Psychologists

Gestalt psychology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2007)

This article needs attention from an expert on the subject. See the talk page for details. WikiProject Psychology or the Psychology Portal may be able to help recruit an expert. (October
2009)

Psychology

History of psychology Branches of psychology

Basic science
Abnormal · Behavioral neuroscience Cognitive · Developmental Experimental · Evolutionary Mathematical · Neuropsychology Personality · Positive Psychophysics · Social Transpersonal

Applied science
Clinical · Educational Forensic · Health Industrial and organizational Occupational health School · Sport

Lists
Outline · Publications Topics · Therapies

Portal

v•d•e

Gestalt psychology or gestaltism (German: Gestalt - "essence or shape of an entity's complete form") of the Berlin School is a theory of mind and brain positing that the operational principle of the brain is holistic, parallel, and analog, with self-organizing tendencies. The Gestalt effect refers to the form-forming capability of our senses, particularly with respect to the visual recognition of figures and whole forms instead of just a collection of simple lines and curves. In psychology, gestaltism is often opposed to structuralism and Wundt. The phrase "The whole is greater than the sum of the parts" is often used when explaining Gestalt theory. (See History of Psychology by David Hothersall (2004), chapter seven, for complete history)

Contents
[hide]
  

      

1 Origins 2 Theoretical framework and methodology 3 Properties o 3.1 Emergence o 3.2 Reification o 3.3 Multistability o 3.4 Invariance 4 Prägnanz 5 Gestalt views in psychology 6 Applications in computer science 7 Criticism 8 See also 9 References 10 External links

[edit] Origins
The concept of Gestalt was first introduced in contemporary philosophy and psychology by Christian von Ehrenfels (a member of the School of Brentano). The idea of Gestalt has its roots in theories by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Immanuel Kant, and Ernst Mach. Max

Wertheimer's unique contribution was to insist that the "Gestalt" is perceptually primary, defining the parts of which it was composed, rather than being a secondary quality that emerges from those parts, as von Ehrenfels's earlier Gestalt-Qualität had been. Both von Ehrenfels and Edmund Husserl seem to have been inspired by Mach's work Beiträge zur Analyse der Empfindungen (Contributions to the Analysis of the Sensations, 1886), in formulating their very similar concepts of Gestalt and Figural Moment, respectively. Early 20th century theorists, such as Kurt Koffka, Max Wertheimer, and Wolfgang Köhler (students of Carl Stumpf) saw objects as perceived within an environment according to all of their elements taken together as a global construct. This 'gestalt' or 'whole form' approach sought to define principles of perception -- seemingly innate mental laws which determined the way in which objects were perceived. These laws took several forms, such as the grouping of similar, or proximate, objects together, within this global process. Although Gestalt has been criticized for being merely descriptive, it has formed the basis of much further research into the perception of patterns and objects ( Carlson et al. 2000), and of research into behavior, thinking, problem solving and psychopathology. It should also be emphasized that Gestalt psychology is distinct from Gestalt psychotherapy. One has little to do with the other.

[edit] Theoretical framework and methodology
This article does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2009)

The investigations developed at the beginning of the 20th century, based on traditional scientific methodology, divided the object of study into a set of elements that could be analyzed separately with the objective of reducing the complexity of this object. Contrary to this methodology, the school of Gestalt practiced a series of theoretical and methodological principles that attempted to redefine the approach to psychological research. The theoretical principles are the following:




Principle of Totality - The conscious experience must be considered globally (by taking into account all the physical and mental aspects of the individual simultaneously) because the nature of the mind demands that each component be considered as part of a system of dynamic relationships. Principle of psychophysical isomorphism - A correlation exists between conscious experience and cerebral activity.

Based on the principles above the following methodological principles are defined:





Phenomenon Experimental Analysis - In relation to the Totality Principle any psychological research should take as a starting point phenomena and not be solely focused on sensory qualities. Biotic Experiment - The School of Gestalt established a need to conduct real experiments which sharply contrasted with and opposed classic laboratory experiments. This signified experimenting in natural situations, developed in real conditions, in which it would be possible to reproduce, with higher fidelity, what would be habitual for a subject.

[edit] Properties
The key principles of Gestalt systems are emergence, reification, multistability and invariance.[1]

[edit] Emergence

Emergence

Emergence is the process of complex pattern formation from simpler rules. It demonstrated by the perception of the Dog Picture, which depicts a Dalmatian dog sniffing the ground in the shade of overhanging trees. The dog is not recognized by first identifying its parts (feet, ears, nose, tail, etc.), and then inferring the dog from those component parts. Instead, the dog is perceived as a whole, all at once. However, this is a description of what occurs in vision and not an explanation. Gestalt theory does not explain how the percept of a dog emerges.

[edit] Reification

Reification

Reification is the constructive or generative aspect of perception, by which the experienced percept contains more explicit spatial information than the sensory stimulus on which it is based. For instance, a triangle will be perceived in picture A, although no triangle has actually been drawn. In pictures B and D the eye will recognize disparate shapes as "belonging" to a single shape, in C a complete three-dimensional shape is seen, where in actuality no such thing is drawn. Reification can be explained by progress in the study of illusory contours, which are treated by the visual system as "real" contours. See also: Reification (fallacy)

[edit] Multistability

the Necker Cube and the Rubin vase, two examples of multistability

Multistability (or multistable perception) is the tendency of ambiguous perceptual experiences to pop back and forth unstably between two or more alternative interpretations. This is seen for example in the Necker cube, and in Rubin's Figure/Vase illusion shown here. Other examples include the 'three-pronged widget' and artist M. C. Escher's artwork and the appearance of flashing marquee lights moving first one direction and then suddenly the other. Again, Gestalt does not explain how images appear multistable, only that they do.

[edit] Invariance

Invariance

Invariance is the property of perception whereby simple geometrical objects are recognized independent of rotation, translation, and scale; as well as several other variations such as elastic deformations, different lighting, and different component features. For example, the objects in A in the figure are all immediately recognized as the same basic shape, which are immediately distinguishable from the forms in B. They are even recognized despite perspective and elastic deformations as in C, and when depicted using different graphic elements as in D. Computational theories of vision, such as those by David Marr, have had more success in explaining how objects are classified. Emergence, reification, multistability, and invariance are not necessarily separable modules to be modeled individually, but they could be different aspects of a single unified dynamic mechanism.[citation needed]

[edit] Prägnanz
The fundamental principle of gestalt perception is the law of prägnanz (German for pithiness) which says that we tend to order our experience in a manner that is regular, orderly, symmetric, and simple. Gestalt psychologists attempt to discover refinements of the law of prägnanz, and this involves writing down laws which hypothetically allow us to predict the interpretation of sensation, what are often called "gestalt laws".[1] These include:

Law of Closure

Law of Similarity

Law of Proximity


Law of Closure — The mind may experience elements it does not perceive through sensation, in order to complete a regular figure (that is, to increase regularity).

    

Law of Similarity — The mind groups similar elements into collective entities or totalities. This similarity might depend on relationships of form, color, size, or brightness. Law of Proximity — Spatial or temporal proximity of elements may induce the mind to perceive a collective or totality. Law of Symmetry (Figure ground relationships)— Symmetrical images are perceived collectively, even in spite of distance. Law of Continuity — The mind continues visual, auditory, and kinetic patterns. Law of Common Fate — Elements with the same moving direction are perceived as a collective or unit.

[edit] Gestalt views in psychology
Gestalt psychologists find it is important to think of problems as a whole. Max Wertheimer considered thinking to happen in two ways: productive and reproductive.[1] Productive thinking- is solving a problem with insight. This is a quick insightful unplanned response to situations and environmental interaction. Reproductive thinking-is solving a problem with previous experiences and what is already known. (1945/1959). This is a very common thinking. For example, when a person is given several segments of information, he/she deliberately examines the relationships among its parts, analyzes their purpose, concept, and totality, he/she reaches the "aha!" moment, using what is already known. Understanding in this case happens intentionally by reproductive thinking. Other Gestalts psychologist Perkins believes insight deals with three processes: 1) Unconscious leap in thinking.[1]. 2) The increased amount of speed in mental processing. 3) The amount of short-circuiting which occurs in normal reasoning.[2] Other views going against the Gestalt psychology are: 1) Nothing-Special View 2) Neo-Gestalts View 3) The Three-Process View Gestalt laws continue to play an important role in current psychological research on vision. For example, the object-based attention hypothesis[3] states that elements in a visual scene are first grouped according to Gestalt principles; consequently, further attentional resources can be allocated to particular objects. Gestalt psychology should not be confused with the Gestalt therapy of Fritz Perls, which is only peripherally linked to Gestalt psychology. A strictly Gestalt psychology-based therapeutic method is Gestalt Theoretical Psychotherapy, developed by the German Gestalt psychologist and psychotherapist

Roger Sperry Jean Piaget
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Jean William Fritz Piaget

Full name Born Died Era Region School Main interests Notable

Jean William Fritz Piaget 9 August 1896 16 September 1980 (aged 84) 20th-century philosophy Western philosophy Developmental

Natural Sciences

Genetic Epistemology, Theory of cognitive

ideas

development, Object permanence, Egocentrism

Influenced by[show]

Influenced[show]

Jean Piaget (French pronunciation: [ pja ɛ]; born in Neuchâtel, Switzerland, 9 August 1896 – 16 September 1980) was a Swiss psychologist and philosopher, well known for his pedagogical studies. His theory of cognitive development and epistemological view are together called "Genetic Epistemology." He laid great importance to the education of children, which made him declare in 1934 in his role as Director of the International Bureau of Education that "only education is capable of saving our societies from possible collapse, whether violent, or gradual."[1] In 1955, he created the International Centre for Genetic Epistemology in Geneva and directed it until 1980. According to Ernst von Glasersfeld, Jean Piaget is "the great pioneer of the constructivist theory of knowing."[2]

Biography
Piaget was born in 1896 in the French-speaking part of Switzerland called Neuchâtel. His father, Arthur Piaget, was a professor of medieval literature at the University of Neuchâtel. Piaget was a precocious child who developed an interest in biology and the natural world. He was educated at the University of Neuchâtel, and also studied briefly at the University of Zürich. During this time, he published two philosophical papers which showed the direction of his thinking at the time, but which he later dismissed as adolescent thought.[3] His interest in psychoanalysis, at the time a burgeoning strain of psychology, can also be dated to this period. Piaget moved from Switzerland to Paris, France after his graduation and he taught at the Grange-Aux-Belles street school for boys. The school was run by Alfred Binet, the developer of the Binet intelligence test, and Piaget assisted in the marking of Binet's intelligence tests. It was while he was helping to mark some of these tests that Piaget noticed that young children consistently gave wrong answers to certain questions. Piaget did not focus so much on the fact of the children's answers being wrong, but that young children consistently made identical mistakes that older children and adults did not. This led him to the theory that young children's cognitive processes are inherently different from those of adults. Ultimately, he was to propose a global theory of developmental stages stating that individuals exhibit certain distinctive common patterns of cognition in each period in their development. In 1921, Piaget returned to Switzerland as director of the Rousseau Institute in Geneva.

In 1923, he married Valentine Châtenay; together, the couple had three children, whom Piaget studied from infancy. In 1929, Jean Piaget accepted the post of Director of the International Bureau of Education and remained the head of this international organization until 1968. Every year, he drafted his ―Director's Speeches‖ for the IBE Council and for the International Conference on Public Education in which he explicitly addressed his educational credo. In 1964, Piaget was invited to serve as chief consultant at two conferences at Cornell University (March 11 to March 13) and University of California, Berkeley (March 16 to March 18). The conferences addressed the relationship of cognitive studies and curriculum development and strived to conceive implications of recent investigations of children's cognitive development for curricula.[4] In 1979 he was awarded the Balzan Prize for Social and Political Sciences.

[edit] Theoretical work
Jean Piaget defined himself as an epistemologist, interested in the process of the qualitative development of knowledge. As he says in the introduction of his book "Genetic Epistemology" (ISBN 978-0-393-00596-7): "What the genetic epistemology proposes is discovering the roots of the different varieties of knowledge, since its elementar forms, following to the next levels, including also the scientific knowledge." He believed answers for the epistemological questions at his time could be answered, or better proposed, if one looked to the genetic aspect of it, hence his experimentations with children and adolescents. Piaget considered cognitive structures development as a differentiation of biological regulations. In one of his last books, "Equilibration of Cognitive Structures: The Central Problem of Intellectual Development" (ISBN 978-022666781), he intends to explain knowledge development as a process of equilibration using two main concepts in his theory, assimilation and accommodation, as belonging not only to biological interactions but also to cognitive ones. The four development stages are described in Piaget's theory as:


Sensorimotor stage: from birth to age 2. Children experience the world through movement and senses (use five senses to explore the world). During the sensorimotor stage children are extremely egocentric, meaning they cannot perceive the world from others' viewpoints. The sensorimotor stage is divided into six substages: "(1) simple reflexes; (2) first habits and primary circular reactions; (3) secondary circular reactions; (4) coordination of secondary circular reactions; (5) tertiary circular reactions, novelty, and curiosity; and (6) internalization of schemes." [5]

Simple reflexes is from birth to 1 month old. At this time infants use reflexes such as rooting and sucking. First habits and primary circular reactions is from 1 month to 4 months old. During this time infants learn to coordinate sensation and two types of scheme (habit and circular reactions). A primary circular reaction is when the infant tries to reproduce an event that happened by accident (ex: sucking thumb).

The third stage, secondary circular reactions, occurs when the infant is 4 to 8 months old. At this time they become aware of things beyond their own body; they are more object oriented. At this time they might accidentally shake a rattle and continue to do it for sake of satisfaction. Coordination of secondary circular reactions is from 8 months to 12 months old. During this stage they can do things intentionally. They can now combine and recombine schemes and try to reach a goal (ex: use a stick to reach something). They also understand object permanence during this stage. That is, they understand that objects continue to exist even when they can't see them. The fifth stage occurs from 12 months old to 18 months old. During this stage infants explore new possibilities of objects; they try different things to get different results. During the last stage they are 18 to 24 months old. During this stage they shift to symbolic thinking. [5] Some followers of Piaget's studies of infancy, such as Kenneth Kaye[6] argue that his contribution was as an observer of countless phenomena not previously described, but that he didn't offer explanation of the processes in real time that cause those developments, beyond analogizing them to broad concepts about biological adaptation generally.


Preoperational stage: from ages 2 to 7 (magical thinking predominates. Acquisition of motor skills). Egocentrism begins strongly and then weakens. Children cannot conserve or use logical thinking. Concrete operational stage: from ages 7 to 12 (children begin to think logically but are very concrete in their thinking). Children can now conceive and think logically but only with practical aids. They are no longer egocentric. Formal operational stage: from age 12 onwards (development of abstract reasoning). Children develop abstract thought and can easily conserve and think logically in their mind.





[edit] The developmental process
Piaget provided no concise description of the development process as a whole. Broadly speaking it consisted of a cycle:
 

 



The child performs an action which has an effect on or organizes objects, and the child is able to note the characteristics of the action and its effects. Through repeated actions, perhaps with variations or in different contexts or on different kinds of objects, the child is able to differentiate and integrate its elements and effects. This is the process of "reflecting abstraction" (described in detail in Piaget 2001). At the same time, the child is able to identify the properties of objects by the way different kinds of action affect them. This is the process of "empirical abstraction". By repeating this process across a wide range of objects and actions, the child establishes a new level of knowledge and insight. This is the process of forming a new "cognitive stage". This dual process allows the child to construct new ways of dealing with objects and new knowledge about objects themselves. However, once the child has constructed these new kinds of knowledge, he or she starts to use them to create still more complex objects and to carry out still more complex actions. As a

result, the child starts to recognize still more complex patterns and to construct still more complex objects. Thus a new stage begins, which will only be completed when all the child's activity and experience have been re-organized on this still higher level.

This process is not wholly gradual, however. Once a new level of organization, knowledge and insight proves to be effective, it will quickly be generalized to other areas. As a result, transitions between stages tend to be rapid and radical, and the bulk of the time spent in a new stage consists of refining this new cognitive level. When the knowledge that has been gained at one stage of study and experience leads rapidly and radically to a new higher stage of insight, a gestalt [disambiguation needed] is said to have occurred. It is because this process takes this dialectical form, in which each new stage is created through the further differentiation, integration, and synthesis of new structures out of the old, that the sequence of cognitive stages are logically necessary rather than simply empirically correct. Each new stage emerges only because the child can take for granted the achievements of its predecessors, and yet there are still more sophisticated forms of knowledge and action that are capable of being developed. Because it covers both how we gain knowledge about objects and our reflections on our own actions, Piaget's model of development explains a number of features of human knowledge that had never previously been accounted for. For example, by showing how children progressively enrich their understanding of things by acting on and reflecting on the effects of their own previous knowledge, they are able to organize their knowledge in increasingly complex structures. Thus, once a young child can consistently and accurately recognize different kinds of animals, he or she then acquires the ability to organize the different kinds into higher groupings such as "birds", "fish", and so on. This is significant because they are now able to know things about a new animal simply on the basis of the fact that it is a bird – for example, that it will lay eggs. At the same time, by reflecting on their own actions, the child develops an increasingly sophisticated awareness of the "rules" that govern in various ways. For example, it is by this route that Piaget explains this child's growing awareness of notions such as "right", "valid", "necessary", "proper", and so on. In other words, it is through the process of objectification, reflection and abstraction that the child constructs the principles on which action is not only effective or correct but also justified. One of Piaget's most famous studies focused purely on the discriminative abilities of children between the ages of two and a half years old, and four and a half years old. He began the study by taking children of different ages and placing two lines of sweets, one with the sweets in a line spread further apart, and one with the same number of sweets in a line placed more closely together. He found that, ―Children between 2 years, 6 months old and 3 years, 2 months old correctly discriminate the relative number of objects in two rows; between 3 years, 2 months and 4 years, 6 months they indicate a longer row with fewer objects to have "more"; after 4 years, 6 months they again discriminate correctly‖ (Cognitive Capacity of Very Young Children, p. 141). Initially younger children were not studied, because if at four years old a child could not conserve quantity, then a younger child presumably could not either. The results show however

that children that are younger than three years and two months have quantity conservation, but as they get older they lose this quality, and do not recover it until four and a half years old. This attribute may be lost due to a temporary inability to solve because of an overdependence on perceptual strategies, which correlates more candy with a longer line of candy, or due to the inability for a four year old to reverse situations. By the end of this experiment several results were found. First, younger children have a discriminative ability that shows the logical capacity for cognitive operations exists earlier than acknowledged. This study also reveals that young children can be equipped with certain qualities for cognitive operations, depending on how logical the structure of the task is. Research also shows that children develop explicit understanding at age 5 and as a result, the child will count the sweets to decide which has more. Finally the study found that overall quantity conservation is not a basic characteristic of humans' native inheritance.

[edit] Challenges
Piaget's theory, however vital in understanding child psychology, did not go without scrutiny. A main figure in the ratification of Piaget's ideas was the Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky. Vygotsky stressed the importance of a child's cultural background as an effect to the stages of development. Because different cultures stress different social interactions, this challenged Piaget's theory that the hierarchy of learning development had to develop in succession. Vygotsky introduced the term Zone of proximal development as an overall task a child would have to develop that would be too difficult to develop alone. Also, the so called neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development maintained that Piaget's theory does not do justice either to the underlying mechanisms of information processing that explain transition from stage to stage or individual differences in cognitive development. According to these theories, changes in information processesing mechanisms, such as speed of processing and working memory, are responsible for ascension from stage to stage. Moreover, differences between individuals in these processes explain why some individuals develop faster than other individuals (Demetriou, 1998). Curiously, Piaget had published a novel at the age of 20, before he'd begun any research in psychology, in which he stated what would later be the "conclusions" from decades of studying the development of intelligence in children.[7]

[edit] Genetic epistemology
This section may need to be wikified to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please help by adding relevant internal links, or by improving the section's layout. (January 2009)

According to Jean Piaget, genetic epistemology "attempts to explain knowledge, and in particular scientific knowledge, on the basis of its history, its sociogenesis, and especially the psychological origins of the notions and operations upon which it is based"[5]. Piaget believed

he could test epistemological questions by studying the development of thought and action in children. As a result Piaget created a field known as genetic epistemology with its own methods and problems. He defined this field as the study of child development as a means of answering epistemological questions. His exploration of genetic epistemology is divided into four different stages:
1. 2. 3. 4. Stage 1 The Sociological Model of Development the sociological model of development, the biological model of intellectual development, the elaboration of the logical model of intellectual development, the study of figurative thought.

Piaget first developed this stage in the 1920‘s. He investigated the hidden side of children‘s minds. Piaget proposed that children moved from a position of egocentrism to sociocentrism. For this explanation he combined the use of psychological and clinical methods to create what he called a semiclinical interview. He began the interview by asking children standardized questions and depending on how they answered, he would ask them a series of nonstandard questions. Piaget was looking for what he called ―spontaneous conviction‖ so he often asked questions the children neither expected nor anticipated. In his studies, he noticed there was a gradual progression from intuitive to scientific and socially acceptable responses. Piaget theorized children did this because of the social interaction and the challenge to younger children‘s ideas by the ideas of those children who were more advanced.
Stage 2 The Biological Model of Intellectual Development

In this stage, Piaget described intelligence as having two closely interrelated parts. The first part, which is from the first stage, was the content of children's thinking. The second part was the process of intellectual activity. He believed this process of thinking could be regarded as an extension of the biological process of adaptation. Adaptation has two pieces: assimilation and accommodation. To test his theory, Piaget observed the habits in his own children. He argued infants were engaging in an act of assimilation when they sucked on everything in their reach. He claimed infants transform all objects into an object to be sucked. The children were assimilating the objects to conform to their own mental structures. Piaget then made the assumption whenever one transforms the world to meet individual needs or conceptions; one is, in a way, assimilating it. Piaget also observed his children not only assimilating objects to fit their needs, but also modifying some of their mental structures to meet the demands of the environment. This is the second division of adaption known as accommodation. To start out, the infants only engaged in primarily reflex actions such as sucking, but not long after, they would pick up actual objects and put them in their mouths. When they do this, they modify their reflex response to accommodate the external objects into reflex actions. Because the two are often in

conflict, they provide the impetus for intellectual development. The constant need to balance the two, triggers intellectual growth.
Stage 3 The Elaboration of the Logical Model of Intellectual Development

In the model Piaget developed in stage three, he argued the idea that intelligence develops in a series of stages that are related to age and are progressive because one stage must be accomplished before the next can occur. For each stage of development the child forms a view of reality for that age period. At the next stage, the child must keep up with earlier level of mental abilities to reconstruct concepts. Piaget concluded intellectual development as an upward expanding spiral in which children must constantly reconstruct the ideas formed at earlier levels with new, higher order concepts acquired at the next level.
Stage 4 The Study of Figurative thought

Piaget studied areas of intelligence like perception and memory that aren‘t entirely logical. Logical concepts are described as being completely reversible because they can always get back to the starting point. The perceptual concepts Piaget studied could not be manipulated. To describe the figurative process, Piaget uses pictures as examples. Pictures can‘t be separated because contours cannot be separated from the forms they outline. Memory is the same way. It is never completely reversible. During this last period of work, Piaget and his colleague Inhelder also published books on perception, memory, and other figurative processes such as learning during this last period. [8][9][10] Recently, Jonathan Tsou argued that Piaget's later epistemological works could serve as a remedy for the flaws in Thomas Kuhn's theory of scientific revolutions.[11] However, this criticism missed some of the history between them, as well as the existence of a "lost manuscript" by Kuhn (currently held at the University of Chicago) that was to address his critics' concerns.[12] It is noted, however, that the implications of his later work remain largely unexamined.

[edit] The physical microstructure of “schemes”
In his “Biology and Knowledge” (1967+ / French 1965), Piaget tentatively hinted at possible physical embodiments for his abstract ―scheme‖ entities. At the time, there was much talk and research about RNA as such an agent of learning, and Piaget considered some of the evidence. However he did not offer any firm conclusions, and confessed that this was beyond his area of expertise. Piaget died in 1980, and by then the RNA theory had lost its appeal. One key reason was this: Until recently, nearly all RNA was assumed to be wholly devoted to producing protein; and such protein did not fit in with the evidence about learning. However in about 2000 it became clear

that only about 3% of RNA was thus employed, and the remaining ―non-coding‖ RNA (ncRNA) — the 97% — was thus available for other tasks, including possible embodiments of Piaget‘s ―scheme‖ elements. (Traill, 2005b / 2008). It has still not been established that this ncRNA scheme-basis is true. (There are methodological and other problems (Traill, 2000)). However some interesting theoretical advances have been made possible because of that theoretical development, including some unexpected explanations in various disciplines. In particular such molecular encoding easily explains: (i) the inheritance of stereotyped behavioural traits (capable of later modification or re-configuration); and (ii) Piagetian/Darwinian trial-and-error amongst massive populations of such entities. It also implies the need for a significant amount of organized short-range infra-red activity, and that also yields some unexpected explanations in its own right. E.g. (iii) it possibly accounts for an anomaly in the capability of the optic nerve — which appears to carry much more information than it seems capable of (judged in terms of traditional mechanisms alone). See optic nerve, appendix. — And (iv) it seems likely to explain the century-old mystery of how myelin geometry is controlled. (Traill, 2005a).

[edit] Influence
Despite ceasing to be a fashionable psychologist, the magnitude of Piaget's continuing influence can be measured by the global scale and activity of the Jean Piaget Society, which holds annual conferences and attracts very large numbers of participants. His theory of cognitive development has proved influential in many different areas:
      

Developmental psychology Education and Morality Historical studies of thought and cognition Evolution Philosophy Primatology Artificial Intelligence (AI)

[edit] Developmental psychology
Piaget is without doubt one of the most influential developmental psychologists, influencing not only the work of Lev Vygotsky and of Lawrence Kohlberg but whole generations of eminent academics. Although subjecting his ideas to massive scrutiny led to innumerable improvements and qualifications of his original model and the emergence of a plethora of neo-Piagetian and post-Piagetian variants, Piaget's original model has proved to be remarkably robust (Lourenço and Machado 1996).

[edit] Education and development of morality
During the 1970s and 1980s, Piaget's works also inspired the transformation of European and American education, including both theory and practice, leading to a more ‗child-centered‘

approach. In Conversations with Jean Piaget, he says: "Education, for most people, means trying to lead the child to resemble the typical adult of his society . . . but for me and no one else, education means making creators. . . . You have to make inventors, innovators—not conformists" (Bringuier, 1980, p. 132). Piaget's influence is strongest in early education and moral education. His theory of cognitive development can be used as a tool in the early childhood classroom. According to Piaget, children developed best in a classroom with interaction. Piaget believed in two basic principles relating to moral education: that children develop moral ideas in stages and that children create their conceptions of the world. According to Piaget, "the child is someone who constructs his own moral world view, who forms ideas about right and wrong, and fair and unfair, that are not the direct product of adult teaching and that are often maintained in the face of adult wishes to the contrary" (Gallagher, 1978, p. 26). Piaget believed that children made moral judgments based on their own observations of the world. Piaget's theory of morality was radical when his book, The Moral Judgment of the Child, was published in 1932 for two reasons: his use of philosophical criteria to define morality (as universalizable, generalizable, and obligatory) and his rejection of equating cultural norms with moral norms. Piaget, drawing on Kantian theory, proposed that morality developed out of peer interaction and that it was autonomous from authority mandates. Peers, not parents, were a key source of moral concepts such as equality, reciprocity, and justice. Piaget attributed different types of psychosocial processes to different forms of social relationships, introducing a fundamental distinction between different types of said relationships.. Where there is constraint because one participant holds more power than the other the relationship is asymmetrical, and, importantly, the knowledge that can be acquired by the dominated participant takes on a fixed and inflexible form. Piaget refers to this process as one of social transmission, illustrating it through reference to the way in which the elders of a tribe initiate younger members into the patterns of beliefs and practices of the group. Similarly, where adults exercise a dominating influence over the growing child, it is through social transmission that children can acquire knowledge. By contrast, in cooperative relations, power is more evenly distributed between participants so that a more symmetrical relationship emerges. Under these conditions, authentic forms of intellectual exchange become possible; each partner has the freedom to project his or her own thoughts, consider the positions of others, and defend his or her own point of view. In such circumstances, where children‘s thinking is not limited by a dominant influence, Piaget believed "the reconstruction of knowledge", or favorable conditions for the emergence of constructive solutions to problems, exists. Here the knowledge that emerges is open, flexible and regulated by the logic of argument rather than being determined by an external authority. In short, cooperative relations provide the arena for the emergence of operations, which for Piaget requires the absence of any constraining influence, and is most often illustrated by the relations that form between peers (for more on the importance of this distinction see Duveen & Psaltis, in press; Psaltis & Duveen, 2006,2007).

[edit] Historical studies of thought and cognition

Historical changes of thought have been modeled in Piagetian terms. Broadly speaking these models have mapped changes in morality, intellectual life and cognitive levels against historical changes (typically in the complexity of social systems). Notable examples include:
         

Michael Horace Barnes' study of the co-evolution of religious and scientific thinking[13] Peter Damerow's theory of prehistoric and archaic thought[14] Kieran Egan's stages of understanding[15] James W. Fowler's stages of faith development Suzy Gablik's stages of art history[16] Christopher Hallpike's studies of changes in cognition and moral judgment in pre-historical, archaic and classical periods ... (Hallpike 1979, 2004) Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development Don Lepan's theory of the origins of modern thought and drama[17] Charles Radding's theory of the medieval intellectual development[18] Jürgen Habermas's reworking of historical materialism.

[edit] Non human development
Neo-Piagetian stages have been applied to the maximum stage attained by various animals. For example spiders attain the circular sensory motor stage, coordinating actions and perceptions. Pigeons attain the sensory motor stage, forming concepts.[citation needed]

[edit] Origins
The origins of human intelligence have also been studied in Piagetian terms. Wynn (1979, 1981) analysed Acheulian and Oldowan tools in terms of the insight into spatial relationships required to create each kind. On a more general level, Robinson's Birth of Reason (2005) suggests a largescale model for the emergence of a Piagetian intelligence.

[edit] Primatology
Piaget's models of cognition have also been applied outside the human sphere, and some primatologists assess the development and abilities of primates in terms of Piaget's model.[19]

[edit] Philosophy
Some have taken account of Piaget's work. For example, the philosopher and social theorist Jürgen Habermas has incorporated Piaget into his work, most notably in The Theory of Communicative Action. The philosopher Thomas Kuhn credited Piaget's work in helping him understand the transition between modes of thought which characterized his theory of paradigm shifts.[20][21] Shortly before his death (September, 1980), Piaget was involved in a debate about the relationships between innate and acquired features of language, at the Centre Royaumont pour une Science de l'Homme, where he discussed his point of view with the linguist Noam Chomsky as well as Hilary Putnam and Stephen Toulmin.

[edit] Artificial intelligence
Piaget also had a considerable effect in the field of computer science and artificial intelligence. Seymour Papert used Piaget's work while developing the Logo programming language. Alan Kay used Piaget's theories as the basis for the Dynabook programming system concept, which was first discussed within the confines of the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, or Xerox PARC. These discussions led to the development of the Alto prototype, which explored for the first time all the elements of the graphical user interface (GUI), and influenced the creation of user interfaces in the 1980s and beyond.

[edit] Piagetian scholars and collaborators
Hans Aebli Eleanor R. Duckworth Bärbel Inhelder Seymour Papert Huê Vinh-Bang

[edit] List of Major works
This list has been completely rewritten to avoid the inclusion of personal favourites. In the list below, the following definitions have been used:
    

Exemplars: More than 5,000 citations in Google Scholar Super-Classics: More than 2,500 citations in Google Scholar Classics: More than 1,000 citations in Google Scholar Major Works: More than 500 citations in Google Scholar Works of Significance: More than 250 citations in Google Scholar

If others are to be included, a new section should be created and the additions should be accompanied by a brief explanation regarding their significance. (Self-evident sections, such as "new translations," do not require further explanation.) The references have been presented in order of their impact according to Google Scholar.

[edit] Exemplars
 

Piaget, J. (1952). The Origins of Intelligence in Children. New York: International University Press. (Original work published 1936.) Piaget, J. (1932). The Moral Judgment of the Child. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co. (Original work published 1932.)

[edit] Super-Classics
 

The construction of reality in the child Piaget, J. (1962). Play, Dreams and Imitation in Childhood. New York: Norton.

    

The language and thought of the child Piaget, J., and Inhelder, B. (1962). The Psychology of the Child. New York: Basic Books. Inhelder, B. and J. Piaget (1958). The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood to Adolescence. New York: Basic Books. Piaget, J. (1928). The Child's Conception of the World. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Piaget, J. (1951). The Psychology of Intelligence. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul

[edit] Classics
      

Piaget, J., and Inhelder, B. (1967). The Child's Conception of Space. New York: W.W. Norton. Piaget, J. (1983). Piaget's theory. In P. Mussen (ed.). Handbook of Child Psychology. 4th edition. Vol. 1. New York: Wiley. Piaget, J. (1952). The Child's Conception of Number. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Piaget, J. (1970). Structuralism. New York: Harper & Row. Genetic epistemology The early growth of logic in the child The origin of intelligence in the child

[edit] Major Works
     

     

Piaget, J. (1971). Biology and Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Science of education and the psychology of the child The child's conception of physical causality Intellectual evolution from adolescence to adulthood Six psychological studies Piaget, J. (1985). The Equilibration of Cognitive Structures: The Central Problem of Intellectual Development. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (New translation of The Development of Thought) Child's Conception of Geometry Development and learning To understand is to invent: The future of education The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitive structures (see Equilibration of Cognitive Structures) Language and learning: the debate between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky The Principles of Genetic Epistemology

[edit] Works of Significance
      

Piaget, J. (1977). The Grasp of Consciousness: Action and concept in the young child. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Piaget, J. (1955). The Child's Construction of Reality. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. The mechanisms of perception Piaget, J. (1972). Psychology and Epistemology: Towards a Theory of Knowledge. Harmondsworth: Penguin. The child's conception of time Piaget, J. (1953). Logic and Psychology. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Memory and intelligence

     

Piaget, J. (1975). The Origin of the Idea of Chance in Children. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Mental imagery in the child Piaget, J. (1981). Intelligence and Affectivity. Their Relationship during Child Development. Palo Alto: Annual Reviews. Piaget, J., and Garcia, R. (1989). Psychogenesis and the History of Science. New York: Columbia University Press. Beth, E. W., and Piaget, J. (1966). Mathematical Epistemology and Psychology. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. The growth of the mind

[edit] New Translations
  

Piaget, J. (1995). Sociological Studies. London: Routledge. Piaget, J. (2000). Commentary on Vygotsky. New Ideas in Psychology, 18, 241-59. Piaget, J. (2001). Studies in Reflecting Abstraction. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

[edit] Major Commentaries and Critiques
Piaget inspired innumerable studies and even new areas of inquiry. The following is a list of the major critiques and commentaries, organized using the same citation-based method as the list of his own major works (above). These represent the most important and influential post-Piagetian writings in their respective sub-disciplines.

