Please read chapter 7. After reading the chapter, please respond to the following questions:
What were three (3) things from the chapter that you found interesting? Why were they interesting to you? What one (1) thing did you find the least interesting? Why?
What did you read in the chapter that you think will be most useful to in understanding the history of psychology?
How, in what ways, does this chapter relate (build on) to the previous chapters?
What topic would you like to learn more about? Why ?
What ideas did you have while reading the chapter?
During this chapter I found the topic about John Dewey and The Reflex Arc to be very interesting. I found out that Dewey was raised like an everyday person; he didn’t receive any extra help or have a “known” last name. He valued hard work, respect for others, simplicity, and a love for democracy. He completed high school at the age of fifteen; he then enrolled in the University of Vermont. He studied the curriculum and humanities; he also tried out evolutionary thinking by studying the new sciences of geology and zoology. Dewey graduated and became a teacher, he taught for several years before deciding to go back to school. Dewey enrolled at John Hopkins to study philosophy. Eventually after a few more years of schooling and teaching Dewey came up with the thought of the reflex arc; he separated this into three separate elementary components: the stimulus producing sensation, central processing producing an idea, and the act or motor response. