as we drive or walk the same route daily and learn the locations of various buildings and objects. Only when we
need to find a building or object does learning become obvious.
Tolman conducted experiments with rats and mazes to examine the role that reinforcement plays in the way that rats
learn their way through complex mazes. These experiments eventually led to the theory of latent learning. Cognitive
maps as an example of latent learning in rats became the outcome.
Tolman coined the term cognitive map, which is an internal representation (or image) of external environmental
feature or landmark. He thought that individuals acquire large numbers of cues (i.e. signals) from the environment
and could use these to build a mental image of an environment (i.e. a cognitive map).
By using this internal representation of a physical space they could get to the goal by knowing where it is in a
complex of environmental features. Short cuts and changeable routes are possible with this model.
Tolman believed individuals do more than merely respond to stimuli; they act on beliefs, attitudes, changing
conditions, and they strive toward goals. Tolman is virtually the only behaviorists who found the stimulus-response
theory unacceptable, because reinforcement was not necessary for learning to occur. He felt behavior was mainly
cognitive.
Clark L. Hull
Clark L. Hull, in full Clark Leonard Hull, (born May 24, 1884, Akron, N.Y., U.S.—died May 10, 1952, New Haven,
Conn.), American psychologist known for his experimental studies on learning and for his attempt to give
mathematical expression to psychological theory. He applied a deductive method of reasoning similar to that used in
geometry, proposing that a series of postulates about psychology could be developed, from which logical
conclusions could be deduced and tested. If a test failed, the postulate could be revised, and if the test then
succeeded, the findings would be added to the body of psychological science.
Hull’s goal was to develop psychology as a natural science by demonstrating that behavioral phenomenaobey
universal, quantitative laws that can be stated by equations comparable to physical laws, “of the type governing the
law of falling bodies”
The reinforcement theory of learning formed the basis for most of Hull’s work. The theory explains behaviour in
terms of stimulus and response, which become associated with each other in the learning process. The tendency for
an association to be made is strengthened when reinforcement is given, that is, when the response reduces a
physiological or psychological need. When a need such as hunger is less strong, as when an animal in a laboratory
test is satiated, the reinforcement (for example, food) has less effect and the animal performs less well on learning
tasks. On the other hand, Hull hypothesized that animals would learn more quickly the stronger the physiological
16
need or drive and the more immediate the reward or reinforcement; this he later confirmed by experiment. Complex
behaviour could be explained by a series of such simple response mechanisms, according to Hull.
Hull’s learning theories were first presented in Mathematico-Deductive Theory of Rote Learning (1940), a
collaboration with several coworkers, in which he expressed his findings through postulates stated in both
mathematical and verbal forms. Hull believed that psychology had its own quantitative laws that could be stated in
mathematical equations. He further developed these ideas in Principles of Behavior (1943), which suggested that the
stimulus-response connection depends on both the kind and the amount of reinforcement. His lasting legacy to
psychology is thought to be his approach to the study of behaviour, rather than the specifics of his theories.
Radical Behaviorism
B.F. Skinner, in full Burrhus Frederic Skinner, (born March 20, 1904, Susquehanna, Pennsylvania, U.S.—
died August 18, 1990, Cambridge, Massachusetts), American psychologist and an influential exponent
of behaviourism, which views human behaviour in terms of responses to environmental stimuli and favours the
controlled, scientific study of responses as the most direct means of elucidating human nature
Susquehanna, Pennsylvania, U.S.—died August 18, 1990, Cambridge, Massachusetts), American psychologist and
an influential exponent of behaviourism, which views human behaviour in terms of responses to environmental
stimuli and favours the controlled, scientific study of responses as the most direct means of elucidating human
nature.
As a professor of psychology at Harvard University from 1948 (emeritus 1974), Skinner influenced a generation of
psychologists. Using various kinds of experimental equipment that he devised, he trained laboratory animals to
perform complex and sometimes quite exceptional actions. A striking example was his pigeons that learned to
play table tennis. One of his best-known inventions, the Skinner box, has been adopted in pharmaceutical research
for observing how drugs may modify animal behaviour.
The work of Skinner was rooted in a view that classical conditioning was far too simplistic to be a complete
explanation of complex human behavior. He believed that the best way to understand behavior is to look at the
causes of an action and its consequences. He called this approach operant conditioning.
Skinner is regarded as the father of Operant Conditioning, but his work was based on Thorndike’s (1898) law of
effect. Skinner (1948) studied operant conditioning by conducting experiments using animals which he placed in a
'Skinner Box' which was similar to Thorndike’s puzzle box.
With rats and later pigeons as his experimental subjects, Skinner measured cumulative responses over elapsed time
as a function of reinforcement schedules . Intervening variables, such as drive or motivation, were defined
operationally in terms of number of hours of deprivation or percent of free-feeding body weight. The reports of
experiments by Skinner and his followers, with few animals but a large number of responses, met with rejection
from editors whose definition of an experiment required a research design comparing experimental and control
groups with a statistical test of the significance of the difference between them. The result was the establishment of
the Journal for the Experimental.
In the decades of the 1950s and 1960s, the language and models that stimulated psychological research began to
change. Explanations of behavior derived from experiments on maze learning and classical and operant-conditioning
research came under attack from those studying more complex behavior patterns (e.g., Harlow, 1953). Rote learning
of serial lists and verbal paired associates were acknowledged o represent only a limited domain of human
learning(Melton, 1956). Information theory, developed during WorldWar II as a tool for measuring the capacity of
humans as processors and transmitters of information, provided a new measure of human performance and implied
capacities for making judgments and choices. Information theory offered fresh interpretations of choice reactiontim
eexperimentsD and the limits of human attention and immediate memory (Miller, 1956). Discussions of human
capacities to reduce, transmit, or create information renewed interest in cognitive capacities of decision making and
problem solving that suggested analogies to the recently developed technology of the computer.
17
SIGMUND FREUD (1856-1939)
Trained as a physician, he formed a theory of the impact of life experiences on behavior known as psychodynamic
theory.
Freud formulated ideas and wrote about the existence of an unconscious mind, the development of sexuality, dream
analysis, and the psychological roots of abnormal behavior, and developed techniques for treating disorders. It is the
classic view of therapy, an authoritarian approach in which the doctor sat in “the big chair” (Tears for Fears song
“Shout” in 10Songs from the Big Chair Album) and was all knowing in his interpretations.
Freud did no real experimentation. His ideas are based on his thinking and anecdotal work with patients, mostly
upper-class Viennese women who were not representative of the general population and are even less representative
now. Still, some of his ideas hold up to contemporary scientific scrutiny.
Humanistic Psychology: In the 1960s, American psychology was largelydichotomized between psychodynamic
theory and behaviorism. The humanists grew out of a reaction against the limitations of these two theories.
Humanists extended the work of philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau into a belief that people are innately good,
motivated to improve themselves, and only behave badly when corrupted by society.
Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) introduced a theory of motivation, the primary goal of which is self-actualization—
to be one’s best self.
Carl Rogers (1902-1987) developed a client-centered approach to therapy, placing the individual undergoing
treatment on equal standing with the therapist, taking an active role in their treatment. Unconditional
love and mirroring are two principle approaches employed in client centered
therapy.
18