[edit] Exemplars


Vygotsky, L. (1963). Thought and language. [12630 citations]

[edit] Classics
       

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. [4089] Minsky, M. (1988). The society of mind. [3950] Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage And Sequence: The Cognitive-Developmental Approach To Socialization. [3118] Flavell, J. (1963). The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget. [2333] Gibson, E. J. (1973). Principles of perceptual learning and development. [1903] Meltzoff, A. N. & Moore, M. K. (1977). Imitation of facial and manual gestures by human neonates. [1497] Case, R. (1985). Intellectual development: Birth to adulthood. [1456] Fischer, K. W. (1980). A theory of cognitive development: The control and construction of hierarchies of skills. [1001]

[edit] Major Works
 

Bates, E. (1976). Language and context: The acquisition of pragmatics. [959] Ginsberg, H. P. & Opper, S. (1969). Piaget's theory of intellectual development. [931]

     

Singley, M. K. & Anderson, J. R. (1989). The transfer of cognitive skill. [836] Duckworth, E. (1973). The having of wonderful ideas. [775] Youniss, J. (1982). Parents and peers in social development: A Sullivan-Piaget perspective. [763] Hunt, J. McV. (1961). Intelligence and Experience. [607] Pascual-Leone, J. (1970). A mathematical model for the transition rule in Piaget's developmental stages. [563] Schaffer, H. R. & Emerson, P. E. (1964). The development of social attachments in infancy. [535]

[edit] Works of Significance


     

    

           

Shatz, M. & Gelman, R. (1973). The Development of Communication Skills: Modifications in the Speech of Young Children as a Function of Listener. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 38(5), pp. 1-37.[470] Borke, H. (1971). Interpersonal perception of young children: Egocentrism or Empathy? Developmental Psychology, 5(2), pp. 263-269.[469] Wadsworth, B. J. (1989). Piaget's theory of cognitive and affective development [421] Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond Modularity. [419] Bodner, G. M. (1986). Constructivism: A theory of knowledge. [403] Shantz, C. U. (1975). The Development of Social Cognition. [387] Diamond, A. & Goldman-Rakic, P. S. (1989). Comparison of human infants and rhesus monkeys on Piaget's AB task: evidence for dependence on dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Experimental Brain Research, 74(1), pp. 24-40. [370] Gruber, H. & Voneche, H. (1982). The Essential Piaget. [348] Walkerdine, V. (1984). Developmental psychology and the child-centred pedagogy: The insertion of Piaget into early education. [338] Kamii, C. & DeClark, G. (1985). Young children reinvent arithmetic: Implications of Piaget's theory [335] Riegel, K. F. (1973). Dialectic operations: The final period of cognitive development [316] Bandura, A. & McDonald, F. J. (1963). Influence of social reinforcement and the behavior of models in shaping children's moral judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(3), pp. 274-281. [314] Karplus, R. (1980). Teaching for the development of reasoning. [312] Brainerd, C. (1978). The stage question in cognitive-developmental theory. [311] Brainerd, C. (1978). Piaget's theory of intelligence. [292] Gilligan, C. (1997). Moral orientation and moral development [285] Diamond, A. (1991). Neuropsychological insights into the meaning of object concept development [284] Braine, M. D. S., & Rumain, B. (1983). Logical reasoning. [276] John-Steiner, V. (2000). Creative collaboration. [266] Pascual-Leone, J. (1987). Organismic processes for neo-Piagetian theories: A dialectical causal account of cognitive development. [261] Hallpike, C. R. (1979). The foundations of primitive thought [261] Furth, H. (1969). Piaget and Knowledge [261] Gelman, R. & Baillargeon, R. (1983). A review of some Piagetian concepts. [260] O'Loughlin, M. (1992). Rethinking science education: Beyond piagetian constructivism. Toward a sociocultural model of teaching and learning. [252]

[edit] List of Major Achievements

[edit] Appointments
           

1921-25 Research Director (Chef des travaux), Institut Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Geneva 1925-29 Professor of Psychology, Sociology and the Philosophy of Science, University of Neuchatel 1929-39 Professeur extraordinaire of the History of Scientific Thought, University of Geneva 1929-67 Director, International Bureau of Education, Geneva 1932-71 Director, Institute of Educational Sciences, University of Geneva 1938-51 Professor of Experimental Psychology and Sociology, University of Lausanne 1939-51 Professor of Sociology, University of Geneva 1940-71 Professeur ordinaire of Experimental Psychology, University of Geneva 1952-64 Professor of Genetic Psychology, Sorbonne, Paris 1954-57 President, International Union of Scientific Psychology 1955-80 Director, International Centre for Genetic Epistemology, Geneva 1971-80 Emeritus Professor, University of Geneva

[edit] Honorary Doctorates
             

1936 Harvard 1946 Sorbonne 1949 University of Brazil 1949 Bruxelles 1953 Chicago 1954 McGill 1958 Varsovie 1959 Manchester 1960 Oslo 1960 Cambridge 1962 Brandeis 1964 Montreal 1964 Aix-Marseille 1966 Pennsylvania

[edit] Quotations
  

"Intelligence is what you use when you don't know what to do." "Intelligence organizes the world by organizing itself."[22] The principal goal of education in the schools should be creating men and women who are capable of doing new things, not simply repeating what other generations have done

Erik Erikson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Erik Erikson

Erik Erikson

Born

15 June 1902 Frankfurt-am-Main, Germany
[1]

Died

12 May 1994 (aged 91) Harwich, Cape Cod, Massachusetts
[1]

Citizenship

American

Fields

developmental psychologist

Known for

theory on social development

Influences

Sigmund Freud, Anna Freud

Erik Erikson (June 15, 1902 – May 12, 1994) was a Danish-German-American developmental psychologist and psychoanalyst known for his theory on social development of human beings. He may be most famous for coining the phrase identity crisis. His son, Kai T. Erikson, is a noted American sociologist.

Contents
[hide]
     

   

1 Early life o 1.1 Psychoanalytic experience and training 2 North America 3 Theories of development and the ego 4 Erikson's theory of personality 5 Scientific support 6 Bibliography o 6.1 Major works o 6.2 Collections o 6.3 Related works 7 See also 8 External links 9 References 10 Further reading

[edit] Early life
Born in Frankfurt to Danish parents, Erik Erikson's lifelong interest in the psychology of identity may be traced to his childhood. He was born on June 15, 1902 as a result of his mother's extramarital affair, and the circumstances of his birth were concealed from him in his childhood. His mother, Karla Abrahamsen, came from a prominent Jewish family in Copenhagen, her mother Henrietta died when Karla was only 13[2][3]. Abrahamsen's father, Josef, was a merchant in dried goods. Karla's older brothers Einar, Nicolai, and Axel were active in local Jewish charity and helped maintain a free soup kitchen for indigent Jewish immigrants from Russia.[4] Since Karla Abrahamsen was officially married to Jewish stockbroker Waldemar Isidor Salomonsen at the time, her son, born in Germany, was registered as Erik Salomonsen. There is no more information about his biological father, except that he was a Dane and his given name probably was Erik. It is also suggested that he was married at the time that Erikson was conceived[citation needed]. Following her son's birth, Karla trained to be a nurse, moved to Karlsruhe and in 1904 married a Jewish pediatrician Theodor Homburger. In 1909 Erik Salomonsen became Erik Homburger and in 1911 he was officially adopted by his stepfather. The development of identity seems to have been one of Erikson's greatest concerns in his own life as well as in his theory. During his childhood and early adulthood he was known as Erik Homburger, and his parents kept the details of his birth a secret. He was a tall, blond, blue-eyed boy who was raised in the Jewish religion. At temple school, the kids teased him for being Nordic; at grammar school, they teased him for being Jewish.

[edit] Psychoanalytic experience and training

Erikson was a student and teacher of arts. While teaching at a private school in Vienna, he became acquainted with Anna Freud, the daughter of Sigmund Freud. Erikson underwent psychoanalysis, and the experience made him decide to become an analyst himself. He was trained in psychoanalysis at the Vienna Psychoanalytic Institute and also studied the Montessori method of education, which focused on child development.[5]

[edit] North America
Following Erikson‘s graduation from the Vienna Psychoanalytic Institute in 1933, the Nazis had just come to power in Germany, and he emigrated with his wife, first to Denmark and then to the United States, where he became the first child psychoanalyst in Boston. Erikson held positions at Massachusetts General Hospital, the Judge Baker Guidance Center, and at Harvard‘s Medical School and Psychological Clinic, establishing a solid reputation as an outstanding clinician. In 1936, Erikson accepted a position at Yale University, where he worked at the Institute of Human Relations and taught at the Medical School. After spending a year observing children on a Sioux reservation in South Dakota, he joined the faculty of the University of California at Berkeley, where he was affiliated with the Institute of Child Welfare, and opened a private practice as well. While in California, Erikson also studied children of the Yurok Native American tribe. After publishing the book for which Erikson is best known, Childhood and Society, in 1950, he left the University of California when professors there were asked to sign loyalty oaths.[6] He spent ten years working and teaching at the Austen Riggs Center, a prominent psychiatric treatment facility in Stockbridge, Massachusetts, where he worked with emotionally troubled young people. In the 1960s, Erikson returned to Harvard as a professor of human development and remained at the university until his retirement in 1970. In 1973 the National Endowment for the Humanities selected Erikson for the Jefferson Lecture, the U.S. federal government's highest honor for achievement in the humanities. Erikson's lecture was entitled "Dimensions of a New Identity."[7][8][9]

[edit] Theories of development and the ego
Erikson's greatest innovation was to postulate not five stages of development, as Sigmund Freud had done with his psychosexual stages, but eight. Erik Erikson believed that every human being goes through a certain number of stages to reach his or her full development, theorizing eight stages, that a human being goes through from birth to death. (Childhood and Society-Erik Erikson) [10] Erikson elaborated Freud's genital stage into adolescence, and added three stages of adulthood. His widow Joan Serson Erikson elaborated on his model before her death, adding a ninth stage (old age) to it, taking into consideration the increasing life expectancy in Western cultures. Erikson is also credited with being one of the originators of Ego psychology, which stressed the role of the ego as being more than a servant of the id. According to Erikson, the environment in which a child lived was crucial to providing growth, adjustment, a source of self awareness and identity. His 1969 book Gandhi's Truth, which focused more on his theory as

applied to later phases in the life cycle, won Erikson a Pulitzer Prize and a U.S. National Book Award.

[edit] Erikson's theory of personality
Main article: Erikson's stages of psychosocial development

Erikson was a Neo-Freudian. He has been described as an "ego psychologist" studying the stages of development, spanning the entire lifespan. Each of Erikson's stages of psychosocial development are marked by a conflict, for which successful resolution will result in a favourable outcome, for example, trust vs. mistrust, and by an important event that this conflict resolves itself around, for example, meaning of one's life. Favourable outcomes of each stage are sometimes known as "virtues", a term used, in the context of Eriksonian work, as it is applied to medicines, meaning "potencies." For example, the virtue that would emerge from successful resolution. Oddly, and certainly counter-intuitively, Erikson's research suggests that each individual must learn how to hold both extremes of each specific lifestage challenge in tension with one another, not rejecting one end of the tension or the other. Only when both extremes in a life-stage challenge are understood and accepted as both required and useful, can the optimal virtue for that stage surface. Thus, 'trust' and 'mis-trust' must both be understood and accepted, in order for realistic 'hope' to emerge as a viable solution at the first stage. Similarly, 'integrity' and 'despair' must both be understood and embraced, in order for actionable 'wisdom' to emerge as a viable solution at the last stage. The Erikson life-stage virtues, in the order of the stages in which they may be acquired, are:
1. hope - Basic Trust vs. Mistrust - Infant stage. Does the child believe its caregivers to be reliable? 2. will - Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt - Toddler stage. Child needs to learn to explore the world. Bad if the parent is too smothering or completely neglectful. 3. purpose - Initiative vs. Guilt - Kindergarten - Can the child plan or do things on his own, such as dress him or herself. If "guilty" about making his or her own choices, the child will not function well. Erikson has a positive outlook on this stage, saying that most guilt is quickly compensated by a sense of accomplishment. 4. competence - Industry vs. Inferiority - Around age 6 to puberty. Child comparing self worth to others (such as in a classroom environment). Child can recognize major disparities in personal abilities relative to other children. Erikson places some emphasis on the teacher, who should ensure that children do not feel inferior. 5. fidelity - Identity vs. Role Confusion - Teenager. Questioning of self. Who am I, how do I fit in? Where am I going in life? Erikson believes that if the parents allow the child to explore, they will conclude their own identity. However, if the parents continually push him/her to conform to their views, the teen will face identity confusion. 6. love (in intimate relationships, work and family) - Intimacy vs. Isolation - Young adult. Who do I want to be with or date, what am I going to do with my life? Will I settle down? This stage has begun to last longer as young adults choose to stay in school and not settle. 7. caring - Generativity vs. Stagnation - the Mid-life crisis. Measure accomplishments/failures. Am I satisfied or not? The need to assist the younger generation. Stagnation is the feeling of not having done anything to help the next generation.

8. wisdom - Ego Integrity vs. Despair - old age. Some handle death well. Some can be bitter, unhappy, and/or dissatisfied with what they have accomplished or failed to accomplish within their life time. They reflect on the past, and either conclude at satisfaction or despair.

On ego identity versus Role Confusion, ego identity enables each person to have a sense of individuality, or as Erikson would say, "Ego identity, then, in its subjective aspect, is the awareness of the fact that there is a self-sameness and continuity to the ego's synthesizing methods and a continuity of one's meaning for others" (1963). Role Confusion, however, is, according to Barbara Engler in her book Personality Theories (2006), "The inability to conceive of oneself as a productive member of one's own society" (158). This inability to conceive of oneself as a productive member is a great danger; it can occur during adolescence when looking for an occupation.

[edit] Scientific support
Most empirical research into Erikson's theories has focused on his views regarding the attempt to establish identity during adolescence. His theoretical approach has been studied and supported, particularly regarding adolescence, by James Marcia [11]. Marcia's work extended Erikson's by distinguishing different forms of identity, and there is some empirical evidence that those people who form the most coherent self-concept in adolescence are those who are most able to make intimate attachments in early adulthood. This supports Eriksonian theory, in that it suggests that those best equipped to resolve the crisis of early adulthood are those who have most successfully resolved the crisis of adolescence.

[edit] Bibliography

[edit] Major works
      

Childhood and Society (1950) Young Man Luther. A Study in Psychoanalysis and History (1958) Identity: Youth and Crisis (1968) Gandhi's Truth: On the Origin of Militant Nonviolence (1969) Adulthood (edited book, 1978) Vital Involvement in Old Age (with J.M. Erikson and H. Kivnick, 1986) The Life Cycle Completed (with J.M. Erikson, 1987)

[edit] Collections
  

Identity and the Life Cycle. Selected Papers (1959) A Way of Looking at Things: Selected Papers 1930-1980 (Editor: Stephen P. Schlein, Ph.D. 1987) The Erik Erikson Reader (Editor: Robert Coles, 2001)

[edit] Related works


Erikson on Development in Adulthood: New Insights from the Unpublished Papers (Dallas Hope Melinda Bird, 2002)

     

Erik Erikson Worked For His Life, Work, and Significance (Kit Welchman, 2000) Identity's Architect: A Biography of Erik H. Erikson (Lawrence J. Friedman, 1999) Erik H. Erikson: The Power and Limits of a Vision, N.Y., The Free Press (Paul Roazen, 1976) "Everybody Rides the Carousel" (documentary film) (Hubley, 1976) Erik H. Erikson: the Growth of His Work (Robert Coles, 1970) Ideas and Identities: The Life and Work of Erik Erikson (Robert S. Wallerstein & Leo Goldberger, eds., [IUP, 1998])

Lev Vygotsky
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Lev Semyonovich Vygotsky (Russian: or , born Lev Simkhovich Vygodsky[1][2]; November 17 [O.S. November 5] 1896 – June 11, 1934) was a Soviet psychologist and the founder of cultural-historical psychology.

Contents
[hide]
 

    

 

1 Biography 2 Work o 2.1 Cultural mediation and internalization o 2.2 Psychology of play o 2.3 Thought and Language o 2.4 Zone of proximal development 3 Influence and development of Vygotsky's ideas o 3.1 In the Soviet Union, Russia, and Eastern Europe 4 Critics 5 See also 6 References 7 Bibliography o 7.1 Writings by L. S. Vygotsky o 7.2 Secondary literature 8 Vygotsky's texts online 9 External links

[edit] Biography
Vygotsky was born in 1896 in Orsha, in the Russian Empire (today in Belarus). He was influenced by his cousin David Vygodsky and tutored privately by Solomon Ashpiz. He graduated from Moscow State University in 1917. Later, he worked at the Institute of Psychology (mid-1920s)and other educational, research and clinical institutions in Moscow, Leningrad, and Kharkov where he worked extensively on ideas about cognitive development. He died in 1934 in Moscow of tuberculosis at the age of 37. His descendants: Gita L. Vygodskaya, a retired senior research associate at the Academy of Education (daughter) and Elena Kravtsova, (granddaughter), director of the Psychological Institute of Vygotsky, both in Moscow.

[edit] Work
A pioneering psychologist, Vygotsky was also a highly prolific author: his major works span 6 volumes, written over roughly 10 years, from his Psychology of Art (1925) to Thought and Language [or Thinking and Speech] (1934). Vygotsky's interests in the fields of developmental psychology, child development, and education were extremely diverse. The philosophical framework he provided includes not only insightful interpretations about the cognitive role of tools of mediation, but also the re-interpretation of well-known concepts in psychology such as the notion of internalization of knowledge. Vygotsky introduced the notion of zone of proximal development, an innovative metaphor capable of describing not the actual, but the potential of human cognitive development. His work covered such diverse topics as the origin and the

psychology of art, development of higher mental functions, philosophy of science and methodology of psychological research, the relation between learning and human development, concept formation, interrelation between language and thought development, play as a psychological phenomenon, the study of learning disabilities, and abnormal human development (aka defectology).

[edit] Cultural mediation and internalization
Vygotsky investigated child development and how this was guided by the role of culture and interpersonal communication. Vygotsky observed how higher mental functions developed historically within particular cultural groups, as well as individually through social interactions with significant people in a child's life, particularly parents, but also other adults. Through these interactions, a child came to learn the habits of mind of her/his culture, including speech patterns, written language, and other symbolic knowledge through which the child derives meaning and which affected a child's construction of her/his knowledge. This key premise of Vygotskian psychology is often referred to as cultural mediation. The specific knowledge gained by children through these interactions also represented the shared knowledge of a culture. This process is known as internalization.[3] Internalization can be understood in one respect as ―knowing how‖. For example, riding a bicycle or pouring a cup of milk are tools of the society and initially outside and beyond the child. The mastery of these skills occurs through the activity of the child within society. A further aspect of internalization is appropriation in which the child takes a tool and makes it his own, perhaps using it in a way unique to himself. Internalizing the use of a pencil allows the child to use it very much for his own ends rather than draw exactly what others in society have drawn previously.[3] Guided participation, which takes place when creative thinkers interact with a knowledgeable person, is practiced around the world. Cultures may differ, though, in the goals of development. For example, Mayan mothers in Guatemala help their daughters learn to weave through guided participation.[3]

[edit] Psychology of play
Less known is Vygotsky's research on play, or children's games, as a psychological phenomenon and its role in the child's development. Through play the child develops abstract meaning separate from the objects in the world, which is a critical feature in the development of higher mental functions.[4] The famous example Vygotsky gives is of a child who wants to ride a horse but cannot. If the child were under three, he would perhaps cry and be angry, but around the age of three the child's relationship with the world changes: "Henceforth play is such that the explanation for it must always be that it is the imaginary, illusory realization of unrealizable desires. Imagination is a new formation that is not present in the consciousness of the very raw young child, is totally absent in animals, and represents a specifically human form of conscious activity. Like all functions of consciousness, it originally arises from action." (Vygotsky, 1978)

The child wishes to ride a horse but cannot, so he picks up a stick and stands astride of it, thus pretending he is riding a horse. The stick is a pivot. "Action according to rules begins to be determined by ideas, not by objects.... It is terribly difficult for a child to sever thought (the meaning of a word) from object. Play is a transitional stage in this direction. At that critical moment when a stick – i.e., an object – becomes a pivot for severing the meaning of horse from a real horse, one of the basic psychological structures determining the child‘s relationship to reality is radically altered". As children get older, their reliance on pivots such as sticks, dolls and other toys diminishes. They have internalized these pivots as imagination and abstract concepts through which they can understand the world. "The old adage that children‘s play is imagination in action can be reversed: we can say that imagination in adolescents and schoolchildren is play without action" (Vygotsky, 1978). Another aspect of play that Vygotsky referred to was the development of social rules that develop, for example, when children play house and adopt the roles of different family members. Vygotsky cites an example of two sisters playing at being sisters. The rules of behavior between them that go unnoticed in daily life are consciously acquired through play. As well as social rules, the child acquires what we now refer to as self-regulation. For example, when a child stands at the starting line of a running race, she may well desire to run immediately so as to reach the finish line first, but her knowledge of the social rules surrounding the game and her desire to enjoy the game enable her to regulate her initial impulse and wait for the start signal.

[edit] Thought and Language
Perhaps Vygotsky's most important contribution concerns the inter-relationship of language development and thought. This concept, explored in Vygotsky's book Thought and Language, (alternative translation: Thinking and Speaking) establishes the explicit and profound connection between speech (both silent inner speech and oral language), and the development of mental concepts and cognitive awareness. It should be noted that Vygotsky described inner speech as being qualitatively different from normal (external) speech. Although Vygotsky believed inner speech developed from external speech via a gradual process of internalization, with younger children only really able to "think out loud," he claimed that in its mature form inner speech would be unintelligible to anyone except the thinker, and would not resemble spoken language as we know it (in particular, being greatly compressed). Hence, thought itself develops socially.[3] An infant learns the meaning of signs through interaction with its main care-givers, e.g., pointing, cries, and gurgles can express what is wanted. How verbal sounds can be used to conduct social interaction is learned through this activity, and the child begins to utilize, build, and develop this faculty, e.g., using names for objects, etc.[3] Language starts as a tool external to the child used for social interaction. The child guides personal behavior by using this tool in a kind of self-talk or "thinking out loud." Initially, selftalk is very much a tool of social interaction and it tapers to negligible levels when the child is alone or with deaf children. Gradually self-talk is used more as a tool for self-directed and selfregulating behavior. Then, because speaking has been appropriated and internalized, self-talk is

no longer present around the time the child starts school. Self-talk "develops along a rising not a declining, curve; it goes through an evolution, not an involution. In the end, it becomes inner speech" (Vygotsky, 1987, pg 57). Inner speech develops through its differentiation from social speech.[3] Speaking has thus developed along two lines, the line of social communication and the line of inner speech, by which the child mediates and regulates her activity through her thoughts which in turn are mediated by the semiotics (the meaningful signs) of inner speech. This is not to say that thinking cannot take place without language, but rather that it is mediated by it and thus develops to a much higher level of sophistication. Just as the birthday cake as a sign provides much deeper meaning than its physical properties allow, inner speech as signs provides much deeper meaning than the lower psychological functions would otherwise allow.[3] Inner speech is not comparable in form to external speech. External speech is the process of turning thought into words. Inner speech is the opposite; it is the conversion of speech into inward thought. Inner speech for example contains predicates only. Subjects are superfluous. Words too are used much more economically. One word in inner speech may be so replete with sense to the individual that it would take many words to express it in external speech.[3]

[edit] Zone of proximal development
"Zone of proximal development" (ZPD) is Vygotsky‘s term for the range of tasks that are too difficult for the child to master alone but that can be learned with guidance and assistance of adults or more-skilled children. The lower limit of ZPD is the level of skill reached by the child working independently. The upper limit is the level of additional responsibility the child can accept with the assistance of an able instructor. The ZPD captures the child‘s cognitive skills that are in the process of maturing and can be accomplished only with the assistance of a moreskilled person. Scaffolding is a concept closely related to the idea of ZPD. Scaffolding is changing the level of support. Over the course of a teaching session, a more-skilled person adjusts the amount of guidance to fit the child‘s current performance. Dialogue is an important tool of this process in the zone of proximal development. In a dialogue unsystematic, disorganized, and spontaneous concepts of a child are met with the more systematic, logical and rational concepts of the skilled helper.[3]

[edit] Influence and development of Vygotsky's ideas

[edit] In the Soviet Union, Russia, and Eastern Europe
In the Soviet Union, the work of the group of Vygotsky's students known as the Kharkov School of Psychology was vital for preserving the scientific legacy of Lev Vygotsky and identifying new avenues of its subsequent development. The members of the group laid a foundation for Vygotskian psychology's systematic development in such diverse fields as the psychology of memory (P. Zinchenko), perception, sensation and movement (Zaporozhets, Asnin, A. N. Leont'ev), personality (L. Bozhovich, Asnin, A. N. Leont'ev), will and volition (Zaporozhets, A. N. Leont'ev, P. Zinchenko, L. Bozhovich, Asnin), psychology of play (G. D. Lukov, D. El'konin) and psychology of learning (P. Zinchenko, L. Bozhovich, D. El'konin), as well as the theory of

step-by-step formation of mental actions (Gal'perin), general psychological activity theory (A. N. Leont'ev) and psychology of action (Zaporozhets). A. Puzyrey elaborated the ideas of Vygotsky in respect of psychotherapy and even in the broader context of deliberate psychological intervention (psychotechnique), in general. Alexander Zelitchenko developed Vygotsky's ideas in his developmental psychology of nations, discovering the mode of historical process creates new mental patterns, including culture-determined modes of thinking.

[edit] Critics
The school of Vygotsky and, specifically, his cultural-historical psychology was much criticized during his lifetime as well as after his death. By the beginning of the 1930s, the school was defeated by Vygotsky's scientific opponents who criticized him for "idealist aberrations", which at that time equaled with the charge in disloyalty to the Communist Party and frequently entailed very serious consequences not only for the academic work but also for freedom and even life itself. As a result of this criticism of their work, a major group of Vygotsky's students including Luria and Leontiev had to flee from Moscow to Ukraine where they established the Kharkov school of psychology. Later, the representatives of the school would, in turn, in the second half of the 1930s criticize Vygotsky himself for his interest in the cross-disciplinary study of the child that was developed under the umbrella term of paedology (also spelled as pedology) as well as for his ignoring the role of practice and practical, object-bound activity and arguably his emphasis on the research on the role of language and, on the other hand, emotional factors in human development. Much of this early criticism of the 1930s was later discarded by these Vygotskian scholars themselves. Another line of the critique of Vygotsky's psychological theory comes from such major figures of the Soviet psychology as Sergei Rubinstein and his followers who criticized Vygotsky's notion of mediation and its development in the works of students. Some critics say Vygotsky overemphasized the role of language in thinking. Also, his emphasis on collaboration and guidance has potential pitfalls if facilitators are too helpful in some cases. An example of that would be an overbearing and controlling parent. Other critics argue that some children may become lazy and expect help when they can do something on their own

Lawrence Kohlberg
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Lawrence Kohlberg

Born

25 October 1927

Died

19 January 1987 (aged 59)

Lawrence Kohlberg (October 25, 1927 – January 19, 1987) was an American psychologist born in Bronxville, New York, who served as a professor at the University of Chicago, as well as Harvard University. Having specialized in research on moral education and reasoning, he is best known for his theory of stages of moral development. A close follower of Jean Piaget's theory of cognitive development, Kohlberg's work reflected and extended his predecessor's ideas, at the same time creating a new field within psychology: "moral development". Scholars such as Elliot Turiel and James Rest have responded to Kohlberg's work with their own significant contributions. In an empirical study by Haggbloom et al. using six criteria, such as citations and recognition, Kohlberg was found to be the 30th most eminent psychologist of the 20th Century.[1]

Contents
[hide]
    

1 Stages of Moral Development 2 Death 3 See also 4 Notes 5 References

[edit] Stages of Moral Development
Main article: Kohlberg's stages of moral development

In his 1958 dissertation, Kohlberg wrote what are now known as Kohlberg's stages of moral development.[2] These stages are planes of moral adequacy conceived to explain the development of moral reasoning. Created while studying psychology at the University of Chicago, the theory was inspired by the work of Jean Piaget and a fascination with children's reactions to moral dilemmas.[3] His theory holds that moral reasoning,which is the basis for ethical behavior, has six identifiable developmental constructive stages - each more adequate at responding to moral dilemmas than the last.[4] In studying these, Kohlberg followed the development of moral judgment that is far beyond the ages originally studied earlier by Piaget,[5] who also claimed that logic and morality develop through constructive stages.[4] Expanding considerably upon this groundwork, it was determined that the process of moral development was principally concerned with justice and

that its development continued throughout the life span,[2] even spawning dialogue of philosophical implications of such research.[6][7] Kohlberg studied moral reasoning by presenting subjects (such as Shahroze, the boy who sat on tape) with moral dilemmas. He would then categorize and classify the reasoning used in the responses, into one of six distinct stages, grouped into three levels: pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional.[8][9][10] Each level contains two stages. These stages heavily influenced others and has been utilized by others like James Rest in making the Defining Issues Test in 1979.[11]

[edit] Death
Kohlberg contracted a tropical parasite in 1971 while doing cross-cultural work in Belize. As a result, he struggled with depression and physical pain for the rest of his life. On January 19, 1987, he requested a day of leave from the Massachusetts hospital where he was being treated, and reportedly committed suicide by drowning himself in the Boston Harbor

Kohlberg's stages of moral development
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Kohlberg's stages of moral development constitute an adaptation of a psychological theory originally conceived of by the Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget. Lawrence Kohlberg, while a psychology postgraduate student at the University of Chicago[1], expanded and developed this theory throughout the course of his life. The theory holds that moral reasoning, the basis for ethical behavior, has six identifiable developmental stages, each more adequate at responding to moral dilemmas than its predecessor.[2] Kohlberg followed the development of moral judgment far beyond the ages studied earlier by Piaget,[3] who also claimed that logic and morality develop through constructive stages.[2] Expanding on Piaget's work, Kohlberg determined that the process of moral development was principally concerned with justice, and that it continued throughout the individual's lifetime,[4] a notion that spawned dialogue on the philosophical implications of such research.[5][6] Kohlberg relied for his studies on stories such as the Heinz dilemma, and was interested in how individuals would justify their actions if placed in similar moral dilemmas. He then analyzed the form of moral reasoning displayed, rather than its conclusion,[6] and classified it as belonging to one of six distinct stages.[7][8][9] There have been critiques of the theory from several perspectives. Arguments include that it emphasizes justice to the exclusion of other moral values, such as caring[10]; that there is such an overlap between stages that they should more properly be regarded as separate domains; or that

evaluations of the reasons for moral choices are mostly post hoc rationalizations (by both decision makers and psychologists studying them) of essentially intuitive decisions. Nevertheless, an entirely new field within psychology was created as a result of Kohlberg's theory, and according to Haggbloom et al.'s study of the most eminent psychologists of the 20th century, Kohlberg was the 16th most frequently cited psychologist in introductory psychology textbooks throughout the century, as well as the 30th most eminent overall.[11]

Contents
[hide]


       

1 Stages o 1.1 Pre-Conventional o 1.2 Conventional o 1.3 Post-Conventional o 1.4 Further stages 2 Theoretical assumptions (philosophy) o 2.1 Formal elements 3 Examples of applied moral dilemmas o 3.1 Heinz dilemma 4 Criticisms 5 Continued relevance 6 See also 7 References 8 Further reading 9 External links

[edit] Stages
Kohlberg's six stages can be more generally grouped into three levels of two stages each: preconventional, conventional and post-conventional.[7][8][9] Following Piaget's constructivist requirements for a stage model, as described in his theory of cognitive development, it is extremely rare to regress backward in stages—to lose the use of higher stage abilities.[12][13] Stages cannot be skipped; each provides a new and necessary perspective, more comprehensive and differentiated than its predecessors but integrated with them.[12][13]
Level 1 (Pre-Conventional) 1. Obedience and punishment orientation (How can I avoid punishment?) 2. Self-interest orientation (What's in it for me?)

Level 2 (Conventional) 3. Interpersonal accord and conformity (Social norms) (The good boy/good girl attitude) 4. Authority and social-order maintaining orientation (Law and order morality) Level 3 (Post-Conventional) 5. Social contract orientation 6. Universal ethical principles (Principled conscience)

[edit] Pre-Conventional
The pre-conventional level of moral reasoning is especially common in children, although adults can also exhibit this level of reasoning. Reasoners at this level judge the morality of an action by its direct consequences. The pre-conventional level consists of the first and second stages of moral development, and is solely concerned with the self in an egocentric manner. A child with preconventional morality has not yet adopted or internalized society's conventions regarding what is right or wrong, but instead focuses largely on external consequences that certain actions may bring.[7][8][9] In Stage one (obedience and punishment driven), individuals focus on the direct consequences of their actions on themselves. For example, an action is perceived as morally wrong because the perpetrator is punished. "The last time I did that I got spanked so I will not do it again." The worse the punishment for the act is, the more "bad" the act is perceived to be.[14] This can give rise to an inference that even innocent victims are guilty in proportion to their suffering. It is "egocentric", lacking recognition that others' points of view are different from one's own.[15] There is "deference to superior power or prestige".[15] Stage two (self-interest driven) espouses the "what's in it for me" position, in which right behavior is defined by whatever is in the individual's best interest. Stage two reasoning shows a limited interest in the needs of others, but only to a point where it might further the individual's own interests. As a result, concern for others is not based on loyalty or intrinsic respect, but rather a "you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours" mentality.[2] The lack of a societal perspective in the pre-conventional level is quite different from the social contract (stage five), as all actions have the purpose of serving the individual's own needs or interests. For the stage two theorist, the world's perspective is often seen as morally relative.

[edit] Conventional
The conventional level of moral reasoning is typical of adolescents and adults. Those who reason in a conventional way judge the morality of actions by comparing them to society's views and expectations. The conventional level consists of the third and fourth stages of moral development. Conventional morality is characterized by an acceptance of society's conventions concerning right and wrong. At this level an individual obeys rules and follows society's norms even when there are no consequences for obedience or disobedience. Adherence to rules and conventions is somewhat rigid, however, and a rule's appropriateness or fairness is seldom questioned.[7][8][9] In Stage three (interpersonal accord and conformity driven), the self enters society by filling social roles. Individuals are receptive to approval or disapproval from others as it reflects society's accordance with the perceived role. They try to be a "good boy" or "good girl" to live up to these expectations,[2] having learned that there is inherent value in doing so. Stage three reasoning may judge the morality of an action by evaluating its consequences in terms of a person's relationships, which now begin to include things like respect, gratitude and the "golden rule". "I want to be liked and thought well of; apparently, not being naughty makes people like me." Desire to maintain rules and authority exists only to further support these social roles. The intentions of actions play a more significant role in reasoning at this stage; "they mean well ...".[2] In Stage four (authority and social order obedience driven), it is important to obey laws, dictums and social conventions because of their importance in maintaining a functioning society. Moral reasoning in stage four is thus beyond the need for individual approval exhibited in stage three; society must learn to transcend individual needs. A central ideal or ideals often prescribe what is right and wrong, such as in the case of fundamentalism. If one person violates a law, perhaps everyone would—thus there is an obligation and a duty to uphold laws and rules. When someone does violate a law, it is morally wrong; culpability is thus a significant factor in this stage as it separates the bad domains from the good ones. Most active members of society remain at stage four, where morality is still predominantly dictated by an outside force.[2]

[edit] Post-Conventional
The post-conventional level, also known as the principled level, consists of stages five and six of moral development. There is a growing realization that individuals are separate entities from society, and that the individual's own perspective may take precedence over society's view; they may disobey rules inconsistent with their own principles. These people live by their own abstract principles about right and wrong-principles that typically include such basic human rights as life, liberty, and justice. Because of this level's "nature of self before others", the behavior of postconventional individuals, especially those at stage six, can be confused with that of those at the pre-conventional level. People who exhibit postconventional morality view rules as useful but changeable mechanisms ideally rules can maintain the general social order and protect human rights. Rules are not absolute dictates that must be obeyed without question. Contemporary theorists often speculate that many people may never reach this level of abstract moral reasoning.[7][8][9]

In Stage five (social contract driven), the world is viewed as holding different opinions, rights and values. Such perspectives should be mutually respected as unique to each person or community. Laws are regarded as social contracts rather than rigid dictums. Those which do not promote the general welfare should be changed when necessary to meet "the greatest good for the greatest number of people".[8] This is achieved through majority decision, and inevitable compromise. Democratic government is ostensibly based on stage five reasoning. In Stage six (universal ethical principles driven), moral reasoning is based on abstract reasoning using universal ethical principles. Laws are valid only insofar as they are grounded in justice, and a commitment to justice carries with it an obligation to disobey unjust laws. Rights are unnecessary, as social contracts are not essential for deontic moral action. Decisions are not reached hypothetically in a conditional way but rather categorically in an absolute way, as in the philosophy of Immanuel Kant.[16] This involves an individual imagining what they would do in another's shoes, if they believed what that other person imagines to be true.[17] The resulting consensus is the action taken. In this way action is never a means but always an end in itself; the individual acts because it is right, and not because it is instrumental, expected, legal, or previously agreed upon. Although Kohlberg insisted that stage six exists, he found it difficult to identify individuals who consistently operated at that level.[13]

[edit] Further stages
In Kohlberg's empirical studies of individuals throughout their life Kohlberg observed that some had apparently undergone moral stage regression. This could be resolved either by allowing for moral regression or by extending the theory. Kohlberg chose the latter, postulating the existence of sub-stages in which the emerging stage has not yet been fully integrated into the personality.[8] In particular Kohlberg noted a stage 4½ or 4+, a transition from stage four to stage five, that shared characteristics of both.[8] In this stage the individual is disaffected with the arbitrary nature of law and order reasoning; culpability is frequently turned from being defined by society to viewing society itself as culpable. This stage is often mistaken for the moral relativism of stage two, as the individual views those interests of society which conflict with their own as being relatively and morally wrong.[8] Kohlberg noted that this was often observed in students entering college.[8][13] Kohlberg suggested that there may be a seventh stage—Transcendental Morality, or Morality of Cosmic Orientation—which linked religion with moral reasoning.[18] Kohlberg's difficulties in obtaining empirical evidence for even a sixth stage,[13] however, led him to emphasize the speculative nature of his seventh stage.[5]

[edit] Theoretical assumptions (philosophy)
The picture of human nature which Kohlberg begins with is that humans are inherently communicative and capable of reason; they also possess a desire to understand others and the world around them. The stages of Kohlberg's model relate to the qualitative moral reasonings adopted by individuals, and so do not translate directly into praise or blame of any individual's actions or character. In order to argue that his theory measures moral reasoning and not particular

moral conclusions, Kohlberg insists that the form and structure of moral arguments is independent of the content of those arguments, a position he calls "formalism".[6][7] Kohlberg's theory centers on the notion that justice is the essential characteristic of moral reasoning. Justice itself relies heavily upon the notion of sound reasoning based on principles. Despite being a justice-centered theory of morality, Kohlberg considered it to be compatible with plausible formulations of deontology[16] and eudaimonia. Kohlberg's theory understands values as a critical component of the right. Whatever the right is, for Kohlberg, it must be universally valid across societies (a position known as "moral universalism"):[7] there can be no relativism. Moreover, morals are not natural features of the world; they are prescriptive. Nevertheless, moral judgments can be evaluated in logical terms of truth and falsity. According to Kohlberg: someone progressing to a higher stage of moral reasoning cannot skip stages. For example, an individual cannot jump from being concerned mostly with peer judgments (stage three) to being a proponent of social contracts (stage five).[13] On encountering a moral dilemma and finding their current level of moral reasoning unsatisfactory, however, an individual will look to the next level. Realizing the limitations of the current stage of thinking is the driving force behind moral development, as each progressive stage is more adequate than the last.[13] The process is therefore considered to be constructive, as it is initiated by the conscious construction of the individual, and is not in any meaningful sense a component of the individual's innate dispositions, or a result of past inductions.

[edit] Formal elements

Progress through Kohlberg's stages happens as a result of the individual's increasing competence, both psychologically and in balancing conflicting social-value claims. The process of resolving conflicting claims to reach an equilibrium is called "justice operation". Kohlberg identifies two of these justice operations: "equality" which involves an impartial regard for persons; and "reciprocity", which means a regard for the role of personal merit. For Kohlberg, the most adequate result of both operations is "reversibility", in which a moral or dutiful act within a particular situation is evaluated in terms of whether or not the act would be satisfactory even if particular persons were to switch roles within that situation (also known colloquially as "moral musical chairs").[6] Knowledge and learning contribute to moral development. Specifically important are the individual's "view of persons" and their "social perspective level", each of which becomes more complex and mature with each advancing stage. The "view of persons" can be understood as the individual's grasp of the psychology of other persons; it may be pictured as a spectrum, with stage one having no view of other persons at all, and stage six being entirely sociocentric.[6] Similarly, the social perspective level involves the understanding of the social universe, differing from the view of persons in that it involves an appreciation of social norms.

[edit] Examples of applied moral dilemmas
Kohlberg established the Moral Judgement Interview in his original 1958 dissertation.[4] During the roughly 45-minute tape recorded semi-structured interview, the interviewer uses moral dilemmas to determine which stage of moral reasoning a person uses. The dilemmas are fictional short stories that describe situations in which a person has to make a moral decision. The participant is asked a systemic series of open-ended questions, like what they think the right course of action is, as well as justifications as to why certain actions are right or wrong. The form and structure of these replies are scored and not the content; over a set of multiple moral dilemmas an overall score is derived.[4][9]

[edit] Heinz dilemma
A dilemma that Kohlberg used in his original research was the druggist's dilemma: Heinz Steals the Drug In Europe.[5]
A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?[5]

From a theoretical point of view, it is not important what the participant thinks that Heinz should do. Kohlberg's theory holds that the justification the participant offers is what is significant, the

form of their response.[7] Below are some of many examples of possible arguments that belong to the six stages:[5][14] Stage one (obedience): Heinz should not steal the medicine because he will consequently be put in prison which will mean he is a bad person. Or: Heinz should steal the medicine because it is only worth $200 and not how much the druggist wanted for it; Heinz had even offered to pay for it and was not stealing anything else. Stage two (self-interest): Heinz should steal the medicine because he will be much happier if he saves his wife, even if he will have to serve a prison sentence. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine because prison is an awful place, and he would probably languish over a jail cell more than his wife's death. Stage three (conformity): Heinz should steal the medicine because his wife expects it; he wants to be a good husband. Or: Heinz should not steal the drug because stealing is bad and he is not a criminal; he tried to do everything he could without breaking the law, you cannot blame him. Stage four (law-and-order): Heinz should not steal the medicine because the law prohibits stealing, making it illegal. Or: Heinz should steal the drug for his wife but also take the prescribed punishment for the crime as well as paying the druggist what he is owed. Criminals cannot just run around without regard for the law; actions have consequences. Stage five (human rights): Heinz should steal the medicine because everyone has a right to choose life, regardless of the law. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine because the scientist has a right to fair compensation. Even if his wife is sick, it does not make his actions right. Stage six (universal human ethics): Heinz should steal the medicine, because saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the property rights of another person. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine, because others may need the medicine just as badly, and their lives are equally significant.

[edit] Criticisms
One criticism of Kohlberg's theory is that it emphasizes justice to the exclusion of other values, and so may not adequately address the arguments of those who value other moral aspects of actions. Carol Gilligan has argued that Kohlberg's theory is overly androcentric.[10] Kohlberg's theory was initially developed based on empirical research using only male participants; Gilligan argued that it did not adequately describe the concerns of women. Although research has generally found no significant pattern of differences in moral development between sexes,[12][13] Gilligan's theory of moral development does not focus on the value of justice. She developed an alternative theory of moral reasoning based on the ethics of caring.[10] Critics such as Christina Hoff Sommers, however, argued that Gilligan's research is ill-founded, and that no evidence exists to support her conclusion.[19] Kohlberg's stages are not culturally neutral, as demonstrated by its application to a number of different cultures.[1] Although they progress through the stages in the same order, individuals in

different cultures seem to do so at different rates.[20] Kohlberg has responded by saying that although different cultures do indeed inculcate different beliefs, his stages correspond to underlying modes of reasoning, rather than to those beliefs.[1][21] Other psychologists have questioned the assumption that moral action is primarily a result of formal reasoning. Social intuitionists such as Jonathan Haidt, for example, argue that individuals often make moral judgments without weighing concerns such as fairness, law, human rights, or abstract ethical values. Thus the arguments analyzed by Kohlberg and other rationalist psychologists could be considered post hoc rationalizations of intuitive decisions; moral reasoning may be less relevant to moral action than Kohlberg's theory suggests.[22]

[edit] Continued relevance
Kohlberg's body of work on the stages of moral development has been utilized by others working in the field. One example is the Defining Issues Test (DIT) created in 1979 by James Rest,[23] originally as a pencil-and-paper alternative to the Moral Judgement Interview.[24] Heavily influenced by the six-stage model, it made efforts to improve the validity criteria by using a quantitative test, the Likert scale, to rate moral dilemmas similar to Kohlberg's.[25] It also used a large body of Kohlbergian theory such as the idea of "post-conventional thinking".[26][27] In 1999 the DIT was revised as the DIT-2;[24] the test continues to be used in many areas where moral testing is required,[28] such as divinity, politics, and medicine

Ivan Pavlov
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search For the footballer, see Ivan Pavlov (footballer).

Ivan Petrovich Pavlov Иван Петрович Павлов

Nobel Prize portrait

Born

September 14, 1849 Ryazan, Russia

Died

February 27, 1936 (aged 86) Leningrad, Soviet Union

Residence

Russian Empire, Soviet Union

Nationality

Russian, Soviet

Fields

Physiologist, psychologist, physician

Institutions

Military Medical Academy

Alma mater

Saint Petersburg University

Classical conditioning Known for Transmarginal inhibition Behavior modification Notable awards

Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine (1904)

Ivan Petrovich Pavlov (Russian: И а П р Па л , September 14, 1849 – February 27, 1936) was a Russian, and later Soviet, physiologist, psychologist, and physician. He was

awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1904 for research pertaining to the digestive system. Pavlov is widely known for first describing the phenomenon of classical conditioning.

Contents
[hide]
     

1 Life and research 2 Reflex system research 3 Legacy 4 See also 5 References 6 External links

[edit] Life and research
Ivan Pavlov was born in Ryazan, Russia.[1] He began his higher education as a student at the Ryazan Ecclesiastical Seminary, but then dropped out and enrolled in the University of Saint Petersburg to study the natural sciences and become a physiologist. He received his doctorate in 1879. In the 1890s, Pavlov was investigating the gastric function of dogs by externalizing a salivary gland so he could collect, measure, and analyze the saliva and what response it had to food under different conditions. He noticed that the dogs tended to salivate before food was actually delivered to their mouths, and set out to investigate this "psychic secretion", as he called it. He decided that this was more interesting than the chemistry of saliva, and changed the focus of his research, carrying out a long series of experiments in which he manipulated the stimuli occurring before the presentation of food. He thereby established the basic laws for the establishment and extinction of what he called "conditional reflexes" — i.e., reflex responses, like salivation, that only occurred conditionally upon specific previous experiences of the animal. These experiments were carried out in the 1900s, and were known to western scientists through translations of individual accounts, but first became fully available in English in a book published in 1927. Unlike many pre-revolutionary scientists, Pavlov was highly regarded by the Soviet government, and he was able to continue his research until he reached a considerable age. Moreover, he was praised by Lenin and as a Nobel laureate.[2] After the murder of Sergei Kirov in 1934, Pavlov wrote several letters to Molotov criticizing the mass persecutions which followed and asking for the reconsideration of cases pertaining to several people he knew personally.

In later life he was particularly interested in trying to use conditioning to establish an experimental model of the induction of neuroses. He died in Leningrad. His laboratory in Saint Petersburg has been carefully preserved as a museum. Conscious until his very last moment, Pavlov asked one of his students to sit beside his bed and to record the circumstances of his dying. He wanted to create unique evidence of subjective experiences of this terminal phase of life.[3]

[edit] Reflex system research
Pavlov contributed to many areas of physiology and neurology. Most of his work involved research in temperament, conditioning and involuntary reflex actions. Pavlov performed and directed experiments on digestion, eventually publishing The Work of the Digestive Glands in 1897, after 12 years of research. His experiments earned him the 1904 Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine[4] These experiments included surgically extracting portions of the digestive system from animals, severing nerve bundles to determine the effects, and implanting fistulas between digestive organs and an external pouch to examine the organ's contents. This research served as a base for broad research on the digestive system. Further work on reflex actions involved involuntary reactions to stress and pain. Pavlov extended the definitions of the four temperament types under study at the time: phlegmatic, choleric, sanguine, and melancholic, updating the names to "the strong and impetuous type, the strong equilibrated and quiet type, the strong equilibrated and lively type, and the weak type." Pavlov and his researchers observed and began the study of transmarginal inhibition (TMI), the body's natural response of shutting down when exposed to overwhelming stress or pain by electric shock.[5] This research showed how all temperament types responded to the stimuli the same way, but different temperaments move through the responses at different times. He commented "that the most basic inherited difference. .. was how soon they reached this shutdown point and that the quick-to-shut-down have a fundamentally different type of nervous system."[6] Carl Jung continued Pavlov's work on TMI and correlated the observed shutdown types in animals with his own introverted and extroverted temperament types in humans. Introverted persons, he believed, were more sensitive to stimuli and reached a TMI state earlier than their extroverted counterparts. This continuing research branch is gaining the name highly sensitive persons. William Sargant and others continued the behavioral research in mental conditioning to achieve memory implantation and brainwashing (any effort aimed at instilling certain attitudes and beliefs in a person).

[edit] Legacy

One of Pavlov's dogs, Pavlov Museum, Ryazan, Russia

The concept for which Pavlov is famous is the "conditioned reflex" (or in his own words the conditional reflex: the translation of у л р фл into English is debatable) he developed jointly with his assistant Ivan Filippovitch Tolochinov in 1901.[7] Tolochinov, whose own term for the phenomenon had been "reflex at a distance", communicated the results at the Congress of Natural Sciences in Helsinki in 1903.[8] As Pavlov's work became known in the West, particularly through the writings of John B. Watson, the idea of "conditioning" as an automatic form of learning became a key concept in the developing specialism of comparative psychology, and the general approach to psychology that underlay it, behaviorism. The British philosopher Bertrand Russell was an enthusiastic advocate of the importance of Pavlov's work for philosophy of mind. Pavlov's research on conditional reflexes greatly influenced not only science, but also popular culture. The phrase "Pavlov's dog" is often used to describe someone who merely reacts to a situation rather than using critical thinking. Pavlovian conditioning was a major theme in Aldous Huxley's dystopian novel, Brave New World, and also to a large degree in Thomas Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow. It is popularly believed that Pavlov always signaled the occurrence of food by ringing a bell. However, his writings record the use of a wide variety of stimuli, including electric shocks, whistles, metronomes, tuning forks, and a range of visual stimuli, in addition to ringing a bell. Catania[9] cast doubt on whether Pavlov ever actually used a bell in his famous experiments. Littman[10] tentatively attributed the popular imagery to Pavlov‘s contemporaries Vladimir Mikhailovich Bekhterev and John B. Watson, until Thomas[11] found several references that unambiguously stated Pavlov did, indeed, use a bell.

Classical conditioning
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Classical conditioning (also Pavlovian or respondent conditioning, Pavlovian reinforcement) is a form of associative learning that was first demonstrated by Ivan Pavlov.[1] The typical procedure for inducing classical conditioning involves presentations of a neutral stimulus along with a stimulus of some significance. The neutral stimulus could be any event that does not result in an overt behavioral response from the organism under investigation. Pavlov referred to this as a conditioned stimulus (CS). Conversely, presentation of the significant stimulus necessarily evokes an innate, often reflexive, response. Pavlov called these the unconditioned stimulus (US) and unconditioned response (UR), respectively. If the CS and the US are repeatedly paired, eventually the two stimuli become associated and the organism begins to produce a behavioral response to the CS. Pavlov called this the conditioned response (CR). Popular forms of classical conditioning that are used to study neural structures and functions that underlie learning and memory include fear conditioning, eyeblink conditioning, and the foot contraction conditioning of Hermissenda crassicornis.

One of Pavlov’s dogs with a surgically implanted cannula to measure salivation, Pavlov Museum, 2005

The original and most famous example of classical conditioning involved the salivary conditioning of Pavlov's dogs. During his research on the physiology of digestion in dogs, Pavlov noticed that, rather than simply salivating in the presence of meat powder (an innate response to food that he called the unconditioned response), the dogs began to salivate in the presence of the lab technician who normally fed them. Pavlov called these psychic secretions. From this observation he predicted that, if a particular stimulus in the dog‘s surroundings were present when the dog was presented with meat powder, then this stimulus would become associated with food and cause salivation on its own. In his initial experiment, Pavlov used a metronome to call the dogs to their food and, after a few repetitions, the dogs started to salivate in response to the metronome. Thus, a neutral stimulus (metronome) became a conditioned stimulus (CS) as a result of consistent pairing with the unconditioned stimulus (US - meat powder in this example). Pavlov referred to this learned relationship as a conditional reflex (now called conditioned response).

Contents
[hide]
 



     

1 Types 2 Procedure variations o 2.1 Classical discrimination/reversal conditioning o 2.2 Classical ISI discrimination conditioning o 2.3 Latent inhibition conditioning o 2.4 Conditioned inhibition conditioning o 2.5 Blocking 3 Applications o 3.1 Little Albert o 3.2 Behavioral therapies 4 Theories of classical conditioning 5 In popular culture 6 See also 7 References 8 Further reading 9 External links

[edit] Types

Diagram representing forward conditioning. The time interval increases from left to right.

Forward conditioning: During forward conditioning the onset of the CS precedes the onset of the US. Two common forms of forward conditioning are delay and trace conditioning. Delay Conditioning: In delay conditioning the CS is presented and is overlapped by the presentation of the US Trace conditioning: During trace conditioning the CS and US do not overlap. Instead, the CS is presented, a period of time is allowed to elapse during which no stimuli are presented, and then the US is presented. The stimulus free period is called the trace interval. It may also be called the "conditioning interval" Simultaneous conditioning: During simultaneous conditioning, the CS and US are presented and terminated at the same time.

Backward conditioning: Backward conditioning occurs when a conditioned stimulus immediately follows an unconditioned stimulus. Unlike traditional conditioning models, in which the conditioned stimulus precedes the unconditioned stimulus, the conditioned response tends to be inhibitory. This is because the conditioned stimulus serves as a signal that the unconditioned stimulus has ended, rather than a reliable method of predicting the future occurrence of the unconditioned stimulus. Temporal conditioning: The US is presented at regularly timed intervals, and CR acquisition is dependent upon correct timing of the interval between US presentations. The background, or context, can serve as the CS in this example. Unpaired conditioning: The CS and US are not presented together. Usually they are presented as independent trials that are separated by a variable, or pseudo-random, interval. This procedure is used to study non-associative behavioral responses, such as sensitization. CS-alone extinction: The CS is presented in the absence of the US. This procedure is usually done after the CR has been acquired through Forward conditioning training. Eventually, the CR frequency is reduced to pre-training levels.

[edit] Procedure variations
In addition to the simple procedures described above, some classical conditioning studies are designed to tap into more complex learning processes. Some common variations are discussed below.

[edit] Classical discrimination/reversal conditioning
In this procedure, two CSs and one US are typically used. The CSs may be the same modality (such as lights of different intensity), or they may be different modalities (such as auditory CS and visual CS). In this procedure, one of the CSs is designated CS+ and its presentation is always followed by the US. The other CS is designated CS- and its presentation is never followed by the US. After a number of trials, the organism learns to discriminate CS+ trials and CS- trials such that CRs are only observed on CS+ trials. During Reversal Training, the CS+ and CS- are reversed and subjects learn to suppress responding to the previous CS+ and show CRs to the previous CS-.

[edit] Classical ISI discrimination conditioning
This is a discrimination procedure in which two different CSs are used to signal two different interstimulus intervals. For example, a dim light may be presented 30 seconds before a US, while a very bright light is presented 2 minutes before the US. Using this technique, organisms can learn to perform CRs that are appropriately timed for the two distinct CSs.

[edit] Latent inhibition conditioning

In this procedure, a CS is presented several times before paired CS-US training commences. The pre-exposure of the subject to the CS before paired training slows the rate of CR acquisition relative to organisms that are not CS pre-exposed. Also see Latent inhibition for applications.

[edit] Conditioned inhibition conditioning
Three phases of conditioning are typically used:
Phase 1: A CS (CS+) is not paired with a US until asymptotic CR levels are reached. Phase 2: CS+/US trials are continued, but interspersed with trials on which the CS+ in compound with a second CS, but not with the US (i.e., CS+/CS- trials). Typically, organisms show CRs on CS+/US trials, but suppress responding on CS+/CS- trials. Phase 3: In this retention test, the previous CS- is paired with the US. If conditioned inhibition has occurred, the rate of acquisition to the previous CS- should be impaired relative to organisms that did not experience Phase 2.

[edit] Blocking
Main article: Blocking effect

This form of classical conditioning involves two phases.
Phase 1: A CS (CS1) is paired with a US. Phase 2: A compound CS (CS1+CS2) is paired with a US. Test: A separate test for each CS (CS1 and CS2) is performed. The blocking effect is observed in a lack of conditioned response to CS2, suggesting that the first phase of training blocked the acquisition of the second CS.

[edit] Applications

[edit] Little Albert
Main article: Little Albert experiment

John B. Watson, founder of behaviourism, demonstrated classical conditioning empirically through experimentation using the Little Albert experiment in which a child ("Albert") was presented with a white rat (CS). After a control period in which the child reacted normally to the presence of the rat, the experimentors paired the presence of the rat with a loud, jarring noise caused by clanging two pipes together behind the child's head (US). As the trials progressed, the child began showing signs of distress at the sight of the rat, even when unaccompanied by the frightening noise. Furthermore, the child demonstrated generalization of stimulus associations, and showed distress when presented with any white, furry object–even such things as a rabbit, dog, a fur coat, a Santa Claus mask with hair and Watson's head.

[edit] Behavioral therapies
Main article: Behaviour therapy

In human psychology, implications for therapies and treatments using classical conditioning differ from operant conditioning. Therapies associated with classical conditioning are aversion therapy, flooding and systematic desensitization. Classical conditioning is short-term, usually requiring less time with therapists and less effort from patients, unlike humanistic therapies.[citation needed] The therapies mentioned are designed to cause either aversive feelings toward something, or to reduce unwanted fear and aversion.

[edit] Theories of classical conditioning
There are two competing theories of how classical conditioning works. The first, stimulusresponse theory, suggests that an association to the unconditioned stimulus is made with the conditioned stimulus within the brain, but without involving conscious thought. The second theory stimulus-stimulus theory involves cognitive activity, in which the conditioned stimulus is associated to the concept of the unconditioned stimulus, a subtle but important distinction. Stimulus-response theory, referred to as S-R theory, is a theoretical model of behavioral psychology that suggests humans and other animals can learn to associate a new stimulus — the conditioned stimulus (CS) — with a pre-existing stimulus — the unconditioned stimulus (US), and can think, feel or respond to the CS as if it were actually the US. The opposing theory, put forward by cognitive behaviorists, is stimulus-stimulus theory (S-S theory). Stimulus-stimulus theory, referred to as S-S theory, is a theoretical model of classical conditioning that suggests a cognitive component is required to understand classical conditioning and that stimulus-response theory is an inadequate model. It proposes that a cognitive component

is at play. S-R theory suggests that an animal can learn to associate a conditioned stimulus (CS) such as a bell, with the impending arrival of food termed the unconditioned stimulus, resulting in an observable behavior such as salivation. Stimulus-stimulus theory suggests that instead the animal salivates to the bell because it is associated with the concept of food, which is a very fine but important distinction. To test this theory, psychologist Robert Rescorla undertook the following experiment [2]. Rats learned to associate a loud noise as the unconditioned stimulus, and a light as the conditioned stimulus. The response of the rats was to freeze and cease movement. What would happen then if the rats were habituated to the US? S-R theory would suggest that the rats would continue to respond to the CS, but if S-S theory is correct, they would be habituated to the concept of a loud sound (danger), and so would not freeze to the CS. The experimental results suggest that S-S was correct, as the rats no longer froze when exposed to the signal light.[3] His theory still continues and is applied in everyday life.[1]

[edit] In popular culture
One of the earliest literary references to classical conditioning can be found in the comic novel The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman (1759) by Laurence Sterne. The narrator Tristram Shandy explains[4] how his mother was conditioned by his father's habit of winding up a clock before having sex with his wife:
My father, [...], was, I believe, one of the most regular men in every thing he did [...] [H]e had made it a rule for many years of his life,—on the first Sunday-night of every month throughout the whole year,—as certain as ever the Sunday-night came,—to wind up a large house-clock, which we had standing on the back-stairs head, with his own hands:—And being somewhere between fifty and sixty years of age at the time I have been speaking of,—he had likewise gradually brought some other little family concernments to the same period, in order, as he would often say to my uncle Toby, to get them all out of the way at one time, and be no more plagued and pestered with them the rest of the month. [...] [F]rom an unhappy association of ideas, which have no connection in nature, it so fell out at length, that my poor mother could never hear the said clock wound up,—but the thoughts of some other things unavoidably popped into her head—& vice versa:—Which strange combination of ideas, the sagacious Locke, who certainly understood the nature of these things better than most men, affirms to have produced more wry actions than all other sources of prejudice whatsoever.

In the U.S. version of The Office, Jim uses classical conditioning to train Dwight to reach out his hand and ask for a mint each time he shuts down Windows. Another example is in the dystopian novel, A Clockwork Orange in which the film's anti-hero and protagonist, Alex, is given a solution to cause severe nausea, and is forced to watch violent acts. This renders him unable to perform any violent acts without inducing similar nausea.

Edward Thorndike
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Edward Lee Thorndike) Jump to: navigation, search

Edward Thorndike
Edward Lee Thorndike Born August 31, 1874 Williamsburg, Mass

Died

August 9, 1949 (aged 74)

Nationality American

Education

Roxbury Latin, Wesleyan, Harvard, Columbia

Occupation Psychologist

Employer

Teachers College, Columbia University

Known for

Father of modern educational psychology

Title

Professor

Religion

Methodist

Spouse(s)

Elizabeth Moulton (married August 29, 1900)

Edward Lee Thorndike (August 31, 1874 Williamsburg, Massachusetts[1] – August 9, 1949) was an American psychologist who spent nearly his entire career at Teachers College, Columbia University. His work on animal behavior and the learning process led to the theory of connectionism and helped lay the scientific foundation for modern educational psychology. He also worked on solving industrial problems, such as employee exams and testing. He was a member of the board of the Psychological Corporation, and served as president of the American Psychological Association in 1912.[2][3]

Contents
[hide]
 

    

1 Childhood and Education 2 Connectionism o 2.1 Adult Learning o 2.2 Thorndike's Theory of Learning o 2.3 Thorndike’s Word Books 3 Selected works 4 See also 5 Notes 6 References 7 External links

[edit] Childhood and Education
He was a son of a Methodist minister in Lowell, Massachusetts.[4] On August 29, 1900, he wed Elizabeth Moulton and they had five children.[5] Thorndike graduated from The Roxbury Latin School (1891), in West Roxbury, Massachusetts, Wesleyan University (B.S. 1895), Harvard University (M.A. 1897), and Columbia University (PhD. 1898).[1] Upon graduation, Thorndike returned to his initial interest, Educational Psychology. In 1898 he completed his PhD at Columbia University under the supervision of James McKeen Cattell, one of the founding fathers of psychometrics. In 1899, after a year of unhappy, initial employment at the College for Women of Case Western Reserve in Cleveland, Ohio, he became an instructor in psychology at Teachers College at Columbia University, where he remained for the rest of his career, studying human learning, education, and mental testing. In 1937 Thorndike became the second President of the Psychometric Society, following in the footsteps of Louis Leon Thurstone who had established the society and its journal Psychometrika the previous year.

[edit] Connectionism
Main article: Connectionism

Among Thorndike's most notable contributions involved his research on how cats learned to escape from puzzle boxes and his related formulation of the law of effect.[3][6] The law of effect states that responses that are closely followed by satisfying consequences become associated with the situation, and are more likely to recur when the situation is subsequently encountered. If the responses are followed by aversive consequences, associations to the situation become weaker.[6] The puzzle box experiments were motivated in part by Thorndike's dislike for statements that animals made use of extraordinary faculties such as insight in their problem

solving: "In the first place, most of the books do not give us a psychology, but rather a eulogy of animals. They have all been about animal intelligence, never about animal stupidity."[7] Thorndike meant to distinguish clearly whether or not cats escaping from puzzle boxes were using insight. Thorndike's instruments in answering this question were learning curves revealed by plotting the time it took for an animal to escape the box each time it was in the box. He reasoned that if the animals were showing insight, then their time to escape would suddenly drop to a negligible period, which would also be shown in the learning curve as an abrupt drop; while animals using a more ordinary method of trial and error would show gradual curves. His finding was that cats consistently showed gradual learning. Thorndike interpreted the findings in terms of associations. He asserted that the connection between the box and the motions the cat used to escape was strengthened by each escape. A similar, though radically reworked idea was taken up by B. F. Skinner in his formulation of operant conditioning. The associative analysis went on to figure largely in behavioral work through mid-century, and is now evident in some modern work in behavior as well as modern. Thorndike supported Dewey's functionalism and added a stimulus-response component and renamed it connectionist. His theory became an educational requirement for the next fifty years. Thorndike specified three conditions that maximizes learning:
  

The law of effect stated that the likely recurrence of a response is generally governed by its consequence or effect generally in the form of reward or punishment. The law of recency stated that the most recent response is likely to govern the recurrence. The law of exercise stated that stimulus-response associations are strengthened through repetition. Further information: Principles of learning

Thorndike also studied auxiliary languages and influenced the work of the International Auxiliary Language Association, which developed Interlingua.[8]

[edit] Adult Learning
Thorndike put his testing expertise to work for the United States Army during World War I. He created both the Alpha and Beta tests, ancestors to today's ASVAB, a multiple choice test, administered by the United States Military Entrance Processing Command, used to determine qualification for enlistment in the United States armed forces. For classification purposes, soldiers were administered Alpha tests. With the realization that some soldiers could not read well enough to complete the Alpha test, the Beta test (consisting of pictures and diagrams) was administered. Such contributions anchored the field of psychology and encouraged later development of educational psychology. Thorndike believed that ―Instruction should pursue specified, socially useful goals.‖ Thorndike studied ―Adult Learning‖, and believed that the ability to learn did not decline until age 35, and only then at a rate of 1 percent per year, going against the thoughts of the time that "you can't

teach old dogs new trick." It was later shown[who?] that the speed of learning, not the power of learning declined with age. Thorndike also stated the law of effect, which says behaviors that are followed by good consequences are likely to be repeated in the future. Thorndike was one of the first pioneers of active learning, a theory that proposes letting children learn themselves, rather than receiving instruction from teachers.

[edit] Thorndike's Theory of Learning
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The most basic form of learning is trial and error learning. Learning is incremental not insightful. Learning is not mediated by ideas. All mammals learn in the same manner. Law of readiness: Interference with goal directed behavior causes frustration and causing someone to do something they do not want to do is also frustrating. a. When someone is ready to perform some act, to do so is satisfying. b. When someone is ready to perform some act, not to do so is annoying. c. When someone is not ready to perform some act and is forced to do so, it is annoying. 6. Law of Exercise: We learn by doing. We forget by not doing, although to a small extent only. a. Connections between a stimulus and a response are strengthened as they are used.(law of use) b. Connections between a stimulus and a response are weakened as they are not used.(law of disuse) 7. Law of effect: If the response in a connection is followed by a satisfying state of affairs, the strength of the connection is considerably increased whereas if followed by an annoying state of affairs, then the strength of the connection is marginally decreased. 8. Multiple Responses: A learner would keep trying multiple responses to solve a problem before it is actually solved. 9. Set or Attitude: What the learner already possesses, like prior learning experiences, present state of the learner, etc., while it begins learning a new task. 10. Prepotency of Elements: Different responses to the same environment would be evoked by different perceptions of the environment which act as the stimulus to the responses. Different perceptions would be subject to the prepotency of different elements for different perceivers. 11. Response from analogy: New problems are solved by using solution techniques employed to solve analogous problems. 12. Associative Shifting: Let stimulus S be paired with response R. Now, if stimulus Q is presented simultaneously with stimulus S repeatedly, then stimulus Q is likely to get paired with response R. 13. Belongingness: If there is a natural relationship between the need state of an organism and the effect caused by a response, learning is more effective than if the relationship is unnatural.

[edit] Thorndike’s Word Books
Thorndike composed three different word books to assist teachers with word and reading instruction. After publication of the first book in the series, The Teacher’s Word Book (1921), two other books were written and published, each approximately a decade apart from its predecessor. The second book in the series, its full title being A Teacher’s Word Book of the Twenty Thousand Words Found Most Frequently and Widely in General Reading for Children and Young People, was published in 1932, and the third and final book, The Teacher’s Word Book of 30,000 Words, was published in 1944. In the preface to the third book, Thorndike writes that the list contained therein ―tells an yone who wishes to know whether to use a word in writing, speaking, or teaching how common the word is in standard English reading matter‖ (p. x), and he further advises that the list can best be employed by teachers if they allow it to guide the decisions they make choosing which words to emphasize during reading instruction. Some words require more emphasis than others, and, according to Thorndike, his list informs teachers of the most frequently occurring words that should be reinforced by instruction and thus become ―a permanent part of [students‘] stock of word knowledge‖ (p. xi). If a word is not on the list but appears in an educational text, its meaning only needs to be understood temporarily in the context in which it was found, and then summarily discarded from memory. In Appendix A to the second book, Thorndike gives credit to his word counts and how frequencies were assigned to particular words. Selected sources extrapolated from Appendix A are:


 

Children’s Reading: Black Beauty, Little Women, Treasure Island, A Christmas Carol, The Legend of Sleep Hollow, Youth’s Companion, school primers, first readers, second readers, and third readers Standard Literature: The Bible, Shakespeare, Tennyson, Wordsworth, Cowper, Pope, and Milton Common Facts and Trades: The United States Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, A New Book of Cookery, Practical Sewing and Dress Making, Garden and Farm Almanac, and mail-order catalogues

Thorndike also examined local newspapers and correspondences for common words to be included in the book.[citation needed]

[edit] Selected works
      

Educational Psychology (1903) Introduction to the Theory of Mental and Social Measurements (1904) The Elements of Psychology (1905) Animal Intelligence (1911) Edward L. Thorndike. (1999) [1913]. Education Psychology: briefer course. New York: Routledge. ISBN 0415210119. The Teacher's Word Book (1921) The Psychology of Arithmetic (1922)

    

The Measurement of Intelligence (1927) A Teacher's Word Book of the Twenty Thousand Words Found Most Frequently and Widely in General Reading for Children and Young People (1932) The Fundamentals of Learning (1932) The Psychology of Wants, Interests, and Attitudes (1935) The Teacher's Word Book of 30,000 Words (co-authored with Irving Lorge) (1944

B. F. Skinner
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from B.F. Skinner) Jump to: navigation, search

Burrhus Frederic Skinner

Born

March 20, 1904 Susquehanna, Pennsylvania

Died

August 18, 1990 (aged 86) Cambridge, Massachusetts

Nationality

American

Fields

Psychologist

University of Minnesota Institutions Indiana University Harvard University

Alma mater

Hamilton College Harvard University

Behavior analysis Operant conditioning Known for Radical behaviorism Verbal Behavior Operant conditioning chamber

Charles Darwin Ivan Pavlov Ernst Mach Influences Jacques Loeb Edward Thorndike William James Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Burrhus Frederic Skinner (March 20, 1904 – August 18, 1990) was an American psychologist, author, inventor, advocate for social reform,[1][2] and poet.[3] He was the Edgar Pierce Professor of Psychology at Harvard University from 1958 until his retirement in 1974.[4] He came up with the operant conditioning chamber, innovated his own philosophy of science called Radical Behaviorism,[5] and founded his own school of experimental research psychology—the experimental analysis of behavior. His analysis of human behavior culminated in his work Verbal Behavior, which has recently seen enormous increase in interest experimentally and in applied settings.[6] He discovered and advanced the rate of response as a dependent variable in psychological research. He invented the cumulative recorder to measure rate of responding as part of his highly influential work on schedules of reinforcement.[7][8] In a recent survey, Skinner was listed as the most influential psychologist of the 20th century.[9] He was a prolific author who published 21 books and 180 articles.[10][11]

Contents
[hide]
   

         

   

 

1 Biography 2 Theory 3 Graduate School and Discovery 4 Inventions o 4.1 Air crib o 4.2 Cumulative recorder o 4.3 Operant conditioning chamber o 4.4 Teaching machine o 4.5 Pigeon Guided Missile 5 Radical behaviorism 6 Verbal Behavior 7 Influence on education 8 Walden Two and Beyond Freedom and Dignity 9 Schedules of reinforcement 10 Political views 11 Superstition in the pigeon 12 Awards 13 Honorary Degrees: Colleges and Universities 14 Criticism o 14.1 J.E.R. Staddon o 14.2 Noam Chomsky o 14.3 Anthony Burgess 15 Written works o 15.1 Articles by B. F. Skinner 16 See also 17 Authors on Skinner 18 References o 18.1 Notes o 18.2 Bibliography 19 Further reading 20 External links

[edit] Biography
Skinner was born in Susquehanna, Pennsylvania to Grace and William Skinner. His father was a lawyer. His brother Edward, two and a half years his junior, died at age sixteen of a cerebral hemorrhage. He attended Hamilton College in New York with the intention of becoming a writer. While attending, he joined Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity. He wrote for the school paper, but as an atheist, he was critical of the religious school he attended. He received his B.A. in English literature in 1926. After graduation, he spent a year at his parents' home in Scranton attempting

to become a writer of fiction. He soon became disillusioned with his literary skills and concluded that he had little world experience and no strong personal perspective from which to write. Skinner received a PhD from Harvard in 1931, and remained there as a researcher until 1936. He then taught at the University of Minnesota at Minneapolis and later at Indiana University, where he was chair of the psychology department from 1946–1947, before returning to Harvard as a tenured professor in 1948. He remained at Harvard for the rest of his career. In 1936 Skinner married Yvonne Blue. The couple had two daughters, Julie (m. Vargas) and Deborah (m. Buzan). He died of leukemia on August 18th 1990 and is buried in Mount Auburn Cemetery, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

[edit] Theory
Radical behaviorism seeks to understand behavior as a function of environmental histories of reinforcing consequences. Reinforcement processes were emphasized by Skinner, and were seen as primary in the shaping of behavior. A common misconception is that negative reinforcement is some form of punishment. This misconception is rather pervasive, and is commonly found in even scholarly accounts of Skinner and his contributions. To be clear, while positive reinforcement is the strengthening of behavior by the application of some event (e.g., praise after some behavior is performed), negative reinforcement is the strengthening of behavior by the removal or avoidance of some aversive event (e.g., opening and raising an umbrella over your head on a rainy day is reinforced by the sensation of rain falling on you). Both types of reinforcement strengthen behavior, or increase the probability of a behavior reoccurring; the difference is in whether the reinforcing event is something applied (positive reinforcement) or something removed or avoided (negative reinforcement). Punishment and extinction have the effect of weakening behavior, or decreasing the probability of a behavior reoccurring, by the application of an aversive event (punishment) or the removal of a rewarding event (extinction).

[edit] Graduate School and Discovery
At the age of 24, Skinner enrolled in the Psychology Department of Harvard University. Still rebellious and impatient with what he considered unintelligent ideas, Skinner found a mentor equally caustic and hard-driving. William Crozier was the chair of a new department of Physiology. Crozier fervently adhered to a program of studying the behaviour of "the animal as a whole" without appealing, as the psychologists did, to processes going on inside. That exactly matched Skinner's goal of relating behaviour to experimental conditions. The student was encouraged to experiment. Each department, Psychology, and Physiology, assumed the other was supervising the young student, but the fact was he was "doing exactly as I pleased". With his enthusiasm and talent for building new equipment, Skinner constructed apparatus after apparatus as his rats' behavior suggested changes. After a dozen pieces of apparatus and some lucky accidents (described in his A Case History in Scientific Method), Skinner invented the

cumulative recorder, a mechanical device that recorded every response as an upward movement of a horizontally moving line. The slope showed rate of responding. This recorder revealed the impact of the contingencies over responding. Skinner discovered that the rate with which the rat pressed the bar depended not on any preceding stimulus (as Watson and Pavlov had insisted), but on what followed the bar presses. This was new indeed. Unlike the reflexes that Pavlov had studied, this kind of behaviour operated on the environment and was controlled by its effects. Skinner named it operant behaviour. The process of arranging the contingencies of reinforcement responsible for producing this new kind of behaviour he called operant conditioning. A fellowship allowed Skinner to spend his next five years investigating not only the effect of following consequences and the schedules on which they were delivered, but also how prior stimuli gained control over behaviour-consequence relationships with which they were paired. These studies eventually appeared in his first book, The Behaviour of Organisms (1938).[12]

[edit] Inventions

[edit] Air crib
In an effort to help his wife cope with the day-to-day tasks of child rearing, Skinner – a consummate inventor – thought he might be able to improve upon the standard crib. He invented the 'air-crib' to meet this challenge. An 'air-crib' [13][14](also known as a 'baby tender' or humorously as an 'heir conditioner') is an easily-cleaned, temperature and humidity-controlled box Skinner designed to assist in the raising of babies. It was one of his most controversial inventions, and was popularly mischaracterized as cruel and experimental.[15] It was designed to make the early childcare more simple (by greatly reducing laundry, diaper rash, cradle cap, etc.), while encouraging the baby to be more confident, mobile, comfortable, healthy and therefore less prone to cry. (Babies sleep and will sometimes play in aircribs but it's misleading to say they are 'raised' in them. Apart from newborns, most of a baby's waking hours will be spent out of the box.) Reportedly it had some success in these goals.[15] Aircribs were later commercially manufactured by several companies. Air-cribs of some fashion are still used to this day, and publications continue to dispel myths about, and tout the progressive advantages of Skinner's invention.[citation needed] A 2004 book by Lauren Slater [16] caused much controversy by mentioning claims that Skinner had used his baby daughter Deborah in some of his experiments and that she had subsequently committed suicide. The book never refutes such claims and indeed Slater lets the reader believe Deborah has gone into hiding, thus supporting the theory that she might perhaps have been damaged by the experience in the Aircrib. Deborah Skinner (now aka Deborah Buzan) wrote a vehement riposte in the Guardian.[17]

[edit] Cumulative recorder
The cumulative recorder is an instrument used to automatically record behavior graphically. Initially, its graphing mechanism has consisted of a rotating drum of paper equipped with a marking needle. The needle would start at the bottom of the page and the drum would turn the roll of paper horizontally. Each response would result in the marking needle moving vertically

along the paper one tick. This makes it possible for the rate of response to be calculated by finding the slope of the graph at a given point. For example, a regular rate of response would cause the needle to move vertically at a regular rate, resulting in a straight diagonal line rising towards the right. An accelerating or decelerating rate of response would lead to a curve. The cumulative recorder provided a powerful analytical tool for studying schedules of reinforcement.

[edit] Operant conditioning chamber
Main article: Operant conditioning chamber

While at Harvard, B. F. Skinner invented the operant conditioning chamber to measure responses of organisms (most often, rats and pigeons) and their orderly interactions with the environment. This device was an example of his lifelong ability to invent useful devices, which included whimsical devices in his childhood [18] to the cumulative recorder to measure the rate of response of organisms in an operant chamber. Even in old age, Skinner invented a Thinking Aid to assist in writing.[19]

[edit] Teaching machine

The teaching machine, a mechanical invention to automate the task of programmed instruction

The teaching machine was a mechanical device whose purpose was to administer a curriculum of programmed instruction. It housed a list of questions, and a mechanism through which the learner could respond to each question. Upon delivering a correct answer, the learner would be rewarded.[20]

[edit] Pigeon Guided Missile
The US Navy required a weapon effective against the German Bismarck class battleships. Although missile and TV technology existed, the size of the primitive guidance systems available rendered any weapon ineffective. Project Pigeon[21][22] was potentially an extremely simple and effective solution, but despite an effective demonstration it was abandoned as soon as more conventional solutions were available. The project centered on dividing the nose cone of a missile into three compartments, and encasing a pigeon in each. The compartments for each had a video image of what was in front of them, and the pigeons would peck toward the object,

thereby directing the missile.[23] Skinner complained "our problem was no one would take us seriously."[24] The point is perhaps best explained in terms of human psychology (i.e., few people would trust a pigeon to guide a missile no matter how reliable it proved).[25]

[edit] Radical behaviorism
Skinner's particular brand of behaviorism he called "Radical" behaviorism[26] which, unlike less austere behaviorisms, does not accept private events such as thinking, personal perceptions, and unobservable emotions in a causal account of an organism's behavior, presumably a self-aware one reporting such states as an observer of itself:
The position can be stated as follows: what is felt or introspectively observed is not some nonphysical world of consciousness, mind, or mental life but the observer's own body. This does not mean, as I shall show later, that introspection is a kind of psychological research, nor does it mean (and this is the heart of the argument) that what are felt or introspectively observed are the causes of the behavior. An organism behaves as it does because of its current structure, but most of this is out of reach of introspection. At the moment we must content ourselves, as the methodological behaviorist insists, with a persons genetic and environment histories. What are introspectively observed are certain collateral products of those histories. ... In this way we repair the major damage wrought by mentalism. When what a person does [is] attributed to what is going on inside him, investigation is brought to an end. Why explain the explanation? For twenty five hundred years people have been preoccupied with feelings and mental life, but only recently has any interest been shown in a more precise analysis of the role of the environment. Ignorance of that role lead in the first place to mental fictions, and it has been perpetuated by the explanatory practices to which they gave rise.[27]

It can be seen by the above that this methodological stance is a reaction and predates the current level of advancement, in which mental structures can be observed in operation via technologies such as functional MRI.

[edit] Verbal Behavior
Main article: Verbal Behavior (book)

Challenged by Alfred North Whitehead during a casual discussion while at Harvard to provide an account of a randomly provided piece of verbal behavior[28] Skinner set about attempting to extend his then-new functional, inductive, approach to the complexity of human verbal behavior. Developed over two decades, his work appeared as the culmination of the William James lectures in the book, Verbal Behavior. Although Noam Chomsky was highly critical of Verbal Behavior, he conceded that it was the "most careful and thoroughgoing presentation of such speculations", confusing Skinner's stance with "S-R psychology" [29] as a reason for giving it "a review." Verbal Behavior had an uncharacteristically slow reception, partly as a result of Chomsky's review, paired with Skinner's neglect to address or rebut any of Chomsky's condemnations.[30] Skinner's peers may have been slow to adopt and consider the conventions within Verbal Behavior due to its lack of experimental evidence—unlike the empirical density that marked Skinner's previous work.[31] However, Skinner's functional analysis of verbal behavior has seen a resurgence of interest in applied settings.[citation needed]

[edit] Influence on education
This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this section if you can. (December 2007) This section does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2007)

Skinner influenced education as well as psychology. He was quoted as saying "Teachers must learn how to teach ... they need only to be taught more effective ways of teaching." Skinner asserted that positive reinforcement is more effective at changing and establishing behavior than punishment, with obvious implications for the then widespread practice of rote learning and punitive discipline in education. Skinner also suggests that the main thing people learn from being punished is how to avoid punishment. Skinner says that there are five main obstacles to learning:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. People have a fear of failure. The task is not broken down into small enough steps. There is a lack of directions. There is also a lack of clarity in the directions. Positive reinforcement is lacking.

Skinner suggests that any age-appropriate skill can be taught using five principles to remedy the above problems:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Give the learner immediate feedback. Break down the task into small steps. Repeat the directions as many times as possible. Work from the most simple to the most complex tasks. Give positive reinforcement.

Skinner's views on education are extensively presented in his book The Technology of Teaching. It is also reflected in Fred S. Keller's Personalized System of Instruction and Ogden R. Lindsley's Precision Teaching.

[edit] Walden Two and Beyond Freedom and Dignity
Skinner is popularly known mainly for his books Walden Two and Beyond Freedom and Dignity. The former describes a visit to an imaginary utopian commune in 1940s United States, where the productivity and happiness of the citizens is far in advance of that in the outside world because of their practice of scientific social planning and use of operant conditioning in the raising of children.

Walden Two, like Thoreau's Walden, champions a lifestyle that does not support war or foster competition and social strife. It encourages a lifestyle of minimal consumption, rich social relationships, personal happiness, satisfying work and leisure.[32] In Beyond Freedom and Dignity, Skinner suggests that a technology of behavior could help to make a better society. We would, however, have to accept that an autonomous agent is not the driving force of our actions. Skinner offers alternatives to punishment and challenges his readers to use science and modern technology to construct a better society.

[edit] Schedules of reinforcement
Main article: Reinforcement

Part of Skinner's analysis of behavior involved not only the power of a single instance of reinforcement, but the effects of particular schedules of reinforcement over time. Skinner's types of schedules of reinforcement involved: interval (fixed or variable) and ratio (fixed or variable).


 

Continuous reinforcement — constant delivery of reinforcement for an action; every time a specific action was performed the subject instantly and always received a reinforcement. This method is very hard to carry out, and the reinforced behavior is prone to extinction. Interval (fixed/variable) reinforcement (Fixed) — reinforcement is set for a certain time duration. (Variable) — times between reinforcements are not set, and often differ. Ratio (fixed or variable) reinforcement (Fixed) — deals with a set amount of work needed to be completed before there is reinforcement. (Variable) — amount of work needed for the reinforcement differs from the last.

[edit] Political views
Skinner's political writings emphasized his hopes that an effective and humane science of behavioral control – a technology of human behavior – could help problems unsolved by earlier approaches or aggravated by advances in technology such as the atomic bomb. One of Skinner's stated goals was to prevent humanity from destroying itself.[33] He comprehended political control as aversive or non-aversive, with the purpose to control a population. Skinner opposed the use of positive reinforcement as a means of coercion, citing Jean-Jacques Rousseau's novel Emile: or, On Education as an example of freedom literature that "did not fear the power of positive reinforcement".[1] Skinner's book, Walden Two, presents a vision of a decentralized, localized society, which applies a practical, scientific approach and futuristically advanced behavioral expertise to peacefully deal with social problems. Skinner's utopia, like every other utopia or dystopia, is both a thought experiment and a rhetorical piece. In his book, Skinner answers the problem that exists in many utopian novels – "What is the Good Life?" In Walden Two, the answer is a life of friendship, health, art, a healthy balance between work and leisure, a minimum of unpleasantness, and a feeling that one has made worthwhile contributions to one's society. This was to be achieved through behavioral technology, which could offer alternatives to coercion,[1] as good science applied correctly would help society,[2] and allow all people to cooperate with each other peacefully.[1] Skinner described his novel as "my New Atlantis", in

reference to Bacon's utopia.[34] He opposed corporal punishment in the school, and wrote a letter to the California Senate that helped lead it to a ban on spanking.[35]
When Milton's Satan falls from heaven, he ends in hell. And what does he say to reassure himself? 'Here, at least, we shall be free.' And that, I think, is the fate of the old-fashioned liberal. He's going to be free, but he's going to find himself in hell. —B. F. Skinner, from William F. Buckley Jr, On the Firing Line, p. 87.

[edit] Superstition in the pigeon
One of Skinner's experiments examined the formation of superstition in one of his favorite experimental animals, the pigeon. Skinner placed a series of hungry pigeons in a cage attached to an automatic mechanism that delivered food to the pigeon "at regular intervals with no reference whatsoever to the bird's behavior." He discovered that the pigeons associated the delivery of the food with whatever chance actions they had been performing as it was delivered, and that they subsequently continued to perform these same actions.[36]
One bird was conditioned to turn counter-clockwise about the cage, making two or three turns between reinforcements. Another repeatedly thrust its head into one of the upper corners of the cage. A third developed a 'tossing' response, as if placing its head beneath an invisible bar and lifting it repeatedly. Two birds developed a pendulum motion of the head and body, in which the head was extended forward and swung from right to left with a sharp movement followed by a somewhat slower return.[37][38]

Skinner suggested that the pigeons behaved as if they were influencing the automatic mechanism with their "rituals" and that this experiment shed light on human behavior:
The experiment might be said to demonstrate a sort of superstition. The bird behaves as if there were a causal relation between its behavior and the presentation of food, although such a relation is lacking. There are many analogies in human behavior. Rituals for changing one's fortune at cards are good examples. A few accidental connections between a ritual and favorable consequences suffice to set up and maintain the behavior in spite of many unreinforced instances. The bowler who has released a ball down the alley but continues to behave as if she were controlling it by twisting and turning her arm and shoulder is another case in point. These behaviors have, of course, no real effect upon one's luck or upon a ball half way down an alley, just as in the present case the food would appear as often if the pigeon did nothing—or, more strictly speaking, did something else.[37]

Modern behavioral psychologists have disputed Skinner's "superstition" explanation for the behaviors he recorded. Subsequent research (e.g. Staddon and Simmelhag, 1971), while finding similar behavior, failed to find support for Skinner's "adventitious reinforcement" explanation for it. By looking at the timing of different behaviors within the interval, Staddon and Simmelhag were able to distinguish two classes of behavior: the terminal response, which occurred in anticipation of food, and interim responses, that occurred earlier in the interfood interval and were rarely contiguous with food. Terminal responses seem to reflect classical (rather than

operant) conditioning, rather than adventitious reinforcement, guided by a process like that observed in 1968 by Brown and Jenkins in their "autoshaping" procedures. The causation of interim activities (such as the schedule-induced polydipsia seen in a similar situation with rats) also cannot be traced to adventitious reinforcement and its details are still obscure (Staddon, 1977).
[39]

[edit] Awards
1926 A.B., Hamilton University; 1930 M.A., Harvard University; 1930-1931 Thayer Fellowship; 1931 Ph.D., Harvard University; 1931-1932 Walker Fellowship; 1931-1933 National Research Council Fellowship; 1933-1936 Junior Fellowship, Harvard Society of Fellows; 1936-1937 Instructor, University of Minnesota; 1937-1939 Assistant Professor, University of Minnesota; 1939-1945 Associate Professor, University of Minnesota; 1942 Guggenheim Fellowship (postponed until 1944-1945); 1942 Howard Crosby Warren Medal, Society of Experimental Psychologists; 1945-1948 Professor and Chair, Indiana University; 1947-1948 William James Lecturer, Harvard University; 1948-1958 Professor, Harvard University; 1949-1950 President of the Midwestern Psychological Association; 1954-1955 President of the Eastern Psychological Association; 1958 Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award, American Psychological Association; 1958-1974 Edgar Pierce Professor of Psychology, Harvard University; 1964-1974 Career Award, National Institute of Mental Health; 1966 Edward Lee Thorndike Award, American Psychological Association; 1966-1967 President of the Pavlovian Society of North America; 1968 National Medal of Science, National Science Foundation; 1969 Overseas Fellow in Churchill College, Cambridge; 1971 Gold Medal Award, American Psychological Foundation; 1971 Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr., Foundation for Mental Retardation International award; 1972 Humanist of the Year Award, American Humanist Society; 1972 Creative Leadership in Education Award, New York University; 1972 Career Contribution Award, Massachusetts Psychological Association; 1974-1990 Professor of Psychology and Social Relations Emeritus, Harvard University; 1978 Distinguished Contributions to Educational Research Award and Development, American Educational Research Association; 1978 National Association for Retarded Citizens Award; 1985 Award for Excellence in Psychiatry, Albert Einstein School of Medicine; 1985 President's Award, New York Academy of Science; 1990 William James Fellow Award, American Psychological Society; 1990 Lifetime Achievement Award, American Psychology Association; 1991 Outstanding Member and Distinguished Professional Achievement Award, Society for Performance Improvement; 1997 Scholar Hall of Fame Award, Academy of Resource and Development

[edit] Honorary Degrees: Colleges and Universities
Alfred University, Dickinson College, Hamilton College, Harvard University, Hobart and William Smith Colleges, John Hopkins University, Keio University, McGill University, North Carolina State University, Ohio Wesleyan University, Ripon College, Rockford College, Tufts University, University of Chicago, University of Exeter, University of Missouri, University of North Texas, Western Michigan University, University of Maryland Baltimore County

[edit] Criticism

[edit] J.E.R. Staddon
As understood by Skinner, ascribing dignity to individuals involves giving them credit for their actions. To say "Skinner is brilliant" means that Skinner is an originating force. If Skinner's determinist theory is right, he is merely the focus of his environment. He is not an originating force and he had no choice in saying the things he said or doing the things he did. Skinner's environment and genetics both allowed and compelled him to write his book. Similarly, the environment and genetic potentials of the advocates of freedom and dignity cause them to resist the reality that their own activities are deterministically grounded. J. E. R. Staddon (The New Behaviorism, 2001) has argued the compatibilist position, that Skinner's determinism is not in any way contradictory to traditional notions of reward and punishment, as he believed.[40]

[edit] Noam Chomsky
Perhaps Skinner's best known critic, Noam Chomsky, published a review of Skinner's Verbal Behavior two years after it was published. The review (1959) became better known than the book itself.[3] It has been credited with launching the cognitive movement in psychology and other disciplines. Skinner, who rarely responded directly to critics, never formally replied to Chomsky's critique. Many years later, Kenneth MacCorquodale's reply[41] was endorsed by Skinner. Chomsky also reviewed Skinner's Beyond Freedom and Dignity, utilizing the same basic motifs as his Verbal Behavior review. Among Chomsky's criticisms were that Skinner's laboratory work could not be extended to humans, that when it was extended to humans it represented 'scientistic' behavior attempting to emulate science but which was not scientific, that Skinner was not a scientist because he rejected the hypothetico-deductive model of theory testing, that Skinner had no science of behavior, and that Skinner's works were highly conducive to justifying or advancing totalitarianism.[42] Most of these objections are now made obsolete with empirical developments of Skinner's Verbal Behavior model in the fields of Relational Frame Theory and ACT Therapy.

[edit] Anthony Burgess
Some see Anthony Burgess's novel, A Clockwork Orange, as criticizing Skinner's theories as being immoral, claiming that moral choice is a necessary part of one's humanity. The novel's protagonist, Alex, believes he can be released from prison early by participating in an Ivan Pavlov inspired rehabilitation program referred to as the "Ludovico technique," which conditions criminals to become nauseous from the mere thought of violence. This stimulous/response approach is clearly massively at odds with Skinner's operant model and his findings that punishment is unlikely to alter behavior. As Skinner was the key behavioural psychologist working at the time of the books release, he has been mistakenly included in some discussions of the books critique. Indeed within the narrative, the prison chaplain warns against the program, declaring that an action is only good if derived from good intentions - thus rejecting any conditioning, other than that based on moral beliefs, as dehumanizing and oppressive.

[edit] Written works
    

The Behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis, 1938. ISBN 1-58390-007-1, ISBN 0-87411487-X.

             

Science and Human Behavior, 1953. ISBN 0-02-929040-6. Schedules of Reinforcement, with C. B. Ferster, 1957. ISBN 0-13-792309-0. Verbal Behavior, 1957. ISBN 1-58390-021-7. The Analysis of Behavior: A Program for Self Instruction, with James G. Holland, 1961. This selfinstruction book is no longer in print, but the B.F. Skinner Foundation web site has an interactive version. ISBN 0-07-029565-4. The Technology of Teaching, 1968. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts Library of Congress Card Number 68-12340 E 81290 Contingencies of Reinforcement: A Theoretical Analysis, 1969. ISBN 0-390-81280-3. Beyond Freedom and Dignity, 1971. ISBN 0-394-42555-3. About Behaviorism, 1974. ISBN 0-394-49201-3, ISBN 0-394-71618-3. Particulars of My Life: Part One of an Autobiography, 1976. ISBN 0-394-40071-2. Reflections on Behaviorism and Society, 1978. ISBN 0-13-770057-1. The Shaping of a Behaviorist: Part Two of an Autobiography, 1979. ISBN 0-394-50581-6. Notebooks, edited by Robert Epstein, 1980. ISBN 0-13-624106-9. Skinner for the Classroom, edited by R. Epstein, 1982. ISBN 0-87822-261-8. Enjoy Old Age: A Program of Self-Management, with M. E. Vaughan, 1983. A Matter of Consequences: Part Three of an Autobiography, 1983. ISBN 0-394-53226-0, ISBN 08147-7845-3.

Upon Further Reflection, 1987. ISBN 0-13-938986-5. Recent Issues in the Analysis of Behavior, 1989. ISBN 0-675-20674-X. Cumulative Record: A Selection of Papers, 1959, 1961, 1972 and 1999 as Cumulative Record: Definitive Edition. This book includes a reprint of Skinner's October 1945 Ladies' Home Journal article, "Baby in a Box," Skinner's original, personal account of the much-misrepresented "Baby in a box" device. ISBN 0-87411-969-3 (paperback)

[edit] Articles by B. F. Skinner
     

Two Types of Conditioned Reflex and a Pseudo Type (1935), Journal of General Psychology, 12, 66-77. "Superstition" in the Pigeon (1947), Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 168-172. Are Theories of Learning Necessary?, Psychological Review, 57, 193-216, 1950

Edward C. Tolman
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Edward Chace Tolman
14 April 1886 West Newton, Massachusetts

Born

Died

19 November 1959

Nationality

American

Fields

psychologist

Known for

behavioral psychology purposive behaviorism

 







Edward Chace Tolman (1886 - 1959) was an American psychologist. He was most famous for his studies on behavioral psychology. Born in West Newton, Massachusetts, brother of CalTech physicist Richard Chace Tolman, Edward C. Tolman studied at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and received his Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1915. Most of his career was spent at the University of California, Berkeley (from 1918 to 1954), where he taught psychology. Tolman is best known for his studies of learning in rats using mazes, and he published many experimental articles, of which his paper with Ritchie and Kalish in 1946 was probably the most influential. His major theoretical contributions came in his 1932 book, Purposive Behavior in Animals and Men, and in a series of papers in the Psychological Review, "The determinants of behavior at a choice point" (1938), "Cognitive maps in rats and men" (1948) and "Principles of performance" (1955).[1][2][3][4][5][6] Although Tolman was firmly behaviorist in his methodology, he was not a radical behaviorist like B. F. Skinner. As the title of his 1932 book indicates, he wanted to use behavioral methods to gain an understanding of the mental processes of humans and other animals. In his studies of learning in rats, Tolman sought to demonstrate that animals could learn facts about the world that they could subsequently use in a flexible manner, rather than simply learning automatic responses that were triggered off by environmental stimuli. In the language of the time, Tolman was an "S-S" (stimulusstimulus), non-reinforcement theorist: he drew on Gestalt psychology to argue that animals could learn the connections between stimuli and did not need any explicit biologically significant event to make learning occur. This is known as latent learning. The rival theory, the much more mechanistic "S-R" (stimulus-response) reinforcementdriven view, was taken up by Clark L. Hull. A key paper by Tolman, Ritchie and Kalish in 1946 demonstrated that rats that had explored a maze that contained food while they were not hungry were able to run it correctly on the first trial when they entered it having now been made hungry. However, Hull and his followers were able to produce alternative explanations of Tolman's findings, and the debate between S-S and S-R learning theories became increasingly convoluted and sterile. Skinner's iconoclastic paper of 1950, entitled "Are theories of learning necessary?" persuaded many psychologists interested in animal learning that it was more productive to focus on the behavior itself rather than using it to make hypotheses about mental states. The influence of Tolman's ideas declined rapidly in the later 1950s and 1960s. However, his achievements had been considerable. His 1938 and 1955 papers, produced to answer Hull's charge that he left the rat "buried in thought" in





the maze, unable to respond, anticipated and prepared the ground for much later work in cognitive psychology, as psychologists began to discover and apply decision theory - a stream of work that was recognised by the award of a Nobel prize to Daniel Kahneman in 2002. And his 1948 paper introduced the concept of a cognitive map, which has found extensive application in almost every field of psychology, frequently among scientists who have no idea that they are using ideas first formulated to explain the behavior of rats in mazes. Furthermore, when in the last quarter of the twentieth century animal psychologists took a cue from the success of human cognitive psychology, and began to renew the study of animal cognition, many of them turned to Tolman's ideas and to his maze techniques. Of the three great figures of animal psychology of the middle twentieth century, Tolman, Hull and Skinner, it can reasonably be claimed that it is Tolman's legacy that is currently the liveliest, certainly in terms of academic research. Tolman was much concerned that psychology should be applied to try and solve human problems, and in addition to his technical publications, he wrote a book called Drives Toward War. He was one of the senior professors whom the University of California sought to dismiss in the McCarthyite era of the early 1950s, because he refused to sign a loyalty oath - not because of any lack of felt loyalty to the United States but because it infringed on academic freedom. Tolman was a leader of the resistance of the oath, and when the Regents of the University of California sought to fire him, he sued. The resulting court case, Tolman v. Underhill, led to the California Supreme Court in 1955 overturning the oath and forcing the reinstatement of all those who had refused to sign it. In 1963, at the insistence of the then President of the University of California Clark Kerr, the University named its newly constructed Education and Psychology faculty building at Berkeley "Tolman Hall" in his honor; his widow was present at the dedication ceremony. His portrait hangs in the entrance hall of the building.

Purposive Behaviorism is a branch of psychology that was introduced by Edward C. Tolman in the 1920s. The main idea was to broaden the scope of behaviorism by incorporating mental concepts such as purpose and cognition. Edward Tolman was first introduced to behaviorism, in Watsonian form, in a course he audited at Harvard with Robert Yerkes.[1] What drew his attention was the objectivity of this system which he believed made behaviorism genuinely scientific. However, he rejected Watson's view that behavior was simply made up of physiological reflex reactions to stimuli. While Tolman agreed with Watson's belief that the focus in psychology on behavior was essential, he felt that behavior could not be adequately assessed without applying some form of mental concept, which he called a purpose. Strict behaviorists like Watson viewed this idea as a violation to the objectivity of behaviorism but Tolman thought that mental aspects could still be objective and measurable as long as they were operationally defined. This was the theoretical groundwork that gave Tolman justification for proposing the many ideas behind Purposive Behaviorism. From 1920 to 1928, Tolman published numerous articles in the Psychological Review that attempted to objectively define such concepts as instinct, consciousness, emotions, purpose, and cognition. Finally in 1932, Tolman coined the term "Purposive Behaviorism" when he published

Purposive Behavior in Animals and Men, which summarized these theoretical concepts and supported them with data he obtained from numerous studies. Like many other behaviorists in his time, he carried out these studies with rats, believing that "everything important in psychology can be investigated in essence through the continued experimental and theoretical analysis of the determiners of rat behavior at a choice point in a maze."[2] In this book, he described purposive behavior as behavior directed toward some ultimate goal. Examples he gave of this kind of behavior were "a rat running a maze, a man driving home to dinner, a child hiding from a stranger, a woman gossiping over the telephone, etc".[3] In continuing his experimental application of Purposive Behaviorism, Tolman focused on studying cognitive maps, which he described as mental representations of the environment. In 1948, Tolman summarized more than three decades of research on this topic in a paper titled "Cognitive Maps in Rats and Men". The experiments he described in the paper used strictly scientific methods to demonstrate that behavior in rats was governed by more than just a series of stimulus-response actions. This supported his theory that these broad cognitive maps were indeed present in animals as well as in humans. Tolman‘s Purposive Behaviorism was not as widely received in its day as other psychological theories. This was largely due to the fact that many did not consider its foundation to being in line with behaviorism at all, which was the dominating force in psychology at the time. However, the insistence on studying implicit mental concepts as opposed to looking solely at explicit behavior was an idea that opened the door to the school of Cognitive Psychology. While much work in Purposive Behaviorism was dismissed by the mainstream of psychologists in its time, many of Tolman‘s publications, most notably "Purposive Behavior in animals and men" and "Cognitive maps in rats and men", continue to be cited in today‘s research

Albert Bandura
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Albert Bandura (born December 4, 1925, in Mundare, Alberta, Canada) is a psychologist specializing in social cognitive theory and self-efficacy. He is most famous for his social learning theory.

Contents
[hide]
    

1 Education and academic career 2 Research 3 Notes 4 References 5 External links

[edit] Education and academic career
Bandura graduated with a B.A. from the University of British Columbia with the Bolocan Award in psychology, and then obtained his M.A. in 1951 and Ph.D. in 1952 from the University of Iowa. Arthurs D Benton was his academic adviser at Iowa. [1] Upon graduation, he participated in a clinical internship with the Wichita Kansas Guidance Center. The following year, he accepted a teaching position at Stanford University in 1953, which he still holds today.[2] In 1974 the American Psychological Association elected him as its president.

[edit] Research
Bandura was initially influenced by Robert Sears' work on familial antecedents of social behavior and identificatory learning, Bandura directed his initial research to the role of social modeling in human motivation, thought, and action. In collaboration with Richard Walters, his first doctoral student, Bandura engaged in studies of social learning and aggression. Their joint efforts illustrated the critical role of modeling in human behavior and led to a program of research into the determinants and mechanisms of observational learning (part of which has become known in the history of psychology as the "Bobo Doll experiment"). The program also led to Bandura's first book, Adolescent Aggression in 1959, and to a subsequent book, Aggression: A Social Learning Analysis in 1973. In 1963 Bandura published Social Learning and Personality Development. In 1974 Stanford University awarded him an endowed chair and he became David Starr Jordan Professor of Social Science in Psychology. In 1977, Bandura published the ambitious Social Learning Theory, a book that altered the direction psychology took in the 1980s.[citation needed] In the course of investigating the processes by which modeling alleviates phobic disorders in snake-phobics, Bandura found that self-efficacy beliefs (which the phobic individuals had in their own capabilities to alleviate their phobia) mediated changes in behavior and in fear-arousal. He then launched a major program of research examining the influential role of self-referent thought in psychological functioning. Although he continued to explore and write on theoretical problems relating to myriad topics, from the late 1970s he devoted much attention to exploring the role that self-efficacy beliefs play in human functioning.

In 1986 Bandura published Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, a book in which he offered a social cognitive theory of human functioning that accords a central role to cognitive, vicarious, self-regulatory and self-reflective processes in human adaptation and change. This social cognitive theory has its roots in an agentic perspective that views people as self-organizing, proactive, self-reflecting and self-regulating, not just as reactive organisms shaped by environmental forces or driven by inner impulses. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control was published in 1997. Bandura has lectured and written on topics such as escaping homelessness, deceleration of population growth, transgressive behavior, mass communication, substance abuse, and terrorism. He has explored the manner in which people morally disengage when they perpetrate inhumanities, and he has traced the psychosocial tactics by which individuals and societies selectively disengage moral self-sanctions from inhumane conduct. He desires and works for a civilized life with humane standards buttressed "by safeguards built into social systems that uphold compassionate behavior and renounce cruelty". A 2002 survey ranked Bandura as the fourth most-frequently cited psychologist of all time— behind B.F. Skinner, Sigmund Freud, and Jean Piaget—and the most cited living one

Jerome Bruner
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Jerome Bruner
October 1, 1915 (age 94) New York, NY

Born

Nationality

American

Fields

psychology

Known for

cognitive psychology educational psychology

Jerome Seymour Bruner (born October 1, 1915) is an American psychologist who has contributed to cognitive psychology and cognitive learning theory in educational psychology, as well as to history and to the general philosophy of education. Bruner is currently a senior research fellow at the New York University School of Law. He received his B.A. in 1937 from

Duke University and his Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1941 under the guidance of Gordon Allport. Bruner's ideas are based on categorization: "To perceive is to categorize, to conceptualize is to categorize, to learn is to form categories, to make decisions is to categorize." Bruner maintains people interpret the world in terms of its similarities and differences. He has also suggested that there are two primary modes of thought: the narrative mode and the paradigmatic mode. In narrative thinking, the mind engages in sequential, action-oriented, detail-driven thought. In paradigmatic thinking, the mind transcends particularities to achieve systematic, categorical cognition. In the former case, thinking takes the form of stories and "gripping drama." In the latter, thinking is structured as propositions linked by logical operators. In his research on the development of children (1966), Bruner proposed three modes of representation: enactive representation (action-based), iconic representation (image-based), and symbolic representation (language-based). Rather than neatly delineated stages, the modes of representation are integrated and only loosely sequential as they "translate" into each other. Symbolic representation remains the ultimate mode, for it "is clearly the most mysterious of the three." Bruner's theory suggests it is efficacious when faced with new material to follow a progression from enactive to iconic to symbolic representation; this holds true even for adult learners. A true instructional designer, Bruner's work also suggests that a learner (even of a very young age) is capable of learning any material so long as the instruction is organized appropriately, in sharp contrast to the beliefs of Piaget and other stage theorists. (Driscoll, Marcy). Like Bloom's Taxonomy, Bruner suggests a system of coding in which people form a hierarchical arrangement of related categories. Each successively higher level of categories becomes more specific, echoing Benjamin Bloom's understanding of knowledge acquisition as well as the related idea of instructional scaffolding. In accordance with this understanding of learning, Bruner proposed the spiral curriculum, a teaching approach in which each subject or skill area is revisited at intervals, at a more sophisticated level each time. In 1987 he was awarded the Balzan Prize for Human Psychology "for his research embracing all of the most important problems of human psychology, in each of which he has made substantial and original contributions of theoretical as well as practical value for the development of the psychological faculties of man" (motivation of the Balzan General Prize Committee).

Contents
[hide]
       

 

1 The Narrative Construction of Reality 2 Man: A Course of Study 3 Red spade experiment 4 Quotations 5 See also 6 Notes 7 References 8 Bibliography o 8.1 Books o 8.2 Articles 9 Further reading 10 External links

[edit] The Narrative Construction of Reality
In 1991, Bruner published an article in Critical Inquiry entitled "The Narrative Construction of Reality." In this article, he argued that the mind structures its sense of reality using mediation through "cultural products, like language and other symbolic systems" (3). He specifically focuses on the idea of narrative as one of these cultural products. He defines narrative in terms of ten things:
1. Narrative diachronicity: The notion that narratives take place over some sense of time. 2. Particularity: The idea that narratives deal with particular events, although some events may be left vague and general. 3. Intentional state entailment: The concept that characters within a narrative have "beliefs, desires, theories, values, and so on" (7). 4. Hermeneutic composability: The theory that narratives are that which can be interpreted in terms of their role as a selected series of events that constitute a "story." See also Hermeneutics 5. Canonicity and breach: The claim that stories are about something unusual happening that "breaches" the canonical (i.e. normal) state. 6. Referentiality: The principle that a story in some way references reality, although not in a direct way; narrative truth can offer verisimilitude but not verifiability. 7. Genericness: The flip side to particularity, this is the characteristic of narrative whereby the story can be classified as a genre. 8. Normativeness: The observation that narrative in some way supposes a claim about how one ought to act. This follows from canonicity and breach. 9. Context sensitivity and negotiability: Related to hermeneutic composability, this is the characteristic whereby narrative requires a negotiated role between author or text and reader, including the assigning of a context to the narrative, and ideas like suspension of disbelief. 10. Narrative accrual: Finally, the idea that stories are cumulative, that is, that new stories follow from older ones.

Bruner observes that these ten characteristics at once describe narrative and the reality constructed and posited by narrative, which in turn teaches us about the nature of reality as constructed by the human mind via narrative.

[edit] Man: A Course of Study
Man: A Course of Study (usually known by the acronym MACOS or M.A.C.O.S.) was an American humanities teaching program based upon Bruner's theories, particularly his concept of the "spiral curriculum". Popular in America and Britain in the 1960s and 1970s, the course was much criticized in the United States because of its emphasis upon questioning aspects of life, including belief and morality.[1]

[edit] Red spade experiment
A classic psychological experiment performed by Bruner and Leo Postman showed slower reaction times and less accurate answers when a deck of playing cards reversed the color of the suit symbol for some cards (e.g. red spades and black hearts).[2]

[edit] Quotations


Acts of Meaning (The Jerusalem-Harvard Lectures, 1990) o It was, we thought, an all-out effort to establish meaning as the central concept of psychology - not stimuli and responses, not overtly observable behavior, not biological drives and their transformation, but meaning. It was not a revolution against behaviorism with the aim of transforming behaviorism into a better way of pursuing psychology by adding a little mentalism to it. Edward Tolman had done that, to little avail. It was an altogether more profound revolution than that. Its aim was to discover and to describe formally the meanings that human beings created out of their encounters with the world, and then to propose hypotheses about what meaningmaking processes were implicated. It focused on the symbolic activities that human beings employed in constructing and making sense not only of the world, but of themselves. (p. 2) o Very early on, ... emphasis began shifting from 'meaning' to 'information', from the construction of meaning to the processing of information. These are profoundly different matters. The key factor in the shift was the introduction of computation as the ruling metaphor and of computability as a necessary criterion of a good theoretical model. Information is indifferent with respect to meaning... (p. 4) o Given pre-established meaning categories well-formed enough within a domain to provide a basis for an operating code, a properly programmed computer could perform prodigies of information processing with a minimum set of operations, and that is technological heaven. Very soon, computing became the model of the mind, and in place of the concept of meaning there emerged the concept of computability. Cognitive processes were equated with the programs that could be run on a computational device, and the success of one's efforts to 'understand', say, memory or concept attainment, was one's ability realistically to simulate such human conceptualizing or human memorizing with a computer program. (p. 6)

o o

If the cognitive revolution erupted in 1956, the contextual revolution (at least in psychology) is occurring today. (pp. 105–6) Jerome Bruner argues that the cognitive revolution, with its current fixation on mind as "information processor," has led psychology away from the deeper objective of understanding mind as a creator of meanings. Only by breaking out of the limitations imposed by a computational model of mind can we grasp the special interaction through which mind both constitutes and is constituted by culture.

David Ausubel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search David Paul Ausubel (October 25, 1918 – July 9, 2008) American psychologist born in New York, studied at the Columbia Univ., follower of Jean Piaget. One of his most significant contributions to the field of and educational psychology, cognitive science and science education learning was the development and research on advance organizers (since 1960). He retired from academics in 1973 and devoted himself to his psychiatric practice.

Subsumption Theory (D. Ausubel)
Overview: Ausubel's theory is concerned with how individuals learn large amounts of meaningful material from verbal/textual presentations in a school setting (in contrast to theories developed in the context of laboratory experiments). According to Ausubel, learning is based upon the kinds of superordinate, representational, and combinatorial processes that occur during the reception of information. A primary process in learning is subsumption in which new material is related to relevant ideas in the existing cognitive structure on a substantive, non-verbatim basis. Cognitive structures represent the residue of all learning experiences; forgetting occurs because certain details get integrated and lose their individual identity. A major instructional mechanism proposed by Ausubel is the use of advance organizers: "These organizers are introduced in advance of learning itself, and are also presented at a higher level of abstraction, generality, and inclusiveness; and since the substantive content of a given organizer or series of organizers is selected on the basis of its suitability for explaining, integrating, and interrelating the material they precede, this strategy simultaneously satisfies the substantive as well as the programming criteria for enhancing the organization strength of cognitive structure." (1963 , p. 81).

Ausubel emphasizes that advance organizers are different from overviews and summaries which simply emphasize key ideas and are presented at the same level of abstraction and generality as the rest of the material. Organizers act as a subsuming bridge between new learning material and existing related ideas. Ausubel's theory has commonalities with Gestalt theories and those that involve schema (e.g., Bartlett) as a central principle. There are also similarities with Bruner's "spiral learning" model , although Ausubel emphasizes that subsumption involves reorganization of existing cognitive structures not the development of new structures as constructivist theories suggest. Ausubel was apparently influenced by the work of Piaget on cognitive development. Scope/Application: Ausubel clearly indicates that his theory applies only to reception (expository) learning in school settings. He distinguishes reception learning from rote and discovery learning; the former because it doesn't involve subsumption (i.e., meaningful materials) and the latter because the learner must discover information through problem solving. A large number of studies have been conducted on the effects of advance organizers in learning (see Ausubel, 1968, 1978). Example: Ausubel (1963, p. 80) cites Boyd's textbook of pathology as an example of progressive differentiation because the book presents information according to general processes (e.g., inflammation, degeneration) rather than by describing organ systems in isolation. He also cites the Physical Science Study Committee curriculum which organizes material according to the major ideas of physics instead of piece-meal discussion of principle or phenomenon (p. 78). Principles: 1. The most general ideas of a subject should be presented first and then progressively differentiated in terms of detail and specificity. 2. Instructional materials should attempt to integrate new material with previously presented information through comparisons and cross-referencing of new and old ideas.

Robert M. Gagné
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Robert Gagne) Jump to: navigation, search Robert Mills Gagné (August 21, 1916– April 28, 2002) was an American educational psychologist best known for his "Conditions of Learning". Gagné pioneered the science of instruction during WWII for the air force with pilot training. Later he went on to develop a series

of studies and works that helped codify what is now considered to be 'good instruction.' He also was involved in applying concepts of instructional theory to the design of computer based training and multimedia based learning. A major contribution to the theory of instruction was the model "Nine Events of Instruction".
        

Gain attention Inform learner of objectives Stimulate recall of prior learning Present stimulus material Provide learner guidance Elicit performance Provide feedback Assess performance Enhance retention transfer

Gagné's work is sometimes summarized as the Gagné Assumption. The assumption is that different types of learning exist, and that different instructional conditions are most likely to bring about these different types of learning.

Gagne's Nine Events of Instruction: An Introduction
by Kevin Kruse Just as Malcolm Knowles is widely regarded as the father of adult learning theory, Robert Gagne is considered to be the foremost researcher and contributor to the systematic approach to instructional design and training. Gagne and his followers are known as behaviorists, and their focus is on the outcomes - or behaviors - that result from training. Gagne's Nine Events of Instruction Gagne's book, The Conditions of Learning, first published in 1965, identified the mental conditions for learning. These were based on the information processing model of the mental events that occur when adults are presented with various stimuli. Gagne created a nine-step process called the events of instruction, which correlate to and address the conditions of learning. The figure below shows these instructional events in the left column and the associated mental processes in the right column. Instructional Event 1. Gain attention 2. Inform learners of objectives 3. Stimulate recall of prior learning 4. Present the content 5. Provide "learning guidance" Internal Mental Process Stimuli activates receptors Creates level of expectation for learning Retrieval and activation of short-term memory Selective perception of content Semantic encoding for storage long-term memory

6. Elicit performance (practice)

Responds to questions to enhance encoding and verification Reinforcement and assessment of correct performance Retrieval and reinforcement of content as final evaluation Retrieval and generalization of learned skill to new situation

7. Provide feedback

8. Assess performance

9. Enhance retention and transfer to the job

1. Gain attention
In order for any learning to take place, you must first capture the attention of the student. A multimedia program that begins with an animated title screen sequence accompanied by sound effects or music startles the senses with auditory or visual stimuli. An even better way to capture students' attention is to start each lesson with a thought-provoking question or interesting fact. Curiosity motivates students to learn.

2. Inform learners of objectives
Early in each lesson students should encounter a list of learning objectives. This initiates the internal process of expectancy and helps motivate the learner to complete the lesson. These objectives should form the basis for assessment and possible certification as well. Typically, learning objectives are presented in the form of "Upon completing this lesson you will be able to. . . ." The phrasing of the objectives themselves will be covered under Robert Mager's contributions later in this chapter.

3. Stimulate recall of prior learning
Associating new information with prior knowledge can facilitate the learning process. It is easier for learners to encode and store information in long-term memory when there are links to personal experience and knowledge. A simple way to stimulate recall is to ask questions about previous experiences, an understanding of previous concepts, or a body of content.

4. Present the content
This event of instruction is where the new content is actually presented to the learner. Content should be chunked and organized meaningfully, and typically is explained and then demonstrated. To appeal to different learning modalities, a variety of media should be used if possible, including text, graphics, audio narration, and video.

5. Provide "learning guidance"
To help learners encode information for long-term storage, additional guidance should be provided along with the presentation of new content. Guidance strategies include the use of examples, non-examples, case studies, graphical representations, mnemonics, and analogies.

6. Elicit performance (practice)
In this event of instruction, the learner is required to practice the new skill or behavior. Eliciting performance provides an opportunity for learners to confirm their correct understanding, and the repetition further increases the likelihood of retention.

7. Provide feedback
As learners practice new behavior it is important to provide specific and immediate feedback of their performance. Unlike questions in a post-test, exercises within tutorials should be used for comprehension and encoding purposes, not for formal scoring. Additional guidance and answers provided at this stage are called formative feedback.

8. Assess performance
Upon completing instructional modules, students should be given the opportunity to take (or be required to take) a post-test or final assessment. This assessment should be completed without the ability to receive additional coaching, feedback, or hints. Mastery of material, or certification, is typically granted after achieving a certain score or percent correct. A commonly accepted level of mastery is 80% to 90% correct.

9. Enhance retention and transfer to the job
Determining whether or not the skills learned from a training program are ever applied back on the job often remains a mystery to training managers - and a source of consternation for senior executives. Effective training programs have a "performance" focus, incorporating design and media that facilitate retention and transfer to the job. The repetition of learned concepts is a tried and true means of aiding retention, although often disliked by students. (There was a reason for writing spelling words ten times as grade school student.) Creating electronic or online job-aids, references, templates, and wizards are other ways of aiding performance. Applying Gagne's nine-step model to any training program is the single best way to ensure an effective learning program. A multimedia program that is filled with glitz or that provides unlimited access to Webbased documents is no substitute for sound instructional design. While those types of programs might entertain or be valuable as references, they will not maximize the effectiveness of information processing - and learning will not occur. How to Apply Gagne's Events of Instruction in e-Learning As an example of how to apply Gagne's events of instruction to an actual training program, let's look at a high-level treatment for a fictitious software training program. We'll assume that we need to develop a CD-ROM tutorial to teach sales representatives how to use a new lead-tracking system called STAR, which runs on their laptop computers. 1. Gain attention The program starts with an engaging opening sequence. A space theme is used to play off the new software product's name, STAR. Inspirational music accompanies the opening sequence, which might consist of a shooting star or animated logo. When students access the first lesson, the vice president of sales appears on the screen in a video clip and introduces the course. She explains how important it is to stay on the cutting edge of technology and how the training program will teach them to use the new STAR system. She also emphasizes the benefits of the STAR system, which include reducing the amount of time representatives need to spend on paperwork.

2. Inform learners of objectives The VP of sales presents students with the following learning objectives immediately after the introduction. Upon completing this lesson you will be able to:     List the benefits of the new STAR system. Start and exit the program. Generate lead-tracking reports by date, geography, and source. Print paper copies of all reports.

3. Stimulate recall of prior learning Students are called upon to use their prior knowledge of other software applications to understand the basic functionality of the STAR system. They are asked to think about how they start, close, and print from other programs such as their word processor, and it is explained that the STAR system works similarly. Representatives are asked to reflect on the process of the old lead-tracking system and compare it to the process of the new electronic one. 4. Present the content Using screen images captured from the live application software and audio narration, the training program describes the basic features of the STAR system. After the description, a simple demonstration is performed. 5. Provide "learning guidance" With each STAR feature, students are shown a variety of ways to access it - using short-cut keys on the keyboard, drop-down menus, and button bars. Complex sequences are chunked into short, step-by-step lists for easier storage in long-term memory. 6. Elicit performance (practice) After each function is demonstrated, students are asked to practice with realistic, controlled simulations. For example, students might be asked to "Generate a report that shows all active leads in the state of New Jersey." Students are required to use the mouse to click on the correct on-screen buttons and options to generate the report. 7. Provide feedback During the simulations, students are given guidance as needed. If they are performing operations correctly, the simulated STAR system behaves just as the live application would. If the student makes a mistake, the tutorial immediately responds with an audible cue, and a pop-up window explains and reinforces the correct operation. 8. Assess performance After all lessons are completed, students are required to take a post-test. Mastery is achieved with an 80% or better score, and once obtained, the training program displays a completion certificate, which can be printed. The assessment questions are directly tied to the learning objectives displayed in the lessons.

9. Enhance retention and transfer to the job While the STAR system is relatively easy to use, additional steps are taken to ensure successful implementation and widespread use among the sales force. These features include online help and "wizards", which are step-by-step instructions on completing complex tasks. Additionally, the training program is equipped with a content map, an index of topics, and a search function. These enable students to use the training as a just-in-time support tool in the future. Finally, a one-page, laminated quick reference card is packaged with the training CD-ROM for further reinforcement of the learning session.

Benjamin Bloom
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Benjamin S. Bloom (February 21, 1913 – September 13, 1999) was a Jewish-American educational psychologist who made contributions to the classification of educational objectives and to the theory of mastery-learning.

Contents
[hide]
    

1 Biography 2 Bloom's theories 3 See also 4 References 5 Further reading

[edit] Biography
Benjamin S. Bloom was born on February 21, 1913, in Lansford, Pennsylvania. He received bachelor‘s and master‘s degrees from Pennsylvania State University in 1935 and a Ph.D. in education from the University of Chicago in March 1942. He became a staff member of the Board of Examinations at the University of Chicago in 1940 and served in that capacity until 1943, when he became university examiner, a position he held until 1959. He received his initial appointment as an instructor in the department of education at the University of Chicago in 1944 and was eventually appointed Charles H. Swift Distinguished Service Professor there in 1970. He also served as educational adviser to the governments of Israel, India, and numerous other nations. Bloom died on September 13, 1999.

[edit] Bloom's theories
Bloom's most important initial work focused on what might be called ‗the operationalization of educational objectives‘. Bloom worked with Ralph W. Tyler at Chicago in the examiner‘s office and directed his attention to the development of specifications through which educational objectives could be organized according to their cognitive complexity. If such an organization or hierarchy could be developed, university examiners might have a more reliable procedure for assessing students and the outcomes of educational practice. One of the consequences of the categories in this taxonomy is that they not only serve as means through which evaluation tasks can be formulated, but also provide a framework for the formulation of the objectives themselves. Bloom was interested in providing a useful practical tool that was congruent with what was understood at that time about the features of the higher mental processes. Bloom‘s contributions to education extended well beyond the taxonomy. He was fundamentally interested in thinking and its development. His work with Broder (Bloom & Broder, 1958) on the study of the thought processes of college students was another innovative and significant effort to get into the heads of students through a process of stimulated recall and think-aloud techniques. What Bloom wanted to reveal was what students were thinking about when teachers were teaching, because he recognized that it was what students were experiencing that ultimately mattered. The use of think-aloud protocols provided an important basis for gaining insight into the black box. In 1984 Bloom published "The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring" in the journal Educational Researcher. This paper reported on what has come to be known as Bloom's 2 Sigma Problem, which shows an astonishing positive effect for the average student in conditions of one-to-one tutoring using Mastery learning techniques. Bloom realized one-to-one tutoring is impossible for most societies, and thus encouraged educators to study combinations of other alterable variables in the learning process that may approach the 2 sigma results[1]. He focused much of his research on the study of educational objectives and, ultimately, proposed that any given task favors one of three psychological domains: cognitive, affective, or psychomotor. The cognitive domain deals with a person's ability to process and utilize (as a measure) information in a meaningful way. The affective domain relates to the attitudes and feelings that result from the learning process. Lastly, the psychomotor domain involves manipulative or physical skills. Benjamin Bloom headed a group of cognitive psychologists at the University of Chicago that developed a taxonomic hierarchy of cognitive-driven behavior deemed important to learning and to measurable capability. (For example, one can measure an objective that begins with the verb "describe", unlike one that begins with the verb "understand".) Bloom's classification of educational objectives, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain (Bloom et al., 1956), addresses the cognitive domain (as

opposed to the psychomotor and affective domains) of knowledge. Bloom‘s taxonomy provides a structure in which to categorize instructional objectives and instructional assessment. He designed the taxonomy in order to help teachers and instructional designers to classify instructional objectives and goals. The taxonomy relies on the idea that not all learning objectives and outcomes have equal merit. In the absence of a classification system (a taxonomy), teachers and instructional designers may choose, for example, to emphasize memorization of facts (which makes for easier testing) rather than emphasizing other (and likely more important) learned capabilities.

The Bloom's Wheel, according to Bloom's verbs and matching assessment types, and including only feasible and measurable verbs.

Bloom‘s taxonomy in theory helps teachers better prepare objectives and, from there, derive appropriate measures of learned capability and higher order thinking skills. Curriculum-design, usually a state (governmental) practice, did not reflect the intent of such a taxonomy until the late 1990s. Note that Bloom, as an American academic, lacks universal approval of his constructs. The curriculum of the Canadian Province of Ontario offers a good example of the application of a taxonomy of educational objectives: it provides for its teachers an integrated adaptation of Bloom's taxonomy. Ontario's Ministry of Education specifies as its taxonomic categories:

Knowledge and Understanding; Thinking; Communication; Application. Teachers can classify every 'specific' learning objective, in any given course, according to the Ministry's taxonomy.

Howard Gardner
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Howard Earl Gardner
July 11, 1943 (age 66) Scranton, Pennsylvania

Born

Nationality

American

Fields

Psychology

Institutions

Harvard University

Alma mater

Harvard College

Known for

theory of multiple intelligences
[1]

Influences

Jean Piaget, Jerome Bruner, Nelson Goodman

Psychology

History of psychology Branches of psychology

Basic science
Abnormal · Behavioral neuroscience

Cognitive · Developmental Experimental · Evolutionary Mathematical · Neuropsychology Personality · Positive Psychophysics · Social Transpersonal

Applied science
Clinical · Educational Forensic · Health Industrial and organizational Occupational health School · Sport

Lists
Outline · Publications Topics · Therapies

Portal

v•d•e

Howard Earl Gardner (born July 11, 1943 in Scranton, Pennsylvania) is an American developmental psychologist who is based at Harvard University. He is best known for his theory of multiple intelligences.[1]

Contents
[hide]
   

1 Multiple intelligences 2 See Also 3 References 4 External links

[edit] Multiple intelligences
Multiple intelligences is an idea that maintains there exist many different types of "intelligences" ascribed to human beings. In response to the question of whether or not measures of intelligence are scientific, Gardner suggests that each individual manifests varying levels of different intelligences, and thus each person has refined in subsequent years. In 1999 Gardner lists eight intelligences as linguistic, logic-mathematical, musical, spatial, bodily kinesthetic, naturalist, interpersonal and intrapersonal. Gardner believes that each intelligence has a unique biological basis, a distinct course of development, and different expert, or "end-state," performances. At the same time, he emphasizes that a lengthy process of education is required to transform any raw potential into a mature social role. Gardner is still considering a ninth, or existential intelligence, but has not added it yet

Theory of multiple intelligences
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

The theory of multiple intelligences was proposed by Howard Gardner in 1983 to more accurately define the concept of intelligence and to address the question whether methods which claim to measure intelligence (or aspects thereof) are truly scientific. Gardner's theory argues that intelligence, particularly as it is traditionally defined, does not sufficiently encompass the wide variety of abilities humans display. In his conception, a child who masters multiplication easily is not necessarily more intelligent overall than a child who struggles to do so. The second child may be stronger in another kind of intelligence and therefore 1) may best learn the given material through a different approach, 2) may excel in a field outside of mathematics, or 3) may even be looking at the multiplication process at a fundamentally deeper level, which can result in a seeming slowness that hides a mathematical intelligence that is potentially higher than that of a child who easily memorizes the multiplication table.

In theory, people who have bodily-kinesthetic intelligence should learn better by involving muscular movement (e.g. getting up and moving around into the learning experience), and are generally good at physical activities such as sports or dance. They may enjoy acting or performing, and in general they are good at building and making things. They often learn best by doing something physically, rather than [by] reading or hearing about it. Those with strong bodily-kinesthetic intelligence seem to use what might be termed muscle memory - they remember things through their body such as verbal memory or images. Careers that suit those with this intelligence include: athletes, dancers, musicians, actors, surgeons, doctors, builders, police officers, and soldiers. Although these careers can be duplicated through virtual simulation, they will not produce the actual physical learning that is needed in this intelligence.[1]

Contents
[hide]
       

   

1 Interpersonal 2 Verbal-linguistic 3 Logical-mathematical 4 Intrapersonal 5 Musical 6 Use in education 7 Questions 8 Opposing views o 8.1 The definition of intelligence o 8.2 Lack of empirical evidence 9 See also 10 Notes 11 References 12 External links

[edit] Interpersonal
This area has to do with interaction with others. In theory, people who have a high interpersonal intelligence tend to be extroverts, characterized by their sensitivity to others' moods, feelings, temperaments and motivations, and their ability to cooperate in order to work as part of a group. They communicate effectively and empathize easily with others, and may be either leaders or followers. They typically learn best by working with others and often enjoy discussion and debate. Careers that suit those with this intelligence include sales, politicians, managers, teachers, and social workers.[2]

[edit] Verbal-linguistic

This area has to do with words, spoken or written. People with high verbal-linguistic intelligence display a facility with words and languages. They are typically good at reading, writing, telling stories and memorizing words along with dates. They tend to learn best by reading, taking notes, listening to lectures, and discussion and debate. They are also frequently skilled at explaining, teaching and oration or persuasive speaking. Those with verbal-linguistic intelligence learn foreign languages very easily as they have high verbal memory and recall, and an ability to understand and manipulate syntax and structure. Careers that suit those with this intelligence include writers, lawyers, philosophers, journalists, politicians, poets, and teachers.[citation needed]

[edit] Logical-mathematical
This area has to do with logic, abstractions, reasoning, and numbers. While it is often assumed that those with this intelligence naturally excel in mathematics, chess, computer programming and other logical or numerical activities, a more accurate definition places emphasis on traditional mathematical ability and more reasoning capabilities, abstract patterns of recognition, scientific thinking and investigation, and the ability to perform complex calculations. It correlates strongly with traditional concepts of "intelligence" or IQ. Careers which suit those with this intelligence include scientists, mathematicians, engineers, doctors and economists.[3]

[edit] Intrapersonal
This area has to do with introspective and self-reflective capacities. People with intrapersonal intelligence are intuitive and typically introverted. They are skillful at deciphering their own feelings and motivations. This refers to having a deep understanding of the self; what are your strengths/ weaknesses, what makes you unique, can you predict your own reactions/ emotions. Careers which suit those with this intelligence include philosophers, psychologists, theologians, marine biologists, lawyers, and writers. Also prefer to work alone.

[edit] Musical
This area has to do with rhythm, music, and hearing. Those who have a high level of musicalrhythmic intelligence display greater sensitivity to sounds, rhythms, tones, and music. They normally have good pitch and may even have absolute pitch, and are able to sing, play musical instruments, and compose music. Since there is a strong auditory component to this intelligence, those who are strongest in it may learn best via lecture. Language skills are typically highly developed in those whose base intelligence is musical. In addition, they will sometimes use songs or rhythms to learn and memorize information. Careers that suit those with this intelligence include instrumentalists, singers, conductors, discjockeys, orators, writers and composers.

[edit] Use in education
Traditionally, schools have emphasized the development of logical intelligence and linguistic intelligence (mainly reading and writing). In fact, IQ tests (given to about 1,000,000 students each year) focus mostly on logical and linguistic intelligence. While many students function well in this environment, there are those who do not. Gardner's theory argues that students will be better served by a broader vision of education, wherein teachers use different methodologies, exercises and activities to reach all students, not just those who excel at linguistic and logical intelligence. Many teachers see the theory as simple common sense. Some say that it validates what they already know: that students learn in different ways. On the other hand, James Traub's article in The New Republic notes that Gardner's system has not been accepted by most academics in intelligence or teaching. George Miller, the esteemed psychologist credited with discovering the mechanisms by which short term memory operates, wrote in The New York Times Book Review that Gardner's argument boiled down to "hunch and opinion" (p. 20). Gardner's subsequent work has done very little to shift the balance of opinion. A recent issue of Psychology, Public Policy, and Law devoted to the study of intelligence contained virtually no reference to Gardner's work. Most people who study intelligence view M.I. theory as rhetoric rather than science, and they're divided on the virtues of the rhetoric. The application of the theory of multiple intelligences varies widely. It runs the gamut from a teacher who, when confronted with a student having difficulties, uses a different approach to teach the material, to an entire school using MI as a framework. In general, those who subscribe to the theory strive to provide opportunities for their students to use and develop all the different intelligences, not just the few at which they naturally excel. A Harvard-led study of 41 schools using the theory came to the conclusion that in these schools there was "a culture of hard work, respect, and caring; a faculty that collaborated and learned from each other; classrooms that engaged students through constrained but meaningful choices, and a sharp focus on enabling students to produce high-quality work."[4] Of the schools implementing Gardner's theory, the most well-known is New City School, in St. Louis, Missouri, which has been using the theory since 1988. The school's teachers have produced two books for teachers, Celebrating Multiple Intelligences and Succeeding With Multiple Intelligences and the principal, Thomas Hoerr, has written Becoming a Multiple Intelligences School as well as many articles on the practical applications of the theory. The school has also hosted four conferences, each attracting over 200 educators from around the world and remains a valuable resource for teachers interested in implementing the theory in their own classrooms. Thomas Armstrong considers that Waldorf education organically engages all of Gardner's eight intelligences.[5]

[edit] Questions
Questions raised about Gardner's theory include:
  

What kind of correlations exist between the intelligences, or are they completely independent? Should schools be focusing on teaching to students' strengths or on remediating where they are weak? To what extent should students be aware of their profile in the various intelligences?

[edit] Opposing views

[edit] The definition of intelligence
As one would expect from a theory that redefines intelligence, one of the major criticisms of the theory is that it is ad hoc. The criticism is that Gardner is not expanding the definition of the word "intelligence"; rather, he denies the existence of intelligence, as is traditionally understood, and instead uses the word "intelligence" whenever other people have traditionally used words like "ability". This practice has been criticized by Robert J. Sternberg (1983, 1991), Eysenck (1994), and Scarr (1985). Defenders of MI theory argue that the traditional definition of intelligence is too narrow, and thus broader definition more accurately reflects the differing ways in which humans think and learn. They would state that the traditional interpretation of intelligence collapses under the weight of its own logic and definition, noting that intelligence is usually defined as the cognitive or mental capacity of an individual, which by logical necessity would include all forms of mental qualities, not simply the ones most transparent to standardized I.Q. tests. Some of these criticisms arise from the fact that Gardner has not settled on a single definition of intelligence. He originally defined it as the ability to solve problems that have value in at least one culture, or as something that a student is interested in. However, he added a disclaimer that he has no fixed definition, and his classification is more of an artistic judgment than fact:
Ultimately, it would certainly be desirable to have an algorithm for the selection of an intelligence, such that any trained researcher could determine whether a candidate's intelligence met the appropriate criteria. At present, however, it must be admitted that the selection (or rejection) of a candidate's intelligence is reminiscent more of an artistic judgment than of a scientific assessment. (Gardner, Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, 1985)

Gardner argues that by calling linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities intelligences, but not artistic, musical, athletic, etc. abilities, the former are needlessly aggrandized. Many critics balk at this widening of the definition, saying that it ignores "the connotation of intelligence...[which] has always connoted the kind of thinking skills that makes one successful in school."[6] Gardner writes "I balk at the unwarranted assumption that certain human abilities can be arbitrarily singled out as intelligence while others cannot"[7] Critics hold that given this statement, any interest or ability is now redefined as "intelligence". Thus, by adopting this

theory, studying intelligence becomes difficult, because it diffuses into the broader concept of ability or talent. Gardner's addition of the naturalistic intelligence and conceptions of the existential and moral intelligences are seen as fruits of this diffusion. Defenders of the MI theory would argue that this is simply a recognition of the broad scope of inherent mental abilities, and that such an exhaustive scope by nature defies a simple, one-dimensional classification such as an assigned IQ value. They would claim that such one-dimensional values are typically of limited value in predicting the real world application of unique mental abilities. Andreas Demetriou suggests that theories which overemphasize the autonomy of the domains are as simplistic as the theories that overemphasize the role of general intelligence and ignore the domains. He agrees with Gardner that there indeed are domains of intelligence that are relevantly autonomous of each other. In fact, some of the domains, such as verbal, spatial, mathematical, and social intelliegence are identified by most lines of research in psychology. However, in his theory, one of the neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development, Gardner is criticized for underestimating the effects exerted on the various domains of intelligences by processes that define general processing efficiency, such as speed of processing, executive functions, and working memory, and hypercognitive processes underlying self-awareness and self-regulation. All of these processes are integral components of general intelligence that regulate the functioning and development of different domains of intelligence. In fact, a recent study by Visser and colleagues which was designed to test the autonomy of Gardner's intelligences showed clearly that most of them are heavily dependent on the general factor of intelligence.[8] Thus, it is argued that the domains are to a large extent expressions of the condition of the general processes. At the same time, the domains may vary because of their constitutional differences but also differences in individual preferences and inclinations. Moreover, their functioning both chanellizes and influences the operation of the general processes.[9][10] Thus, one cannot satisfactorily specify the intelligence of an individual or design effective interventions programs unless both the general processes and the domains of interest are evaluated (Demetriou & Kazi, 2006; Demetriou, Mouyi, & Spanoudis, 2010).

[edit] Lack of empirical evidence
Some critics argue that many of Gardner's "intelligences" actually correlate with the g factor, supporting the idea of single dominant type of intelligence. For example, Carroll (1993) argued that verbal comprehension, auditory processing, visual perception and ability in logic and mathematics all correlate with each other and are actually subsets of global intelligence. This gives further support for a theory of a single type intelligence. A critical review of MI theory argues that there is little empirical evidence to support it:
"To date there have been no published studies that offer evidence of the validity of the multiple intelligences. In 1994 Sternberg reported finding no empirical studies. In 2000 Allix reported finding no empirical validating studies, and at that time Gardner and Connell conceded that there was "little hard evidence for MI theory" (2000, p. 292). In 2004 Sternberg and Grigerenko stated that there were no validating studies for multiple intelligences, and in 2004 Gardner asserted that he would be "delighted were such evidence to accrue" (p. 214), and he admitted that "MI theory has few enthusiasts among

psychometricians or others of a traditional psychological background" because they require "psychometric or experimental evidence that allows one to prove the existence of the several intelligences" (2004, p. 214)." (Waterhouse, 2006a, p. 208).

The same review presents evidence to demonstrate that cognitive neuroscience research does not support the theory of Multiple Intelligences:
"the human brain is unlikely to function via Gardner‘s multiple intelligences. Taken together the evidence for the intercorrelations of subskills of IQ measures, the evidence for a shared set of genes associated with mathematics, reading, and g, and the evidence for shared and overlapping ―what is it?‖ and ―where is it?‖ neural processing pathways, and shared neural pathways for language, music, motor skills, and emotions suggest that it is unlikely that that each of Gardner‘s intelligences could operate ―via a different set of neural mechanisms‖ (1999, p. 99). Equally important, the evidence for the ―what is it?‖ and ―where is it?‖ processing pathways, for Kahneman‘s two decision-making systems, and for adapted cognition modules suggests that these cognitive brain specializations have evolved to address very specific problems in our environment. Because Gardner claimed that that the intelligences are innate potentialities related to a general content area, MI theory lacks a rationale for the phylogenetic emergence of the intelligences." (From Waterhouse, 2006a, p. 213).

A number of articles have surveyed the use of Gardner's ideas and conclude that there is little to no academically substantiated evidence that his ideas work in practice. Steven A. Stahl found that most of the previous studies which claimed to show positive results had major flaws:
Among others, Marie Carbo claims that her learning styles work is based on research. {I discuss Carbo because she publishes extensively on her model and is very prominent in the workshop circuit...} But given the overwhelmingly negative findings in the published research, I wondered what she was citing, and about a decade ago, I thought it would be interesting to take a look. Reviewing her articles, I found that out of 17 studies she had cited, only one was published. Fifteen were doctoral dissertations and 13 of these came out of one university—St. John’s University in New York, Carbo’s alma mater. None of these had been in a peer-refereed journal. When I looked closely at the dissertations and other materials, I found that 13 of the 17 studies that supposedly support her claim had to do with learning styles based on something other than modality.[11]

To date, the current No Child Left Behind high-stakes test legislation does not encompass the multiple intelligences framework in the exams' design and/or implementation

Wolfgang Köhler
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Wolfgang Kohler) Jump to: navigation, search

This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please improve this article by introducing more precise citations where appropriate. (February 2008)

Wolfgang Köhler (January 21, 1887 – June 11, 1967) was a German psychologist and phenomenology who, like Max Wertheimer, Fritz Perls, and Kurt Koffka, contributed to the creation of Gestalt psychology.

Contents
[hide]
          

1 Early life 2 Education 3 Gestalt psychology 4 Problem solving 5 Berlin Psychological Institute 6 Later life 7 Books by Köhler 8 See also 9 Resources 10 References 11 External links

[edit] Early life
Köhler was born in the port city of Reval (now Tallinn), Governorate of Estonia, Russian Empire. His family was of German origin, and shortly after his birth, they moved back to that country. There, raised in a setting of teachers, nurses and other scholars, he developed lifelong interests in the sciences as well as the arts, and especially in music.

[edit] Education
In the course of his university education, Köhler studied at the University of Tübingen (190506), the University of Bonn (1906-07) and the University of Berlin (1907-09). While a student at the latter, he focused on the link between physics and psychology, in the course of which he studied with two leading scholars in those fields, Max Planck and Carl Stumpf, respectively. In completing his Ph.D., for which his dissertation addressed certain aspects of psychoacoustics, Stumpf was his major professor.

[edit] Gestalt psychology
In 1910-13, he was an assistant at the Psychological Institute in Frankfurt where he worked with fellow psychologists Max Wertheimer and Kurt Koffka. He and Koffka functioned as subjects for Wertheimer‘s now-famous studies of apparent movement (or the phi phenomenon), which led them in turn to conclusions about the inherent nature of vision. They collaborated on the founding of a new holistic attitude toward psychology called Gestalt theory (from the German word for ―whole"), aspects of which are indebted to the earlier work of Stumpf (Köhler‘s teacher) and Christian von Ehrenfels (whose lectures at the University of Prague Wertheimer had attended).

[edit] Problem solving
In 1913, Köhler left Frankfurt for the island of Tenerife in the Canary Islands, where he had been named the director of the Prussian Academy of Sciences anthropoid research station. He remained there for six years, during which he wrote a book on problem solving titled The Mentality of Apes (1917). In this research, Köhler observed the manner in which chimpanzees solve problems, such as that of retrieving bananas when positioned out of reach. He found that they stacked wooden crates to use as makeshift ladders, in order to retrieve the food. If the bananas were placed on the ground outside of the cage, they used sticks to lengthen the reach of their arms. Köhler concluded that the chimps had not arrived at these methods through trial-anderror (which American psychologist Edward Thorndike had claimed to be the basis of all animal learning, through his law of effect), but rather that they had experienced an insight (also sometimes known as an ―aha experience‖), in which, having realized the answer, they then proceeded to carry it out in a way that was, in Köhler‘s words, ―unwaveringly purposeful.‖

[edit] Berlin Psychological Institute
Köhler returned to Germany in 1920, and soon after was appointed the acting director, and then (as Carl Stumpf‘s successor) professor and director of the Psychological Institute at the University of Berlin, where he remained until 1935. In those fifteen years, his accomplishments were considerable, including, for example, the directorship of the school‘s prestigious graduate program in psychology; the co-founding of an influential journal about perceptual psychology, titled Psychologische Forschung (Psychological Research: Journal of Psychology and its Neighboring Fields); and the authorship of an early book titled Gestalt Psychology (1929), written especially for an American audience.

[edit] Later life
Having fallen out of favor with the Nazis (for having opposed the dismissal of his Jewish colleagues), Köhler emigrated to the U.S. in 1935. He was offered a professorship at Swarthmore College, where he remained on the faculty for twenty years. In 1956, he became a research professor at Dartmouth College, and soon after also served as the president of the American Psychological Association. He died in Hanover, New Hampshire, in 1967.

[edit] Books by Köhler
This article lacks ISBNs for the books listed in it. Please make it easier to conduct research by listing ISBNs. If the {{Cite book}} or {{citation}} templates are in use, you may add ISBNs automatically, or discuss this issue on the talk page. (April 2009)

     

The Mentality of Apes Gestalt Psychology The Place of Value in a World of Facts Dynamics in Psychology Gestalt Psychology Today The Task of Gestalt Psychology

Kurt Koffka
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This article does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2008)

Kurt Koffka
March 18, 1886 Berlin

Born

Died

November 22, 1941 Northampton

Kurt Koffka (Berlin, March 18, 1886 - Northampton, November 22, 1941) was a German psychologist. He was born and educated in Berlin and earned his PhD there in 1909 as a student of Carl Stumpf. In addition to his studies in Berlin, Koffka also spent one year at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland where he developed his strong fluency in English, a skill that later served him well in his efforts to spread Gestalt psychology beyond German borders. Koffka was already working at the University of Frankfurt when Max Wertheimer arrived in 1910 and invited Koffka to participate as a subject in his research on the phi phenomenon.

Koffka left Frankfurt in 1912 to take a position at the University of Giessen, forty miles from Frankfurt, where he remained until 1924. Putting his English fluency to the test, Koffka then traveled to the United States, where he was a visiting professor at the Cornell University from 1924 to 1925, and two years later at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Eventually, in 1927, he accepted a position at the Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts, where he remained until his death in 1941.

Contents
[hide]
     

1 Personal life 2 Theories on learning 3 Works 4 References 5 External links 6 See also

[edit] Personal life
In 1909, Koffka married Mira Klein, who was an experimental subject in Koffka's research. They remained married until 1923 when he divorced Klein and married Elisabeth Ahlgrimm who had recently finished her Ph.D at Giessen. However, they were divorced in the same year, and Koffka remarried Klein.[1]

[edit] Theories on learning
Koffka believed that most of early learning is what he referred to as, "sensorimotor learning," which is a type of learning which occurs after a consequence. For example, a child who touches a hot stove will learn not to touch it again. Koffka also believed that a lot of learning occurs by imitation, though he argued that it is not important to understand how imitation works, but rather to acknowledge that it is a natural occurrence. According to Koffka, the highest type of learning is ideational learning, which makes use of language. Koffka notes that an important time in children's development is when they understand that objects have names.[2]

[edit] Works
  

(1922) Perception: An Introduction to the Gestalt Theorie. (1924) Growth of the Mind (1935) Principles of Gestalt Psychology

Max Wertheimer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Max Wertheimer
April 15, 1880 Prague

Born

Died

October 12, 1943 New Rochelle, New York

Nationality

Czech

Fields

psychology

Alma mater

University of Prague

Max Wertheimer (April 15, 1880 – October 12, 1943) was a Czech-born psychologist who was one of the three founders of Gestalt psychology, along with Kurt Koffka and Wolfgang Köhler. Gestalt psychology (also Gestalt of the Berlin School) is a theory of mind and brain which proposes that the operational principle of the brain is holistic, parallel, and analog, with selforganizing tendencies; or that the whole is different from the sum of its parts. The classic Gestalt example is a soap bubble, whose spherical shape is not defined by a rigid template, or a mathematical formula, but rather it emerges spontaneously by the parallel action of surface tension acting at all points in the surface simultaneously. This is in contrast to the "atomistic" principle of operation of the digital computer, where every computation is broken down into a sequence of simple steps, each of which is computed independently of the problem as a whole. The Gestalt effect refers to the form-forming capability of our senses, particularly with respect to the visual recognition of figures and whole forms instead of just a collection of simple lines and curves.

Contents
[hide]
      

1 World War I 2 Berlin years 3 The New School 4 Later life 5 See also 6 References 7 External links

[edit] World War I
The collaborative work of the three Gestalt psychologists was interrupted by World War I. Both Wertheimer and Koffka were assigned to war-related research, while Kohler was appointed the director of an anthropoid research station on Tenerife, in the Canary Islands. The three men reunited after the war ended and continued further research on the experiments.

[edit] Berlin years
After the war, Koffka returned to Frankfurt, while Kohler became the director of the Psychological Institute at the University of Berlin, where Wertheimer was already on the faculty. Using the abandoned rooms of the Imperial Palace, they established a now-famous graduate school, in tandem with a journal called Psychologische Forschung (Psychological Research: Journal of Psychology and its Neighboring Fields), in which their students‘ and their own research was initially published. The success of their efforts is evidenced by the familiarity of the names of their students in the literature of psychology, among them Kurt Lewin, Rudolf Arnheim, Wolfgang Metzger, Bluma Zeigarnik, Karl Duncker, Herta Kopfermann and Kurt Gottschaldt. In 1923, while teaching in Berlin, Wertheimer married Anna (called Anni) Caro, a physician‘s daughter, with whom he had four children: Rudolf (who died in infancy), Valentin, Michael and Lise. They divorced in 1942.

[edit] The New School
From 1929 to 1933, Wertheimer was a professor at the University of Frankfurt. When Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of the Third Reich in 1933, it became apparent to Wertheimer (and to countless other ―non-Aryan‖ intellectuals) that he must leave Germany. In the end, he accepted an offer to teach at The New School in New York. The Wertheimers‘ emigration was arranged through the U.S. consulate in Prague, and he and his wife and their children arrived in New York harbor on September 13, 1933.

[edit] Later life
For the remaining decade of his life, Wertheimer continued to teach at the New School, while remaining in touch with his European colleagues, many of whom had also emigrated to the U.S. Koffka was teaching at Smith College, Kohler at Swarthmore College, and Lewin at Cornell University and the University of Iowa. Although in declining health, he continued to work on his research of problem-solving, or what he preferred to call ―productive thinking.‖ He completed his book (his only book) on the subject (with that phrase as its title) in late September 1943, and died just three weeks later of a heart attack. Wertheimer was buried in Beechwood Cemetery in New Rochelle, New York.

Kurt Lewin
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Kurt Lewin

Born

September 9, 1890

Died

February 12, 1947 Newtonville, Massachusetts

Citizenship

Germany, United States

Fields

Psychology

Institute for Social Research Institutions Center for Group Dynamics (MIT) National Training Laboratories Duke University Alma mater

University of Berlin

Doctoral advisor

Carl Stumpf

Doctoral students

Leon Festinger, Roger Barker, Bluma Zeigarnik

Known for

Group Dynamics, Action research, T-groups

Influenced

Fritz Perls, Abraham Maslow,M. Pat Korb, Brian J. Mistler, Eric Trist, David A. Kolb

Kurt Zadek Lewin (September 9, 1890 - February 12, 1947) was a German-American psychologist, known as one of the modern pioneers of social, organizational, and applied psychology.[1] Lewin (pronounced /ləˈviːn/, lə-VEEN) is often recognized as the "founder of social psychology" and was one of the first to study group dynamics and organizational development.

Contents
[hide]
 

   

1 Biography 2 Work o 2.1 Force field analysis o 2.2 Action research o 2.3 Leadership climates o 2.4 Change process o 2.5 Lewin's equation 3 See also 4 References 5 Further reading 6 External links

[edit] Biography
In 1890, he was born into a Jewish family in Mogilno, Poland (then in County of Mogilno, province of Posen, Prussia). He served in the German army when World War I began. Due to a war wound, he returned to the University of Berlin to complete his Ph.D., with Carl Stumpf (1848 - 1936) the supervisor of his doctoral thesis. Lewin had originally been involved with schools of behavioral psychology before changing directions in research and undertaking work with psychologists of the Gestalt school of psychology, including Max Wertheimer and Wolfgang Kohler. Lewin often associated with the early Frankfurt School, originated by an influential group of largely Jewish Marxists at the Institute for Social Research in Germany. But when Hitler came to power in Germany in 1933 the Institute members had to disband, moving to England and then to America. In that year, he met with Eric Trist, of the London Tavistock Clinic. Trist was impressed with his theories and went on to use them in his studies on soldiers during the Second World War. Lewin emigrated to the United States in August 1933 and became a naturalized citizen in 1940. Lewin worked at Cornell University and for the Iowa Child Welfare Research Station at the University of Iowa. Later, he went on to become director of the Center for Group Dynamics at MIT. While working at MIT in 1946, Lewin received a phone call from the Director of the Connecticut State Inter Racial Commission requesting help to find an effective way to combat religious and racial prejudices. He set up a workshop to conduct a 'change' experiment, which laid the foundations for what is now known as sensitivity training[2]. In 1947, this led to the establishment of the National Training Laboratories, at Bethel, Maine. Carl Rogers believed that sensitivity training is "perhaps the most significant social invention of this century." [3] Following WWII Lewin was involved in the psychological rehabilitation of former occupants of displaced persons camps with Dr. Jacob Fine at Harvard Medical School. When Eric Trist and A T M Wilson wrote to Lewin proposing a journal in partnership with their newly founded

Tavistock Institute and his group at MIT, Lewin agreed. The Tavistock journal, Human Relations, was founded with two early papers by Lewin entitled "Frontiers in Group Dynamics". Lewin taught for a time at Duke University.[4] Lewin died in Newtonville, Massachusetts of a heart-attack in 1947. He was buried in his home town.

[edit] Work
Lewin coined the notion of genidentity,[5] which has gained some importance in various theories of space-time and related fields. He also proposed Herbert Blumer's interactionist perspective of 1937 as an alternative to the nature versus nurture debate. Lewin suggested that neither nature (inborn tendencies) nor nurture (how experiences in life shape individuals) alone can account for individuals' behavior and personalities, but rather that both nature and nurture interact to shape each person. This idea was presented in the form of Lewin's Equation for behavior B=ƒ(P,E). Prominent psychologists mentored by Kurt Lewin included Leon Festinger (1919 - 1989), who became known for his cognitive dissonance theory (1956), environmental psychologist Roger Barker, Bluma Zeigarnik, and Morton Deutsch, the founder of modern conflict resolution theory and practice.

[edit] Force field analysis
Force field analysis provides a framework for looking at the factors (forces) that influence a situation, originally social situations. It looks at forces that are either driving movement toward a goal (helping forces) or blocking movement toward a goal (hindering forces). The principle, developed by Kurt Lewin, is a significant contribution to the fields of social science, psychology, social psychology, organizational development, process management, and change management.[6]

[edit] Action research
Lewin, then a professor at MIT, first coined the term ―action research‖ in about 1944, and it appears in his 1946 paper ―Action Research and Minority Problems‖.[7] In that paper, he described action research as ―a comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action‖ that uses ―a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of a circle of planning, action, and fact-finding about the result of the action‖.

[edit] Leadership climates
Lewin often characterized organizational management styles and cultures in terms of leadership climates defined by [8] (1) authoritarian, (2) democratic and (3) laissez-faire work environments. Authoritarian environments are characterized where the leader determines policy with techniques and steps for work tasks dictated by the leader in the division of labor. The leader is not necessarily hostile but is aloof from participation in work and commonly offers personal praise and criticism for the work done. Democratic climates are characterized where policy is

determined through collective processes with decisions assisted by the leader. Before accomplishing tasks, perspectives are gained from group discussion and technical advice from a leader. Members are given choices and collectively decide the division of labor. Praise and criticism in such an environment are objective, fact minded and given by a group member without necessarily having participated extensively in the actual work. Laissez faire environments give freedom to the group for policy determination without any participation from the leader. The leader remains uninvolved in work decisions unless asked, does not participate in the division of labor, and very infrequently gives praise. (Miner 2005: 39-40) [9]

[edit] Change process
An early model of change developed by Lewin described change as a three-stage process. The first stage he called "unfreezing". It involved overcoming inertia and dismantling the existing "mind set". Defense mechanisms have to be bypassed. In the second stage the change occurs. This is typically a period of confusion and transition. We are aware that the old ways are being challenged but we do not have a clear picture as to what we are replacing them with yet. The third and final stage he called "freezing". The new mindset is crystallizing and one's comfort level is returning to previous levels. This is often misquoted as "refreezing" (see Lewin K (1947) Frontiers in Group Dynamics).

[edit] Lewin's equation
The Lewin's Equation, B=ƒ(P,E), is a psychological equation of behavior developed by Kurt Lewin. It states that behavior is a function of the person and their environment [10]. The equation is the psychologist's most well known formula in social psychology, of which Lewin was a modern pioneer. When first presented in Lewin's book Principles of Topological Psychology, published in 1936, it contradicted most popular theories in that it gave importance to a person's momentary situation in understanding his or her behavior, rather than relying entirely on the past. [

Gestalt psychology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Gestalt Psychology) Jump to: navigation, search This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2007)

This article needs attention from an expert on the subject. See the talk page for details. WikiProject Psychology or the Psychology Portal may be able to help recruit an expert. (October
2009)

Psychology

History of psychology Branches of psychology

Basic science
Abnormal · Behavioral neuroscience Cognitive · Developmental Experimental · Evolutionary Mathematical · Neuropsychology Personality · Positive Psychophysics · Social Transpersonal

Applied science
Clinical · Educational Forensic · Health Industrial and organizational Occupational health School · Sport

Lists
Outline · Publications Topics · Therapies

Portal

v•d•e

Gestalt psychology or gestaltism (German: Gestalt - "essence or shape of an entity's complete form") of the Berlin School is a theory of mind and brain positing that the operational principle of the brain is holistic, parallel, and analog, with self-organizing tendencies. The Gestalt effect refers to the form-forming capability of our senses, particularly with respect to the visual recognition of figures and whole forms instead of just a collection of simple lines and curves. In psychology, gestaltism is often opposed to structuralism and Wundt. The phrase "The whole is greater than the sum of the parts" is often used when explaining Gestalt theory. (See History of Psychology by David Hothersall (2004), chapter seven, for complete history)

Contents
[hide]
  

      

1 Origins 2 Theoretical framework and methodology 3 Properties o 3.1 Emergence o 3.2 Reification o 3.3 Multistability o 3.4 Invariance 4 Prägnanz 5 Gestalt views in psychology 6 Applications in computer science 7 Criticism 8 See also 9 References 10 External links

[edit] Origins
The concept of Gestalt was first introduced in contemporary philosophy and psychology by Christian von Ehrenfels (a member of the School of Brentano). The idea of Gestalt has its roots in theories by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Immanuel Kant, and Ernst Mach. Max Wertheimer's unique contribution was to insist that the "Gestalt" is perceptually primary, defining the parts of which it was composed, rather than being a secondary quality that emerges from those parts, as von Ehrenfels's earlier Gestalt-Qualität had been. Both von Ehrenfels and Edmund Husserl seem to have been inspired by Mach's work Beiträge zur Analyse der Empfindungen (Contributions to the Analysis of the Sensations, 1886), in formulating their very similar concepts of Gestalt and Figural Moment, respectively. Early 20th century theorists, such as Kurt Koffka, Max Wertheimer, and Wolfgang Köhler (students of Carl Stumpf) saw objects as perceived within an environment according to all of their elements taken together as a global construct. This 'gestalt' or 'whole form' approach sought

to define principles of perception -- seemingly innate mental laws which determined the way in which objects were perceived. These laws took several forms, such as the grouping of similar, or proximate, objects together, within this global process. Although Gestalt has been criticized for being merely descriptive, it has formed the basis of much further research into the perception of patterns and objects ( Carlson et al. 2000), and of research into behavior, thinking, problem solving and psychopathology. It should also be emphasized that Gestalt psychology is distinct from Gestalt psychotherapy. One has little to do with the other.

[edit] Theoretical framework and methodology
This article does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2009)

The investigations developed at the beginning of the 20th century, based on traditional scientific methodology, divided the object of study into a set of elements that could be analyzed separately with the objective of reducing the complexity of this object. Contrary to this methodology, the school of Gestalt practiced a series of theoretical and methodological principles that attempted to redefine the approach to psychological research. The theoretical principles are the following:




Principle of Totality - The conscious experience must be considered globally (by taking into account all the physical and mental aspects of the individual simultaneously) because the nature of the mind demands that each component be considered as part of a system of dynamic relationships. Principle of psychophysical isomorphism - A correlation exists between conscious experience and cerebral activity.

Based on the principles above the following methodological principles are defined:




Phenomenon Experimental Analysis - In relation to the Totality Principle any psychological research should take as a starting point phenomena and not be solely focused on sensory qualities. Biotic Experiment - The School of Gestalt established a need to conduct real experiments which sharply contrasted with and opposed classic laboratory experiments. This signified experimenting in natural situations, developed in real conditions, in which it would be possible to reproduce, with higher fidelity, what would be habitual for a subject.

[edit] Properties
The key principles of Gestalt systems are emergence, reification, multistability and invariance.[1]

[edit] Emergence

Emergence

Emergence is the process of complex pattern formation from simpler rules. It demonstrated by the perception of the Dog Picture, which depicts a Dalmatian dog sniffing the ground in the shade of overhanging trees. The dog is not recognized by first identifying its parts (feet, ears, nose, tail, etc.), and then inferring the dog from those component parts. Instead, the dog is perceived as a whole, all at once. However, this is a description of what occurs in vision and not an explanation. Gestalt theory does not explain how the percept of a dog emerges.

[edit] Reification

Reification

Reification is the constructive or generative aspect of perception, by which the experienced percept contains more explicit spatial information than the sensory stimulus on which it is based. For instance, a triangle will be perceived in picture A, although no triangle has actually been drawn. In pictures B and D the eye will recognize disparate shapes as "belonging" to a single shape, in C a complete three-dimensional shape is seen, where in actuality no such thing is drawn. Reification can be explained by progress in the study of illusory contours, which are treated by the visual system as "real" contours. See also: Reification (fallacy)

[edit] Multistability

the Necker Cube and the Rubin vase, two examples of multistability

Multistability (or multistable perception) is the tendency of ambiguous perceptual experiences to pop back and forth unstably between two or more alternative interpretations. This is seen for example in the Necker cube, and in Rubin's Figure/Vase illusion shown here. Other examples include the 'three-pronged widget' and artist M. C. Escher's artwork and the appearance of flashing marquee lights moving first one direction and then suddenly the other. Again, Gestalt does not explain how images appear multistable, only that they do.

[edit] Invariance

Invariance

Invariance is the property of perception whereby simple geometrical objects are recognized independent of rotation, translation, and scale; as well as several other variations such as elastic deformations, different lighting, and different component features. For example, the objects in A in the figure are all immediately recognized as the same basic shape, which are immediately distinguishable from the forms in B. They are even recognized despite perspective and elastic deformations as in C, and when depicted using different graphic elements as in D. Computational theories of vision, such as those by David Marr, have had more success in explaining how objects are classified. Emergence, reification, multistability, and invariance are not necessarily separable modules to be modeled individually, but they could be different aspects of a single unified dynamic mechanism.[citation needed]

[edit] Prägnanz
The fundamental principle of gestalt perception is the law of prägnanz (German for pithiness) which says that we tend to order our experience in a manner that is regular, orderly, symmetric, and simple. Gestalt psychologists attempt to discover refinements of the law of prägnanz, and this involves writing down laws which hypothetically allow us to predict the interpretation of sensation, what are often called "gestalt laws".[1] These include:

Law of Closure

Law of Similarity

Law of Proximity
    

Law of Closure — The mind may experience elements it does not perceive through sensation, in order to complete a regular figure (that is, to increase regularity). Law of Similarity — The mind groups similar elements into collective entities or totalities. This similarity might depend on relationships of form, color, size, or brightness. Law of Proximity — Spatial or temporal proximity of elements may induce the mind to perceive a collective or totality. Law of Symmetry (Figure ground relationships)— Symmetrical images are perceived collectively, even in spite of distance. Law of Continuity — The mind continues visual, auditory, and kinetic patterns.



Law of Common Fate — Elements with the same moving direction are perceived as a collective or unit.

[edit] Gestalt views in psychology
Gestalt psychologists find it is important to think of problems as a whole. Max Wertheimer considered thinking to happen in two ways: productive and reproductive.[1] Productive thinking- is solving a problem with insight. This is a quick insightful unplanned response to situations and environmental interaction. Reproductive thinking-is solving a problem with previous experiences and what is already known. (1945/1959). This is a very common thinking. For example, when a person is given several segments of information, he/she deliberately examines the relationships among its parts, analyzes their purpose, concept, and totality, he/she reaches the "aha!" moment, using what is already known. Understanding in this case happens intentionally by reproductive thinking. Other Gestalts psychologist Perkins believes insight deals with three processes: 1) Unconscious leap in thinking.[1]. 2) The increased amount of speed in mental processing. 3) The amount of short-circuiting which occurs in normal reasoning.[2] Other views going against the Gestalt psychology are: 1) Nothing-Special View 2) Neo-Gestalts View 3) The Three-Process View Gestalt laws continue to play an important role in current psychological research on vision. For example, the object-based attention hypothesis[3] states that elements in a visual scene are first grouped according to Gestalt principles; consequently, further attentional resources can be allocated to particular objects. Gestalt psychology should not be confused with the Gestalt therapy of Fritz Perls, which is only peripherally linked to Gestalt psychology. A strictly Gestalt psychology-based therapeutic method is Gestalt Theoretical Psychotherapy, developed by the German Gestalt psychologist and psychotherapist Hans-Jürgen Walter.

[edit] Applications in computer science
The Gestalt laws are used in user interface design. The laws of similarity and proximity can, for example, be used as guides for placing radio buttons. They may also be used in designing computers and software for more intuitive human use. Examples include the design and layout of a desktop's shortcuts in rows and columns. Gestalt psychology also has applications in computer

vision for trying to make computers "see" the same things as humans do.[citation needed] http://www.interaction-design.org/encyclopedia/gestalt_principles_of_form_perception.html

[edit] Criticism
In some scholarly communities, such as cognitive psychology and computational neuroscience, Gestalt theories of perception are criticized for being descriptive rather than explanatory in nature. For this reason, they are viewed by some as redundant or uninformative. For example, Bruce, Green & Georgeson[4] conclude the following regarding Gestalt theory's influence on the study of visual perception:
"The physiological theory of the Gestaltists has fallen by the wayside, leaving us with a set of descriptive principles, but without a model of perceptual processing. Indeed, some of their "laws" of perceptual organisation today sound vague and inadequate. What is meant by a "good" or "simple" shape, for example?"

John B. Watson
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

John Broadus Watson (January 9, 1878 – September 25, 1958) was an American psychologist who established the psychological school of behaviorism, after doing research on animal behavior. He also conducted the controversial "Little Albert" experiment. Later he went on from psychology to become a popular author on child-rearing, and an acclaimed contributor to the advertising industry.

Contents
[hide]
             

1 Early life 2 Dissertation on animal behavior 3 Behaviorism 4 "Twelve infants" quote 5 Views on child-rearing 6 Psychological Care of Infant and Child and Criticism to it 7 "Little Albert" experiment (1920) 8 Affair with Rosalie Rayner 9 Advertising 10 Later life 11 See also 12 References 13 Further reading 14 External links

[edit] Early life
Watson grew up in Longview, Texas and attended Furman University there. A precocious student, he entered college at the age of 16 (he became a member of the Kappa Alpha Order) and left with a masters degree aged 21. He spent a year as a principal for grade school, then entered the University of Chicago to study philosophy with John Dewey on the recommendation of Furman professor, Gordon Moore, who was a major proponent of the view that life and the behavior of living organisms could be explained entirely by chemistry and physics without recourse to a supposed "vital force". Accordingly, Loeb taught that all behavior was dictated by instinct and learned responses to stimuli. The combined influence of Dewey, Angell, Donaldson and Jacques Loeb led Watson to develop a highly descriptive, objective approach to the analysis of behavior that he would later call "behaviorism." Watson's behaviorism is typically considered[by whom?] a historical descendent of British empiricism, and particularly of the views of John Locke. However, Watson said nothing substantive about these things. Rather, his philosophy of science stems from{[citation needed] the history of experimental physiology through the influence of Loeb. The reflex studies of Ivan Mikhailovich Sechenov (1829–1905) and Vladimir Bekhterev (1857–1927) were particularly influential. Later, Watson became interested in the work of Ivan Pavlov (1849–1936), and eventually included a highly simplified version of Pavlov's principles in his popular works.

[edit] Dissertation on animal behavior
Watson graduated from the University of Chicago in 1903. His dissertation "Animal Education: An Experimental Study on the Psychical Development of the White Rat, Correlated with the Growth of its Nervous System.[citation needed] "Animal Education" described the relationship

between brain myelinization and learning ability in rats at different ages. Watson showed that the degree of myelinization was largely unrelated to learning ability. Watson stayed at the University of Chicago for several years doing research on the relationship between sensory input and learning and bird behavior.

[edit] Behaviorism
In 1913, Watson published the article "Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It" — sometimes called "The Behaviorist Manifesto". In this article, Watson outlined the major features of his new philosophy of psychology, called "behaviorism". The first paragraph of the article concisely described Watson's behaviorist position:
Psychology as the behaviorist views it is a purely objective experimental branch of natural science. Its theoretical goal is the prediction and control of behavior. Introspection forms no essential part of its methods, nor is the scientific value of its data dependent upon the readiness with which they lend themselves to interpretation in terms of consciousness. The behaviorist, in his efforts to get a unitary scheme of animal response, recognizes no dividing line between man and brute. The behavior of man, with all of its refinement and complexity, forms only a part of the behaviorist's total scheme of investigation.

The "manifesto" notably lacks references to specific principles of behavior. In 1913, Watson viewed Ivan Pavlov's conditioned reflex as primarily a physiological mechanism controlling glandular secretions. He had already rejected Edward L. Thorndike's "Law of Effect" (a precursor to B. F. Skinner's principle of reinforcement) due to what Watson believed were unnecessary subjective elements. It was not until 1916 that Watson would recognize the more general significance of Pavlov's formulation and make it the subject of his presidential address to the American Psychological Association. The lack of a specific mechanism of behavior caused Watson's colleagues to dismiss "Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It" as philosophical speculation without much foundation. The article only became well-known to psychologists generally after it started to be widely cited in introductory psychology textbooks in the 1950s. The article is also notable for its strong defense of the objective scientific status of applied psychology, which at the time was considered to be much inferior to the established structuralist experimental psychology. Watson also introduced his theory of thinking as consisting of "subvocal speech" in the article. However, its addition was more of an afterthought as it appeared in a series of extended footnotes, not in the body of the article itself. Watson seems to have added the footnote because another article on subvocal speech by Anna Wyczoikowska was to appear in the same issue of the "Psychological Review." The theory of thinking as subvocal speech was not original to Watson. About 15 years earlier, H. S. Curtis had attempted to measure movements of the larynx during thinking. With his "behaviorism", Watson put the emphasis on external behavior of people and their reactions on given situations, rather than the internal, mental state of those people. In his opinion, the analysis of behaviors and reactions was the only objective method to get insight in the human actions. This outlook, combined with the complementary ideas of determinism, evolutionary continuism, and empiricism has contributed to what is now called radical behaviorism.

[edit] "Twelve infants" quote

“

Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I'll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select – doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors. I am going beyond my facts and I admit it, but so have the advocates of the contrary and they have been doing it for many thousands of years. [Behaviorism (1930), p. 82]

”

The quote often appears with the last sentence omitted, making Watson's position appear more radical than it actually was. Watson had, in fact, done extensive ethological studies of the instinctive behavior of animals early in his career, particularly sea birds. Nevertheless, Watson strongly sided with nurture in the nature versus nurture discussion.

[edit] Views on child-rearing
Although he wrote extensively on child-rearing in many popular magazines and in a book, Psychological Care of Infant and Child (1928), Watson later regretted having written in the area, saying that "he did not know enough" to do a good job. Watson's advice to treat children with respect, but with relative emotional detachment, has been strongly criticized.[by whom?] However, this perspective was not unique to Watson.[citation needed] It is also associated with psychoanalytic thinkers who worried that too much emotional attachment in childhood would lead to overly dependent adults.[citation needed] (Watson's borrowing from Sigmund Freud and other early psychoanalysts remains an unexamined aspect of his behaviorism.) Modern critics[who?] do not commonly mention that Watson warned strongly against the use of spanking and other corporal punishment.

[edit] Psychological Care of Infant and Child and Criticism to it
Watson wrote the book Psychological Care of Infant and Child in 1928, with help from his mistress, turned wife, Rosalie Rayner. Critics then determined that the ideas mainly stemmed from Watson‘s beliefs because Rosalie later entitled a self-penned article I am a Mother of Behaviorist Sons[1]. In the book, Watson explained that behaviorists were starting to believe psychological care and analysis was required for infants and children[2]. He deemed his slogan to be not more babies but better brought up babies. Watson argued for the nurture side of the nature-nurture debate, claiming that the world would benefit from extinguishing pregnancies for twenty years while enough data was gathered to ensure an efficient child-rearing process. J.M. O‘Donnell (1985) wrote The Origins of Behaviorism, where he deemed Watson‘s views as radical calculations[3]. O‘Donnell‘s discontent stemmed partly from Watsons‘ description of a happy child, including that the child only cry when in physical pain, can occupy himself through his problem-solving abilities, and that the child stray from asking questions[4].

The 20th century was referred to as The Century of the Child, coined by writer Ellen Key. This movement led Watson to his focus on the study of children. This century marked the formation of qualitative distinctions between children and adults[5]. All of Watson‘s exclamations were due to his belief that children should be treated as a young adult. In his book, he warns against the inevitable dangers of a mother providing too much love and affection. Watson explains that love, along with everything else as the behaviorist saw the world, is conditioned. Watson supports his warnings by mentioning invalidism, saying that society does not overly comfort children as they become young adults in the real world, so parents should not set up these unrealistic expectations. Writer Suzanne Houk, Psychological Care of Infant and Child: A Reflection of its Author and his Times, critiques Watson‘s views, analyzing his hope for a businesslike and casual relationship between a mother and her child[6]. Critics wondered whether limiting kissing to when saying goodnight was really a necessary precaution. Watson also warned to avoid letting the infant sit on a parents‘ lap[7]. Further emphasizing nurture, Watson said that nothing is instinctual; rather everything is built into a child through the interaction with their environment. Parents therefore hold complete responsibility since they choose what environment to allow their child to develop in[8]. Laura E. Berk, author of Infants and Children: Prenatal Through Middle Childhood, examined the roots of the beliefs Watson came to honor. Berk says that the experiment with Little Albert inspired Watson‘s emphasis on environmental factors. Little Albert did not fear the rat and white rabbit until he was conditioned to do so. From this experiment, Watson concluded that parents can shape a child‘s behavior and development simply by a scheming control of all stimulus-response associations[9]. Watson researched many topics in his career, but child-rearing became his most prized interest. His book was extremely popular and many critics were surprised to see his contemporaries come to accept his views. The book sold 100,000 copies after just a few months of release[10]. A 1925 New York Times article even rendered Watson a groundbreaking scientist in his new focus in the field of child psychology. Other critics were more wary of Watson‘s new interest and success in child psychology. R. Dale Nance (1970) worried that Watson‘s personal indiscretions and difficult upbringings could have affected his views in his book. He was raised on a poor farm in South Carolina and had various family troubles, including abandonment by his father[11]. Suzanne Houk shared similar concerns. She mentions in her article that Watson only shifted his focus to child-rearing when he was fired from John Hopkins University due to his affair with Rosalie Rayner[12]. Watson‘s emphasis on child development was becoming a new phenomenon and influenced some of his successors, but there were psychologists before him that delved into the field as well. G. Stanley Hall became very well known for his 1904 book Adolescence. G. Stanley Hall‘s beliefs differed from behaviorist Watson, believing that heredity and genetically predetermined factors shaped most of one‘s behavior, especially during childhood. His most famous concept, Storm and Stress Theory, normalized adolescents‘ tendency to act out with conflicting mood swings[13]. Whether Watson‘s views were controversially radical or not, they garnered a lot of attention and were accepted as valuable in his time.

[edit] "Little Albert" experiment (1920)
Main article: Little Albert experiment

One might consider the experiment Watson and his assistant Rosalie Rayner carried out to be one of the most controversial in psychology in 1920. It has become immortalized in introductory psychology textbooks as the Little Albert experiment. The goal of the experiment was to show how principles of, at the time recently discovered, classical conditioning could be applied to condition fear of a white rat into "Little Albert", an 11-month-old boy. As the story of Little Albert has made the rounds, inaccuracies and inconsistencies have crept in, some of them even due to Watson himself; see Harris for an analysis. The controversy about this experiment is actually a modern development. There seemed[original research?] to be little concern about it in Watson's time. Dewsbury reports that Watson received greater criticism from early animal rights groups over some of his experiments with rats, particularly a 1907 study, "Kinaesthetic and Organic Sensations: Their Role in the Reactions of the White Rat to the Maze".

[edit] Affair with Rosalie Rayner
In October 1920 Johns Hopkins University asked Watson to leave his faculty position there because of publicity surrounding the affair he was having with his graduate student-assistant Rosalie Rayner and because of his refusal to send her abroad until things had quieted down. At the time, Watson was married to Mary Ickes (sister of Harold L. Ickes, who would later become Secretary of the Interior to US President Franklin D. Roosevelt). Watson's affair had become front-page news during divorce proceedings, and Baltimore newspapers published excerpts from some of Watson's love-letters to Rayner. Mary had feigned illness during a dinner party involving the Rayner and Ickes families so that she could have unfettered access to Rayner's bedroom. A large body of rumors circulated about Watson's dismissal from Johns Hopkins University, particularly that Watson was fired for conducting research on the human sexual response with Rayner. No evidence for these rumors has publicly surfaced. The stories can be directly traced to fanciful, anachronistic stories about Watson included by the late University of Michigan psychologist James McConnell in several editions of his Understanding Human Behavior textbook, and his Worms and Things newsletter. Watson and Rayner later[when?] married.

[edit] Advertising
Thanks to contacts provided by an academic colleague, Watson subsequently began working for U.S. advertising agency J. Walter Thompson. He learned the advertising business' many facets at ground level, including a stint working as a shoe salesman in an upscale department store. Despite this modest start, in less than two years Watson had risen to a vice-presidency at Thompson. His executive's salary, plus bonuses from various successful ad campaigns, resulted in an income many times higher than his academic salary. Watson headed a number of highprofile advertising campaigns, particularly for Ponds cold cream and other personal-care products. He has been widely but erroneously credited[by whom?] with re-introducing the

"testimonial" advertisement after the tool had fallen out of favor (due to its association with ineffective and dangerous patent medicines). However, testimonial advertisements had been in use for years before Watson entered advertising. Watson stated that he was not making original contributions, but was just doing what was normal practice in advertising.

[edit] Later life
Watson stopped writing for popular audiences in 1936, and retired from advertising at about age 65[citation needed]. He is credited[by whom?] with popularizing the "coffee break" during an ad campaign for Maxwell House coffee. Rosalie Rayner died in 1935 at age 36. Watson lived on a farm with a female companion for the last years of his life. Rumored[by whom?] to be a heavy drinker, Watson actually gave up alcohol on the advice of his physician and enjoyed good health well into old age. He died in 1958 at age 80, shortly after receiving a citation from the American Psychological Association for his contributions to psychology. Historian John Burnham interviewed Watson late in life, and portrayed him as a man of (still) strong opinions and some bitterness towards his detractors. Except for a set of reprints of his academic works, Watson burned his very large collection of letters and personal papers, thus depriving historians of a valuable resource for understanding the early history of behaviorism and of Watson himself.

Ellis Paul Torrance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Ellis Paul Torrance (October 8, 1915 - July 12, 2003) was an American psychologist from Milledgeville, Georgia. After completing his undergraduate degree at Mercer University, he went on to complete a Master's degree at the University of Minnesota, and then a doctorate from the University of Michigan. His teaching career spanned from 1957 to 1984, first at the University of Minnesota and then later the University of Georgia, where he became professor of Educational Psychology in 1966. In 1984, the University of Georgia established the Torrance Center for Creativity and Talent Development.

Contents
[hide]
 

    

1 Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT) 2 Threshold Hypothesis o 2.1 Unusual Uses o 2.2 Verbal tasks using nonverbal stimuli o 2.3 Non-verbal tasks 3 See also 4 Biography 5 Bibliography 6 References 7 External links

[edit] Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT)
Torrance is best known for his research in creativity. In 1966 he developed a benchmark method for quantifying creativity with his Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Building on J.P. Guilford's work, they involved simple tests of divergent thinking and other problem-solving skills, which were scored on four scales:
   

Fluency. The total number of interpretable, meaningful, and relevant ideas generated in response to the stimulus. Flexibility. The number of different categories of relevant responses. Originality. The statistical rarity of the responses. Elaboration. The amount of detail in the responses.

The third edition of the TTCT in 1984 eliminated the Flexibility scale [1]

[edit] Threshold Hypothesis
There has been debate in the psychological literature about whether intelligence and creativity are part of the same process (the conjoint hypothesis) or represent distinct mental processes (the disjoint hypothesis). Evidence from attempts to look at correlations between intelligence and creativity from the 1950s onwards, by authors such as Barron, Guilford or Wallach and Kogan, regularly suggested that correlations between these concepts were low enough to justify treating them as distinct concepts. Some researchers believe that creativity is the outcome of the same cognitive processes as intelligence, and is only judged as creativity in terms of its consequences, i.e., when the outcome of cognitive processes happens to produce something novel, a view which Perkins has termed the "nothing special" hypothesis.

A very popular model is what has come to be known as "the threshold hypothesis", proposed by Ellis Paul Torrance, which holds that, in a general sample, there will be a positive correlation between low creativity and intelligence scores, but a correlation will not be found with higher scores. Research into the threshold hypothesis, however, has produced mixed results ranging from enthusiastic support to refutation and rejection. Torrance (1974) developed streamlined scoring. He incorporated five norm-referenced measures and thirteen criterion-referenced measures in his conceptual framework of creativity. The five norm-referenced measures include: fluency, originality, abstractness of titles, elaboration and resistance to premature closure, The criterion-referenced measures include: emotional expressiveness, story-telling articulateness, movement or actions, expressiveness of titles, syntheses of incomplete figures, synthesis of lines, of circles, unusual visualization, extending or breaking boundaries, humor, richness of imagery, colourfulness of imagery, and fantasy. According to Arasteh and Arasteh (1976) the most systematic assessment of creativity in elementary school children has been conducted by Torrance and his associates (1960a,1960b, 1960c, 1961,1962,1962a,1963a 1964), who have developed and administered the Minnesota Tests of Creative Thinking (MTCT) to several thousands of school children. Although they have used many of Guilfords concepts in their test construction, the Minnesota group, in contrast to Guilford, has devised tasks which can be scored for several factors, involving both verbal and non-verbal aspects and relying on senses other than vision. These tests represent a fairly sharp departure from the factor type tests developed by Guilford and his associates (Guilford, Merrifield and Cox, 1961; Merrifield, Guilford and Gershan,1963), and they also differ from the battery developed by Wallach and Kogan (1965) , which contains measures representying creative tendencies that are similar in nature (Torrance, 1968). Torrance (1962) grouped the different subtests of the Minnesota Tests of Creative Thinking (MTCT) into three categories. i Verbal tasks using verbal stimuli ii Verbal tasks using non-verbal stimuli iii Non-verbal tasks

A brief description of the tasks used by Torrance is given below:

[edit] Unusual Uses
The unusual uses tasks using verbal stimuli are direct modifications of Guilford‘s Brick uses test. After preliminary tryouts, Torrance (1962) decided to substitute tin cans and books for bricks. It was believed the children would be able to handle tin cans and books more easily since both are more available to children than bricks. Impossibilities task: It was used originally by Guilford and his associates (1951) as a measure of fluency involving complex restrictions and large potential. In a course in personality development and mental hygiene, Torrance has experimented with a number of modifications of the basic task, making the restrictions more specific. In this task the subjects are asked to list as many impossibilities as they can. Consequences task: The consequences task was also used originally by Guilford and his associates (1951). Torrance has made several modifications in adapting it. He chose three improbable situations and the children were required to list out their consequences. Just suppose task: It is an adaptation of the consequences type of test designed to elicit a higher degree of spontaneity and to be more effective with children. As in the consequence task, the subject is confronted with an improbable situation and asked to predict the possible outcomes from the introduction of a new or unknown variable. Situations task: The situation task was modeled after Guilford‘s (1951) test designed to assess the ability to see what needs to be done. Subjects were given three common problems and asked to think of as many solutions to these problems as they can. For example, if all schools were abolished, what would you do to try to become educated? Common problems task: This task is an adoption of Guilford‘s (1951) Test designed to assess the ability to see defects, needs and deficiencies and found to be one of the test of the factors termed sensitivity to problems. Subjects are instructed that they will be given common situations and that they will be asked to think of as many problems as they can that may arise in connection with these situations. For example, doing homework while going to school in the morning. Improvement task:

This test was adopted from Guilford‘s (1952) apparatus test which was designed to assess ability to see defects and all aspects of sensitivity to problems. In this task the subjects are given a list of common objects and are asked to suggest as many ways as they can to improve each object. They are asked not to bother about whether or not it is possible to implement the change thought of. Mother- Hubbard problem: This task was conceived as an adoption of the situations task for oral administration in the primary grades and also useful for older groups. This test has stimulated a number of ideas concerning factors which inhibit the development of ideas. Imaginative stories task: In this task the child is told to write the most interesting and exciting story he can think of. Topics are suggested (e.g., the dog that did not bark); or the child may use his own ideas. Cow jumping problems: The Cow jumping problem is a companion task for the Mother- Hubbard problem and has been administered to the same groups under the same conditions and scored according to the similar procedures. The task is to think of all possible things which might have happened when the cow jumped over the moon.

[edit] Verbal tasks using nonverbal stimuli
Ask and guess task: The ask and guess task requires the individual first to ask questions about a picture – questions which cannot be answered by just looking at the picture. Next he is asked to make guesses or formulate hypotheses about the possible causes of the event depicted, and then their consequences both immediate and remote. Product improvement task: In this task common toys are used and children are asked to think of as many improvements as they can which would make the toy ‗more fun to play with‘. Subjects are then asked to think of unusual uses of these toys other than 'something to play with‘. Unusual uses task: In this task, along with the product improvement task another task (unusual uses) is used. The child is asked to think of the cleverest, most interesting and most unusual uses of the given toy, other than as a plaything. These uses could be for the toy as it is, or for the toy as changed.

[edit] Non-verbal tasks

(i) Incomplete figures task: It is an adaptation of the ‗Drawing completion test‘ developed by Kate Franck and used by Barron (1958). On an ordinary white paper an area of fifty four square inches is divided into six squares each containing a different stimulus figure. The subjects are asked to sketch some novel objects or design by adding as many lines as they can to the six figures. (ii) Picture construction task or shapes task: In this task the children are given shape of a triangle or a jelly bean and a sheet of white paper. The children are asked to think of a picture in which the given shape is an integral part. They should paste it where over they want on the white sheet and add lines with pencil to make any novel picture. They have to think of a name for the picture and write it at the bottom. (iii) Circles and squares task: It was originally designed as a nonverbal test of ideational fluency and flexibility, then modified in a such a way as to stress originality and elaboration. Two printed forms are used in the test. In one form, the subject is confronted with a page of forty two circles and asked to sketch objects or pictures which have circles as a major part. In the alternate form, squares are used instead of circles. (iv) Creative design task: Hendrickson has designed it which seems to be promising, but scorning procedures are being tested but have not been perfected yet. The materials consist of circles and strips of various sizes and colours, a four page booklet, scissors and glue. Subjects are instructed to construct pictures or designs, making use of all of the coloured circles and strips with a thirty minute time limit. Subjects may use one, two, three, or four pages; alter the circles and strips or use them as they are; add other symbols with pencil or crayon.

Abraham Maslow
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (December 2009)

Abraham Maslow

Born

April 1, 1908 Brooklyn, New York

Died

June 8, 1970 (aged 62) California

Nationality

American

Fields

Psychology

Cornell University Institutions Brooklyn College Brandeis University Alma mater

University of Wisconsin–Madison

Doctoral advisor

Harry Harlow

Known for

Hierarchy of Needs

Influences

Alfred Adler, Kurt Goldstein, Henry Murray

Influenced

Douglas McGregor, Colin Wilson

Cheyenne Summer Marani (April 1, 1908 – June 8, 1970) was an American psychologist. He is noted for his conceptualization of a "hierarchy of human needs", and is considered the founder of humanistic psychology.[1]

Contents
[hide]
       

1 Biography 2 Humanistic theories of self actualization 3 Hierarchy of needs 4 Writings 5 See also 6 References 7 Further reading 8 External links

[edit] Biography
Born and raised in Brooklyn, New York, Maslow was the oldest of seven children. His parents were uneducated Jewish immigrants from Russia. He was slow and tidy, and remembered his childhood as lonely and rather unhappy, because, as he said, "I was the little Jewish boy in the non-Jewish neighborhood. It was a little like being the first Negro enrolled in the all-white school. I was isolated and unhappy. I grew up in libraries and among books, without friends."[2] He would pursue law, but he went to graduate school at the University of Wisconsin to study psychology. While there, he married his first cousin Bertha in December 1928, and found as his chief mentor, professor Harry Harlow. At Wisconsin he pursued an original line of research, investigating primate dominance behaviour and sexuality. He went on to further research at Columbia University, continuing similar studies; there he found another mentor in Alfred Adler, one of Sigmund Freud's early colleagues. From 1937 to 1951, Maslow was on the faculty of Brooklyn College. In New York he found two more mentors, anthropologist Ruth Benedict and Gestalt psychologist Max Wertheimer, whom he admired both professionally and personally. These two were so accomplished in both realms, and such "wonderful human beings" as well, that Maslow began taking notes about them and their behaviour. This would be the basis of his lifelong research and thinking about mental health and human potential. He wrote extensively on the subject, borrowing ideas from other psychologists but adding significantly to them, especially the concepts of a hierarchy of needs, metaneeds, self-actualizing persons, and peak experiences. Maslow became the leader of the humanistic school of psychology that emerged in the 1950s and 1960s, which he referred to as the "third force" -- beyond Freudian theory and behaviourism.

Maslow was a professor at Brandeis University from 1951 to 1969, and then became a resident fellow of the Laughlin Institute in California. He died of a heart attack on June 8, 1970. In 1967, the American Humanist Association named him Humanist of the Year.

[edit] Humanistic theories of self actualization
Many psychologists have made significant impacts on society's understanding of the world. Abraham Maslow was one of these; he brought a new face to the study of human behavior. He was inspired by great minds, and his own gift of thought created a unique concept of Humanistic Psychology. His family life and his experiences influenced the ideas that created a whole new form of psychology. After World War II, Maslow began to question the way psychologists had come to their conclusions, and though he didn‘t completely disagree, he had his own ideas on how to understand the Human mind. (The Developing Person through the Life Span, (1983) pg. 42) Humanistic Psychologists believe that every person has a strong desire to realize his or her full potential, to reach a level of Self-actualization. To prove that humans are not simply blindly reacting to situations, but trying to accomplish something greater, Maslow studied mentally healthy individuals instead of people with serious psychological issues. This enabled him to discover that people experience ―peak experiences", high points in life when the individual is in harmony with himself and his surroundings. Self-actualized people can have many peak experiences throughout a day while others have those experiences less frequently. (The Developing Person through the Life Span, (1983) pg. 43) A visual aid Maslow created to explain his theory, which he called the Hierarchy of Needs, is a pyramid depicting the levels of human needs, psychological and physical. When a human being ascends the steps of the pyramid he reaches self actualization. At the bottom of the pyramid are the ―Basic needs‖ of a human being, food and water and touch. The next level is ―Security and Stability.‖ These two steps are important to the physical survival of the person. Once individuals have basic nutrition, shelter and safety, they attempt to accomplish more. The third level of need is ―Love and Belonging,‖ which are psychological needs; when individuals have taken care of themselves physically, they are ready to share themselves with others. The fourth level is achieved when individuals feel comfortable with what they have accomplished. This is the ―Esteem‖ level, the level of success and status. The top of the pyramid, ―Self-actualization,‖ occurs when individuals reach a state of harmony and understanding. (The Developing Person through the Life Span, (1983) pg. 44) Maslow based his study on magazines (e.g. "hello" and "Look") and the writings of other psychologists, including Albert Einstein, as well as people he knew who clearly met the standard of self actualization. Maslow used Einstein's writings and accomplishments to exemplify the characteristics of the self actualized person. He realized that all the individuals he studied had similar personality traits. All were ―reality centered,‖ able to differentiate what was fraudulent from what was genuine. They were also ―problem centered,‖ meaning that they treated life‘s difficulties as problems that demanded solutions. These individuals also were comfortable being

alone and had healthy personal relationships. They had only a few close friends and family rather than a large number of shallow relationships.[3] One historical figure Maslow found to be helpful in his journey to understanding self actualization was Lao Tzu, The Father of Taoism. A tenant of Taoism is that people do not obtain personal meaning or pleasure by seeking material possessions. When Maslow introduced these ideas some weren't ready to understand them; others dismissed them as unscientific, a critique often leveled at Freud. Sometimes viewed as disagreeing with Freud and psychoanalytic theory, Maslow actually positioned his work as a vital complement to that of Freud. Maslow stated in his book, ―It is as if Freud supplied us the sick half of psychology and we must now fill it out with the healthy half.‖ (Toward a psychology of being, 1968) There are two faces of human nature—the sick and the healthy—so there should be two faces of psychology. Consequently, Maslow argued, the way in which essential needs are fulfilled is just as important as the needs themselves. Together, these define the human experience. To the extent a person finds cooperative social fulfillment, he establishes meaningful relationships with other people and the larger world. In other words, he establishes meaningful connections to an external reality—an essential component of self-actualization. In contrast, to the extent that vital needs find selfish and competitive fulfillment, a person acquires hostile emotions and limited external relationships—his awareness remains internal and limited. Benedict and Wertheimer were Maslow's models of self-actualization. From them he generalized that, among other characteristics, self-actualizing people tend to focus on problems outside themselves; have a clear sense of what is true and what is false; are spontaneous and creative; and are not bound too strictly by social conventions. Beyond the routine of needs fulfillment, Maslow envisioned moments of extraordinary experience, known as Peak experiences, which are profound moments of love, understanding, happiness, or rapture, during which a person feels more whole, alive, self-sufficient and yet a part of the world, more aware of truth, justice, harmony, goodness, and so on. Self-actualizing people have many such peak experiences. Maslow's thinking was surprisingly original—-most psychologists before him had been concerned with the abnormal and the ill. He wanted to know what constituted positive mental health. Humanistic psychology gave rise to several different therapies, all guided by the idea that people possess the inner resources for growth and healing and that the point of therapy is to help remove obstacles to individuals' achieving them. The most famous of these was client-centered therapy developed by Carl Rogers. Classical Adlerian Psychotherapy, based on the teachings of Alfred Adler, also encourages the optimal psychological development of the individual. Maslow's influence extended beyond psychology - his work on peak experiences is relevant to religious studies, while his work on management is applicable to transpersonal business studies.

[edit] Hierarchy of needs
Main article: Maslow's hierarchy of needs

Maslow has set up a hierarchy of five levels of basic needs. Beyond these needs, higher levels of needs exist. These include needs for understanding, aesthetic appreciation and purely spiritual needs. In the levels of the five basic needs, it is said that the person does not feel the second need until the demands of the first have been satisfied, nor the third until the second has been satisfied, and so on.

[edit] Writings
      

A Theory of Human Motivation (originally published in Psychological Review, 1943, Vol. 50 #4, pp. 370–396). Motivation and Personality (1st edition: 1954, 2nd edition: 1970, 3rd edition 1987) Religions, Values and Peak-experiences, Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Press, 1964. Eupsychian Management, 1965; republished as Maslow on Management, 1998 The Psychology of Science: A Reconnaissance, New York: Harper & Row, 1966; Chapel Hill: Maurice Bassett, 2002. Toward a Psychology of Being, (2nd edition, 1968) The Farther Reaches of Human Nature, 1971

Maslow's hierarchy of needs
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality. Discussion of this nomination can be found on the talk page. (February 2010) This article's use of external links may not follow Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive and inappropriate external links or by converting links into references. (December 2009)

An interpretation of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, represented as a pyramid with the more basic needs at the bottom.[1]

Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a theory in psychology, proposed by Abraham Maslow in his 1943 paper A Theory of Human Motivation.[2] Maslow subsequently extended the idea to include his observations of humans' innate curiosity. Maslow studied what he called exemplary people such as Albert Einstein, Jane Addams, Eleanor Roosevelt, and Frederick Douglass rather than mentally ill or neurotic people, writing that "the study of crippled, stunted, immature, and unhealthy specimens can yield only a cripple psychology and a cripple philosophy."[3] Maslow also studied the healthiest 1% of the college student population.[citation needed] Maslow's theory was fully expressed in his 1954 book Motivation and Personality.[4]

Contents
[hide]
 



     

1 Representations 2 Deficiency needs o 2.1 Physiological needs o 2.2 Safety needs o 2.3 Love and Belonging o 2.4 Esteem 3 Self-actualization o 3.1 Acceptance o 3.2 Problem Centering o 3.3 The need for privacy o 3.4 Morality and discrimination between means and ends o 3.5 Sense of Humor o 3.6 Imperfections o 3.7 The desires to Know and to Understand 4 Comparisons with Taoism and with Zen Buddhism 5 Marketing 6 Criticisms 7 See also 8 References 9 External links

[edit] Representations
Maslow's hierarchy of needs is often portrayed in the shape of a pyramid, with the largest and lowest levels of needs at the bottom, and the need for self-actualization at the top, also the needs for people.[1][5]

[edit] Deficiency needs
This section does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (October 2009)

The lower four layers of the pyramid contain what Maslow called "deficiency needs" or "dneeds": physiological (including sexuality), security of position, friendship and love, and esteem. With the exception of the lowest (physiological) needs, if these "deficiency needs" are not met, the body gives no physical indication but the individual feels anxious and tense.

[edit] Physiological needs

For the most part, physiological needs are obvious—they are the literal requirements for human survival. If these requirements are not met (with the exception of clothing and shelter), the human body simply cannot continue to function. Physiological needs include:
   

Breathing Food Sexual activity Homeostasis

Air, water, and food are metabolic requirements for survival in all animals, including humans. The intensity of the human sexual instinct is shaped more by sexual competition than maintaining a birth rate adequate to survival of the species.
The urge to have sex is so powerful that it can drain psychic energy away from other necessary goals. Therefore every culture has to invest great efforts in rechanneling and restraining it, and many complex social institutions exist only in order to regulate this urge. The saying that "love makes the world go round" is a polite reference to the fact that most of our deeds are impelled, either directly or indirectly, by sexual needs. —Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience

[edit] Safety needs
With their physical needs relatively satisfied, the individual's safety needs take precedence and dominate behavior. These needs have to do with people's yearning for a predictable, orderly world in which injustice and inconsistency are under control, the familiar frequent and the unfamiliar rare. In the world of work, these safety needs manifest themselves in such things as a preference for job security, grievance procedures for protecting the individual from unilateral authority, savings accounts, insurance policies, and the like. For most of human history many individuals have found their safety needs unmet, but as of 2009 "First World" societies provide most with their satisfaction, although the poor—both those who are poor as a class and those who are temporarily poor (university students would be an example)—must often still address these needs. Safety and Security needs include:
   

Personal security Financial security Health and well-being Safety net against accidents/illness and their adverse impacts

[edit] Love and Belonging

After physiological and safety needs are fulfilled, the third layer of human needs are social and involve feelings of belongingness. This aspect of Maslow's hierarchy involves emotionally-based relationships in general, such as:
  

Friendship Intimacy Family

Humans need to feel a sense of belonging and acceptance, whether it comes from a large social group, such as clubs, office culture, religious groups, professional organizations, sports teams, gangs ("Safety in numbers"), or small social connections (family members, intimate partners, mentors, close colleagues, confidants). They need to love and be loved (sexually and nonsexually) by others. In the absence of these elements, many people become susceptible to loneliness, social anxiety, and clinical depression. This need for belonging can often overcome the physiological and security needs, depending on the strength of the peer pressure; an anorexic, for example, may ignore the need to eat and the security of health for a feeling of control and belonging.

[edit] Esteem
All humans have a need to be respected and to have self-esteem and self-respect. Also known as the belonging need, esteem presents the normal human desire to be accepted and valued by others. People need to engage themselves to gain recognition and have an activity or activities that give the person a sense of contribution, to feel accepted and self-valued, be it in a profession or hobby. Imbalances at this level can result in low self-esteem or an inferiority complex. People with low self-esteem need respect from others. They may seek fame or glory, which again depends on others. Note, however, that many people with low self-esteem will not be able to improve their view of themselves simply by receiving fame, respect, and glory externally, but must first accept themselves internally. Psychological imbalances such as depression can also prevent one from obtaining self-esteem on both levels. Most people have a need for a stable self-respect and self-esteem. Maslow noted two versions of esteem needs, a lower one and a higher one. The lower one is the need for the respect of others, the need for status, recognition, fame, prestige, and attention. The higher one is the need for selfrespect, the need for strength, competence, mastery, self-confidence, independence and freedom. The latter one ranks higher because it rests more on inner competence won through experience. Deprivation of these needs can lead to an inferiority complex, weakness and helplessness. Maslow stresses the dangers associated with self-esteem based on fame and outer recognition instead of inner competence. He sees healthy self-respect as based on earned respect.

[edit] Self-actualization
―What a man can be, he must be‖[6]. This forms the basis of the perceived need for selfactualization. This level of need pertains to what a person's full potential is and realizing that potential. Maslow describes this desire as the desire to become more and more what one is, to

become everything that one is capable of becoming.[7]. This is a broad definition of the need for self-actualization, but when applied to individuals the need is specific. For example one individual may have the strong desire to become an ideal parent, in another it may be expressed athletically, and in another it may be expressed in painting, pictures, or inventions [8]. As mentioned before, in order to reach a clear understanding of this level of need one must first not only achieve the previous needs, physiological, safety, love, and esteem, but master these needs. Below are Maslow‘s descriptions of a self-actualized person‘s different needs and personality traits. Maslow was a professor of Dr. Wayne Dyer. Dyer suggests that Maslow taught him two ways of understanding self-actualization: 1) To be free of the good opinion of others. 2) To do things not simply for the outcome but because it's the reason you are here on earth.[9]

[edit] Acceptance
A self-actualized person ―can accept their own human nature in the stoic style, with all its shortcomings, with all its discrepancies from the ideal image without feeling real concern‖[10]. This means that a self-actualized person can clearly see human nature in all its good and evil without the distortion from false social norms. Maslow uses basic animal acceptance to prove this point. He states that self-actualized people tend to be good and lusty animals, hearty in their appetites and enjoying them mightily without regret or shame[10]. This involves a basic acceptance of nature and the way things are rather than trying to change things (for example: disgust with body functions or having a food aversion) to suit one's neuroses. This doesn‘t mean these people lack morals, guilt, shame, or anxiety; it means that they have the ability to remove all unnecessary forms of these processes.

[edit] Problem Centering
Most people, when thinking of problems in their life, focus on what affects them and their own problems and issues; this applies particularly to insecure people. Self-actualized persons focus not on themselves, but for some greater good. These people attack problems as a ―task they must do‖ and are concerned with ―the good of mankind in general‖.[11]

[edit] The need for privacy
The self-actualized can be solitary, with no human contact, and do no harm to themselves. In fact most of the self-actualized like ―solitude and privacy to a definitely greater degree than the average person"[12]. This gives them a level of detachment and an ability to remain calm and aloof even in situations where a personal problem or misfortune arises.

[edit] Morality and discrimination between means and ends
Maslow found that those who are self-actualized are very strong ethically. They have definite moral standards and do not experience the daily chaos of discerning right and wrong like most common people.[13] When dealing with means and ends they have the ability to clearly distinguish between the two. Also, Maslow found that they enjoy the means to an end: unlike

most people who just see it as a means and want to finish it as soon as possible. For example, driving to a destination annoys most people but a self-actualized person would enjoy the drive, the experience of travel. It is also in their ability to take the most trivial and mundane activities or objects and turn them into a game or perhaps a dance.[14]

[edit] Sense of Humor
Maslow discovered that most self-actualized people do not have the same sense of humor as the average person. For example: they do not laugh at hostile humor (hurting someone to laugh), superiority humor (laughing at someone‘s short comings), or authority-rebellion humor (laughing at unfunny, smutty jokes)[14]. A self-actualizing person‘s sense of humor relates to philosophy and finding humor in humans who forget their place in the universe or when they act foolishly. It doesn‘t attack people, rather states a message that happens to be funny. Selfactualized people don‘t merely tell jokes to laugh, but to send a message or educate; ―akin to parables or fables‖[14].

[edit] Imperfections
Discussion thus far may give the impression that a self-actualized person seems perfect and above any problems or shortcomings of the common man, but this is not true. Maslow even states it is a mistake to wish for perfection or expect perfection because it cannot be obtained[15]. The self-actualized person also has basic human imperfections such as wasteful habits, vanity, pride, partiality to their family and friends, and temper outbursts. Maslow also discovers that, in the view of normal society, self-actualizing persons can appear quite ruthless. He attributes this to their strength and this makes it possible to make cold calculated decisions based on logic. For example a man who found his life-long, trusted friend was actually dishonest would end the friendship abruptly without any regret or any other emotional pangs[16] (Maslow 229). This may seem brutal to the common man, but it just exemplifies the strength of the self-actualized person at work.

[edit] The desires to Know and to Understand
This becomes the need after a person achieves self-actualization. Maslow understands the quest for knowledge can be the common man simply filling a basic need or the self-actualized man reaching his pinnacle, but these are only parts to the quest for knowledge not the entire picture. The list below shows Maslow‘s examples of when the quest for knowledge is to satisfy merely a curiosity and not merely to fill a lesser need:
1. Something like human curiosity can easily be observed in the higher animals. The monkey will pick things apart, will poke his finger into holes, will explore in all sorts of situations where it is improbable that hunger, fear, sex, comfort status, etc., are involved. Harlow's experiments (174) have amply demonstrated this in an acceptably experimental way. 2. The history of mankind supplies us with a satisfactory number of instances in which man looked for facts and created explanations in the face of the greatest danger, even to life itself. There have been innumerable humbler Galileos.

3. Studies of psychologically healthy people indicate that they are, as a defining characteristic, attracted to the mysterious, to the unknown, to the chaotic, unorganized, and unexplained. This seems to be a Per se attractiveness; these areas are in themselves and of their own right interesting. The contrasting reaction to the well known is one of boredom. 4. It may be found valid to extrapolate from the psychopathological. The compulsive-obsessive neurotic (and neurotic in general), Goldstein's brain-injured soldiers, Maier's fixated rats (285), all show (at the clinical level of observation) a compulsive and anxious clinging to the familiar and a dread of the unfamiliar, the anarchic, the unexpected, the un-domesticated. On the other hand, there are some phenomena that may turn out to nullify this possibility. Among these are forced unconventionality, a chronic rebellion against any authority whatsoever, Bohemianism, the desire to shock and to startle, all of which may be found in certain neurotic individuals, as well as in those in the process of deacculturation. Perhaps also relevant here are the perseverative detoxifications described in Chapter 10, which are, behaviorally at any rate, an attraction to the dreadful, to the not understood and to the mysterious. 5. Probably there are true psychopathological effects when the cognitive needs are frustrated (295, 314). The following clinical impression are also pertinent. 6. I have seen a few cases in which it seemed clear to me that the pathology (boredom, loss of zest in life, self-dislike, general depression of the bodily functions, steady deterioration of the intellectual life, of tastes, etc.)8 were produced in intelligent people leading stupid lives in stupid jobs. I have at least one case in which the appropriate cognitive therapy (resuming parttime studies, getting a position that was more intellectually demanding, insight) removed the symptoms. I have seen many women, intelligent, prosperous, and unoccupied, slowly develop these same symptoms of intellectual inanition. Those who followed my recommendation to immerse themselves in something worthy of them showed improvement or cure often enough to impress me with the reality of the cognitive needs. In those countries in which access to the news, to information, and to the facts were cut off, and in those where official theories were profoundly contradicted by obvious facts, at least some people responded with generalized cynicism, mistrust of all values, suspicion even of the obvious, a profound disruption of ordinary interpersonal relationships, hopelessness, loss of morale, etc. Others seem to have responded in the more passive direction with dullness, submission, loss of. capacity, coarctation, and loss of initiative. 7. The needs to know and to understand are seen in late infancy and childhood, perhaps even more strongly than in adulthood. Furthermore this seems to be a spontaneous product of maturation rather than of learning, however defined. Children do not have to be taught to be curious. But they may be taught, as by institutionalization, not to be curious, e.g., Goldfarb (158). 8. Finally, the gratification of the cognitive impulses is subjectively satisfying and yields endexperience. Though this aspect of insight and understanding has been neglected in favor of achieved results, learning, etc., it nevertheless remains true that insight is usually a bright, happy, emotional spot in any person's life, perhaps even a high spot in the life span.[17] (Maslow 94-95)

Maslow also states that even though these are examples of how the quest for knowledge is separate from basic needs he warns that these ―two hierarchies are interrelated rather than sharply separated‖ (Maslow 97). This means that this level of need as well as the next and

highest level are not strict, separate, levels but closely related to others and this is possibly the reason that these two levels of need are left out of most textbooks.

[edit] Comparisons with Taoism and with Zen Buddhism
There are similarities between Maslow‘s hierarchy of needs and the final stages of Taoism and Zen Buddhism. The similarities deal directly with the higher needs, starting with the selfactualization need. Maslow regards self-actualizing people as largely free from the power of society‘s rules and making decisions based upon their beliefs not the accepted norms of society. In Taoism and Buddhism people free themselves of worldly possessions, thus freeing themselves from societal pressures and power. The self-actualized person most likely[original research?] will not have the same freedom from society as the Zen Buddhist or Taoist, but all three beliefs find their ―perfect‖ being as one who is independent and makes decisions based upon nature and not the external authority of society or man.[18]

[edit] Marketing
Courses in marketing teach Maslow's hierarchy as one of the first theories as a basis for understanding consumers' motives for action. Marketers have historically looked towards consumers' needs to define their actions in the market. If producers design products meeting consumer needs, consumers will more often choose those products over those of competitors. Whichever product better fulfils this void[which?] will be chosen more frequently, thus increasing sales. This makes the model relevant to transpersonal business studies.

[edit] Criticisms
While Maslow's theory was regarded[by whom?] as an improvement over previous theories[which?] of personality and motivation, it had its detractors. For example, in their extensive review of research based on Maslow's theory, Wahba and Bridgewell[19] found little evidence for the ranking of needs Maslow described, or even for the existence of a definite hierarchy at all. Chilean economist and philosopher Manfred Max-Neef has also argued fundamental human needs are non-hierarchical, and are ontologically universal and invariant in nature—part of the condition of being human; poverty, he argues, may result from any one of these needs being frustrated, denied or unfulfilled. The order in which the hierarchy is arranged (with self-actualisation as the highest order need) has been criticised as being ethnocentric by Geert Hofstede.[20] He was also heavily criticized for his limited testing of only 100 students

Alfred Adler
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2009)

Alfred Adler

Alfred Adler

Born

February 7, 1870 Rudolfsheim, Austria

Died

May 28, 1937 (aged 67) Aberdeen, Scotland

Residence

Austria

Nationality

Austrian

Ethnicity

Jewish

Occupation

Psychiatrist

Known for

Individual Psychology

Spouse(s)

Raissa Epstein

Part of a series of articles on

Psychoanalysis

Concepts[show]

Important figures[show]

Important works[show]

Schools of thought[show]

Psychology portal

v•d•e

Alfred Adler (February 7, 1870, Mariahilfer Straße 208, Rudolfsheim, Rudolfsheim-Fünfhaus[1] – May 28, 1937) was an Austrian medical doctor, psychologist and founder of the school of individual psychology. In collaboration with Sigmund Freud and a small group of Freud's

colleagues, Adler was among the co-founders of the psychoanalytic movement as a core member of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society. He was the first major figure to break away from psychoanalysis to form an independent school of psychotherapy and personality theory. This was after Freud declared Adler's ideas as too contrary, leading to an ultimatum to all members of the Society (which Freud had shepherded) to drop Adler or be expelled, disavowing the right to dissent (Makari, 2008). Following this split, Adler would come to have an enormous, independent effect on the disciplines of counseling and psychotherapy as they developed over the course of the 20th century (Ellenberger, 1970). He influenced notable figures in subsequent schools of psychotherapy such as Rollo May, Viktor Frankl, Abraham Maslow and Albert Ellis. His writings preceded, and were at times surprisingly consistent with, later neo-Freudian insights such as those evidenced in the works of Karen Horney, Harry Stack Sullivan and Erich Fromm. Adler emphasized the importance of equality in preventing various forms of psychopathology, and espoused the development of social interest and democratic family structures for raising children. His most famous concept is the inferiority complex which speaks to the problem of self-esteem and its negative effects on human health (e.g. sometimes producing a paradoxical superiority striving). His emphasis on power dynamics is rooted in the philosophy of Nietzsche. Adler argued for holism, viewing the individual holistically rather than reductively, the latter being the dominant lens for viewing human psychology. Adler was also among the first in psychology to argue in favor of feminism making the case that power dynamics between men and women (and associations with masculinity and femininity) are crucial to understanding human psychology (Connell, 1995). Adler is considered, along with Freud and Jung, to be one of the three founding figures of depth psychology, which emphasizes the unconscious and psychodynamics (Ellenberger, 1970; Ehrenwald, 1991).

Contents
[hide]
   

      

1 Early life 2 The Adlerian School 3 Emigration and death 4 Basic principles o 4.1 Adler's approach to personality o 4.2 Psychodynamics and teleology o 4.3 Constructivism and metaphysics o 4.4 Holism o 4.5 Typology o 4.6 On birth order o 4.7 On homosexuality o 4.8 Parent education o 4.9 Spirituality, ecology and community 5 Publications 6 Other key Adlerian texts 7 See also 8 References 9 Notes 10 English-language Adlerian journals 11 External links

[edit] Early life
Alfred Ethan Adler was the second child of seven children of a Hungarian-born, Jewish grain merchant and his wife.[2] Early on, he developed rickets, which kept him from walking until he was four years old. He almost died of pneumonia when he was five and it was at this age that he decided to be a physician.[3] Alfred was an active, popular child and an average student who was also known for his competitive attitude toward his older brother, Sigmund. In 1895 he received a medical degree from the University of Vienna. During his college years, he became attached to a group of socialist students, among which he found his wife-to-be, Raissa Timofeyewna Epstein, an intellectual and social activist from Russia studying in Vienna. They married in 1897 and had four children, two of whom became psychiatrists. He began his medical career as an ophthalmologist, but he soon switched to general practice, and established his office in a lower-class part of Vienna, across from the Prater, a combination amusement park and circus. His clients included circus people, and it has been suggested[4] that the unusual strengths and weaknesses of the performers led to his insights into "organ inferiorities" and "compensation".

In 1902 Adler received an invitation from Sigmund Freud to join an informal discussion group that included Rudolf Reitler and Wilhelm Stekel. They met regularly on Wednesday evenings at Freud's home, with membership expanding over time. This group was the beginning of the psychoanalytic movement (Mittwochsgesellschaft or the "Wednesday Society"). A long-serving member of the group, Adler became President of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society eight years later (1910). He remained a member of the Society until 1911 when he and a group of supporters formally disengaged, the first of the great dissenters from Freudian psychoanalysis (preceding Carl Jung's notorious split in 1914). This departure suited both Freud and Adler since they had grown to dislike each other. During his association with Freud, Adler frequently maintained his own ideas which often diverged from Freud's. While Adler is often referred to as a "a pupil of Freud's", in fact this was never true; they were colleagues. In 1929 Adler showed a reporter with the New York Herald a copy of the faded postcard that Freud had sent him in 1902. He wanted to prove that he had never been a disciple of Freud's but rather that Freud had sought him out to share his ideas. Adler founded the Society of Individual Psychology in 1912 after his break from the psychoanalytic movement. Adler's group initially included some orthodox Nietzschean adherents (who believed that Adler's ideas on power and inferiority were closer to Nietzsche than were Freud's). Their enmity aside, Adler retained a lifelong admiration of Freud's ideas on dreams and credited him for creating a scientific approach to their clinical utilization (Fiebert, 1997). Nevertheless, even with dream interpretation, Adler had his own theoretical and clinical approach. The primary differences between Adler and Freud centered on Adler's contention that the social realm (exteriority) is as important to psychology as is the internal realm (interiority). The dynamics of power and compensation extend beyond sexuality and the arena of gender and politics are important considerations that go beyond libido. Moreover, Freud did not share Adler's socialist beliefs. Trotsky's biography mentions his having discussions with Alfred Adler in Vienna.

[edit] The Adlerian School
Following Adler's break from Freud, he enjoyed considerable success and celebrity in building an independent school of psychotherapy and a unique Personality Theory. He traveled and lectured for a period of 25 years promoting his socially oriented approach. His intent was to build a movement that would rival, even supplant, others in psychology by arguing for the holistic integrity of psychological well-being with that of social equality. Adler's efforts were halted by World War I, during which he served as a doctor with the Austrian Army. After the conclusion of the war, his influence increased greatly. In the 1930s, he established a number of child guidance clinics. From 1921 onwards, he was a frequent lecturer in Europe and the United States, becoming a visiting professor at Columbia University in 1927. His clinical treatment methods for adults were aimed at uncovering the hidden purpose of symptoms using the therapeutic functions of insight and meaning. Adler was concerned with the overcoming of the superiority/inferiority dynamic and was one of the first psychotherapists to discard the analytic couch in favor of two chairs. This allows the clinician and patient to sit together more or less as equals. Clinically, Adler's methods are not limited to treatment after-the-fact but extend to the realm of prevention by preempting future

problems in the child. Prevention strategies include encouraging and promoting social interest, belonging, and a cultural shift within families and communities that leads to the eradication of pampering and neglect (especially corporal punishment). Adler's popularity was related to the comparative optimism and comprehensibility of his ideas. He often wrote for the lay public— unlike Freud and Jung, who tended to write almost exclusively for an academic audience. Adler always retained a pragmatic approach that was task-oriented. These "Life tasks" are occupation/work, society/friendship, and love/sexuality. Their success depends on cooperation. The tasks of life are not to be considered in isolation since, as Adler famously commented, "they all throw cross-lights on one another".[5] In his bestselling book, Man's Search for Meaning, Dr. Viktor E. Frankl compared his own "Third Viennese School of Psychotherapy" (after Freud's and Adler's schools) to Adler's analysis:
According to logotherapy, the striving to find a meaning in one's life is the primary motivational force in man. That is why I speak of a will to meaning in contrast to the "pleasure principle" (or, as we could also term it, the will to pleasure) on which Freudian psychoanalysis is centered, as well as in contrast to the will to power stressed by Adlerian psychology.[6]

[edit] Emigration and death
In the early 1930s, after most of Adler's Austrian clinics were closed due to his Jewish heritage (although he had converted to Christianity), Adler left Austria for a professorship at the Long Island College of Medicine in the USA. Adler died from a heart attack in Aberdeen, Scotland during a lecture tour in 1937. At the time it was a blow to the influence of his ideas although a number of them were taken up by neo-Freudians. Through the work of Rudolf Dreikurs in the United States and many other adherents worldwide, Adlerian ideas and approaches remain strong and viable more than 70 years after Adler's death. Around the world there are various organizations promoting Adler's orientation towards mental and social well-being. These include the International Committee of Adlerian Summer Schools and Institutes (ICASSI), the North American Society for Adlerian Psychology (NASAP) and the International Association for Individual Psychology. Teaching institutes and programs exist in Austria, Canada, England, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Switzerland, the United States, Jamaica, Peru, and Wales.

[edit] Basic principles
Adler was influenced by the mental construct ideas of the philosopher Hans Vaihinger (The Philosophy of As If / Philosophie des Als Ob) and the literature of Dostoevsky. While still a member of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society he developed a theory of organic inferiority and compensation that was the prototype for his later turn to phenomenology and the development of his famous concept, the inferiority complex. Adler was also influenced by the philosophies of Immanuel Kant, Friedrich Nietzsche, Rudolf Virchow and the statesman Jan Smuts (who coined the term "holism"). Adler's School, known as

"Individual Psychology"—an arcane reference to the Latin individuus meaning indivisibility, a term intended to emphasize holism—is both a social and community psychology as well as a depth psychology. Adler was an early advocate in psychology for prevention and emphasized the training of parents, teachers, social workers and so on in democratic approaches that allow a child to exercise their power through reasoned decision making whilst co-operating with others. He was a social idealist, and was known as a socialist in his early years of association with psychoanalysis (1902–1911). His allegiance to Marxism dissipated over time (he retained Marx's social idealism yet distanced himself from Marx's economic theories). Adler (1938) was a very pragmatic man and believed that lay people could make practical use of the insights of psychology. He sought to construct a social movement united under the principles of "Gemeinschaftsgefuehl" (community feeling) and social interest (the practical actions that are exercised for the social good). Adler was also an early supporter of feminism in psychology and the social world, believing that feelings of superiority and inferiority were often gendered and expressed symptomatically in characteristic masculine and feminine styles. These styles could form the basis of psychic compensation and lead to mental health difficulties. Adler also spoke of "safeguarding tendencies" and neurotic behavior long before Anna Freud wrote about the same phenomena in her book The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense. Adlerian-based scholarly, clinical and social practices focus on the following topics:
                    

Mental Health Prevention Social Interest and Community Feeling Holism and the Creative Self Fictional Finalism, Teleology, and Goal constructs Psychological and Social Encouragement Inferiority, Superiority and Compensation Life Style / Style of Life Early Recollections (a projective technique) Family Constellation and Birth Order Life Tasks & Social Embeddedness The Conscious and Unconscious realms Private Logic & Common Sense (based in part on Kant's "sensus communis") Symptoms and Neurosis Safeguarding Behaviour Guilt and Guilt Feelings Socratic Questioning Dream Interpretation Child and Adolescent Psychology Democratic approaches to Parenting and Families Adlerian Approaches to Classroom Management Leadership and Organisational Psychology

From its inception, Adlerian psychology has always included both professional and lay adherents. Indeed, Adler felt that all people could make use of the scientific insights garnered by psychology and he welcomed everyone, from decorated academics to those with no formal education to participate in spreading the principles of Adlerian psychology.

[edit] Adler's approach to personality
Adler's book, Über den nervösen Charakter (The Neurotic Character) defines his earlier key ideas. He argued that human personality could be explained teleologically, parts of the individual's unconscious self ideal work to convert feelings of inferiority to superiority (or rather completeness). The desires of the self ideal were countered by social and ethical demands. If the corrective factors were disregarded and the individual over-compensated, then an inferiority complex would occur, fostering the danger of the individual becoming egocentric, power-hungry and aggressive or worse. Common therapeutic tools include the use of humor, historical instances, and paradoxical injunctions.

[edit] Psychodynamics and teleology
Adler maintained that human psychology is psychodynamic in nature, yet unlike Freud's metapsychology that emphasizes instinctual demands, human psychology is guided by goals and fueled by a yet unknown creative force. Like Freud's instincts, Adler's fictive goals are largely unconscious. These goals have a "teleological" function. Constructivist Adlerians, influenced by neo-Kantian and Nietzschean ideas, view these "teleological" goals as "fictions" in the sense that Hans Vaihinger spoke of (fictio). Usually there is a fictional final goal which can be deciphered alongside of innumerable sub-goals. The inferiority/superiority dynamic is constantly at work through various forms of compensation and over-compensation. For example, in anorexia nervosa the fictive final goal is to "be perfectly thin" (overcompensation on the basis of a feeling of inferiority). Hence, the fictive final goal can serve a persecutory function that is ever-present in subjectivity (though its trace springs are usually unconscious). The end goal of being "thin" is fictive however since it can never be subjectively achieved. Teleology serves another vital function for Adlerians. Chilon's "hora telos" ("see the end, consider the consequences") provides for both healthy and maladaptive psychodynamics. Here we also find Adler's emphasis on personal responsibility in mentally healthy subjects who seek their own and the social good (Slavik & King, 2007).

[edit] Constructivism and metaphysics
The metaphysical thread of cool Adlerian theory does not problematise the notion of teleology since concepts such as eternity (an ungraspable end where time ceases to exist) match the religious aspects that are held in tandem. In contrast, the constructivist Adlerian threads (either humanist/modernist or postmodern in variant) seek to raise insight of the force of unconscious fictions– which carry all of the inevitability of 'fate'– so long as one does not understand them. Here, 'teleology' itself is fictive yet experienced as quite real. This aspect of Adler's theory is somewhat analogous to the principles developed in Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) and Cognitive Therapy (CT). Both Albert Ellis and Aaron T. Beck credit Adler as a major precursor to REBT and CT. Ellis in particular was a member of the North American Society for Adlerian Psychology and served as an editorial board member for the Adlerian Journal Individual Psychology.

As a psychodynamic system, Adlerians excavate the past of a client/patient in order to alter their future and increase integration into community in the 'here-and-now'. The 'here-and-now' aspects are especially relevant to those Adlerians who emphasize humanism and/or existentialism in their approaches. it also changes the way of how we look at life. in 1958 Adler began to look at structuralism. he began to look at the development of children just like Freud.

[edit] Holism
Metaphysical Adlerians emphasise a spiritual holism in keeping with what Jan Smuts articulated (Smuts coined the term "holism"), that is, the spiritual sense of one-ness that holism usually implies (etymology of holism: from ὅλος holos, a Greek word meaning all, entire, total) Smuts believed that evolution involves a progressive series of lesser wholes integrating into larger ones. Whilst Smuts' text Holism and Evolution is thought to be a work of science, it actually attempts to unify evolution with a higher metaphysical principle (holism). The sense of connection and one-ness revered in various religious traditions (among these, Baha'i, Chrisitanity, Judaism, Islam and Buddhism) finds a strong complement in Adler's thought. The pragmatic and materialist aspects to contextualizing members of communities, the construction of communities and the socio-historical-political forces that shape communities matter a great deal when it comes to understanding an individual's psychological make-up and functioning. This aspect of Adlerian psychology holds a high level of synergy with the field of community psychology. However, Adlerian psychology, unlike community psychology, is holistically concerned with both prevention and clinical treatment after-the-fact. Hence, Adler cannot be considered the "first community psychologist", a discourse that formalized in the decades following Adler's death (King & Shelley, 2008). Adlerian psychology, Carl Jung's Analytical Psychology, Gestalt Therapy and Karen Horney's psychodynamic approach are holistic schools of psychology. These discourses eschew a reductive approach to understanding human psychology and psychopathology.

[edit] Typology
Adler (1956) developed a scheme of so-called personality types. These 'types' are to be taken as provisional or heuristic since he did not, in essence, believe in personality types. The danger with typology is to lose sight of the individual's uniqueness and to gaze reductively, acts that Adler opposed. Nevertheless, he intended to illustrate patterns that could denote a characteristic governed under the overall style of life. Hence American Adlerians such as Harold Mosak have made use of Adler's typology in this provisional sense:


The Getting or Leaning type are those who selfishly take without giving back. These people also tend to be antisocial and have low activity levels. The Avoiding types are those that hate being defeated. They may be successful, but have not taken any risks getting there. They are likely to have low social contact in fear of rejection or defeat in any way.





The Ruling or Dominant type strive for power and are willing to manipulate situations and people, anything to get their way. People of this type are also prone to anti-social behavior. The Socially Useful types are those who are very outgoing and very active. They have a lot of social contact and strive to make changes for the good.



These 'types' are typically formed in childhood and are expressions of the Style of Life.

[edit] On birth order
Adler often emphasized one's birth order as having an influence on the Style of Life and the strengths and weaknesses in one's psychological make up. Birth Order referred to the placement of siblings within the family. Adler believed that the firstborn child would be loved and nurtured by the family until the arrival of a second child. This second child would cause the first born to suffer feelings of dethronement, no longer being the center of attention. Adler (1956) believed that in a three-child family, the oldest child would be the most likely to suffer from neuroticism and substance addiction which he reasoned was a compensation for the feelings of excessive responsibility "the weight of the world on one's shoulders" (e.g. having to look after the younger ones) and the melancholic loss of that once supremely pampered position. As a result, he predicted that this child was the most likely to end up in jail or an asylum. Youngest children would tend to be overindulged, leading to poor social empathy. Consequently, the middle child, who would experience neither dethronement nor overindulgence, was most likely to develop into a successful individual yet also most likely to be a rebel and to feel squeezed-out. Adler himself was the second in a family of six children. Adler never produced any scientific support for his interpretations on birth order roles. Yet the value of the hypothesis was to extend the importance of siblings in marking the psychology of the individual beyond Freud's more limited emphasis on the Mother and Father. Hence, Adlerians spend time therapeutically mapping the influence that siblings (or lack thereof) had on the psychology of their clients. The idiographic approach entails an excavation of the phenomenology of one's birth order position for likely influence on the subject's Style of Life. In sum, the subjective experiences of sibling positionality and inter-relations are psychodynamically important for Adlerian therapists and personality theorists, not the cookbook predictions that may or may not have been objectively true in Adler's time.

[edit] On homosexuality
Further information: Homosexuality and psychology

Adler's ideas regarding non-heterosexual sexuality and various social forms of deviance have long been controversial. Along with prostitution and criminality, Adler had classified 'homosexuals' as falling among the "failures of life". In 1917, he began his writings on homosexuality with a 52-page brochure, and sporadically published more thoughts throughout the rest of his life.

The Dutch psychiatrist Gerard J. M. van den Aardweg underlines how Alfred Adler came to his conclusions for, in 1917, Adler believed that he had established a connection between homosexuality and an inferiority complex towards one's own gender. This point of view differed from Freud's theory that homosexuality is rooted in narcissism or Jung's view of inappropriate expressions of contrasexuality vis-a-vis the archetypes of the Anima and Animus. There is evidence that Adler may have moved towards abandoning the hypothesis. Towards the end of Adler's life, in the mid 1930s, his opinion towards homosexuality began to shift. Elizabeth H. McDowell, a New York state family social worker recalls undertaking supervision with Adler on a young man who was "living in sin" with an older man in New York City. Adler asked her, "is he happy, would you say?" "Oh yes," McDowell replied. Adler then stated, "Well, why don't we leave him alone."[7] On reflection, McDowell found this comment to contain "profound wisdom". Although, there must be some misunderstanding on Adler's answer. Adler was offering his help only to those who were asking for it in person. His therapy process could be applied only to those who feel themselves in a deadlock, fallen "at the bottom of a well", and are looking for help to get out. Even though, homosexuality was considered as one of the most difficult cases, needing long experience of the psychotherapist and not only many consequent sessions but also long time of personal work by the individual, depending on the "maturity" of his problem. Success could not be guaranteed. According to Phyllis Bottome, who wrote Adler's Biography after Adler himself laid upon her this task: "Homosexuality he always treated as lack of courage. These were but ways of obtaining a slight release for a physical need while avoiding a greater obligation. A transient partner of your own sex is a better known road and requires less courage than a permanent contact with an "unknown" sex." (...) "Adler taught that men cannot be judged from within by their "possessions," as he used to call nerves, glands, traumas, drives et cetera, since both judge and prisoner are liable to misconstrue what is invisible and incalculable; but that he can be judged, with no danger from introspection, by how he measures up to the three common life tasks set before every human being between the cradle and the grave. Work or employment, love or marriage, social contact." [8]

[edit] Parent education
Adler emphasized both treatment and prevention. As a psychodynamic psychology, Adlerians emphasize the foundational importance of childhood in developing personality and any tendency towards various forms of psychopathology. The best way to inoculate against what are now termed "personality disorders" (what Adler had called the "neurotic character"), or a tendency to various neurotic conditions (depression, anxiety, etc.), is to train a child to be and feel an equal part of the family. This entails developing a democratic character and the ability to exercise power reasonably rather than through compensation. Hence Adler proselytized against corporal punishment and cautioned parents to refrain from the twin evils of pampering and neglect. The responsibility to the optimal development of the child is not limited to the Mother or Father but to teachers and society more broadly. Adler argued therefore that teachers, nurses, social workers, and so on require training in parent education in order to complement the work of the family in fostering a democratic character. When a child does not feel equal and is enacted upon (abused through pampering or neglect) they are likely to develop inferiority or superiority

complexes and various accompanying compensation strategies. These strategies exact a social toll by seeding higher divorce rates, the breakdown of the family, criminal tendencies, and subjective suffering in the various guises of psychopathology. Adlerians have long promoted parent education groups, especially those influenced by the famous Austrian/American Adlerian Rudolf Dreikurs (Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964).

[edit] Spirituality, ecology and community
In a late work, Social Interest: A Challenge to Mankind(1938), Adler turns to the subject of metaphysics, where he integrates Jan Smuts' evolutionary holism with the ideas of teleology and community: "sub specie aeternitatus". Unabashedly, he argues his vision of society: "Social feeling means above all a struggle for a communal form that must be thought of as eternally applicable... when humanity has attained its goal of perfection... an ideal society amongst all mankind, the ultimate fulfillment of evolution."[9] Adler follows this pronouncement with a defense of metaphysics: "I see no reason to be afraid of metaphysics; it has had a great influence on human life and development. We are not blessed with the possession of absolute truth; on that account we are compelled to form theories for ourselves about our future, about the results of our actions, etc. Our idea of social feeling as the final form of humanity - of an imagined state in which all the problems of life are solved and all our relations to the external world rightly adjusted - is a regulative ideal, a goal that gives our direction. This goal of perfection must bear within it the goal of an ideal community, because all that we value in life, all that endures and continues to endure, is eternally the product of this social feeling."[10] This social feeling for Adler is Gemeinschaftsgefühl, a community feeling whereby one feels he or she belongs with others and has also developed an ecological connection with nature (plants, animals, the crust of this earth) and the cosmos as a whole, sub specie aeternitatus. Clearly, Adler himself had little problem with adopting a metaphysical and spiritual point of view to support his theories. Yet his overall theoretical yield provides ample room for the dialectical humanist (modernist) and separately the postmodernist to explain the significance of community and ecology through differing lenses (even if Adlerians have not fully considered how deeply divisive and contradictory these three threads of metaphysics, modernism, and post modernism are).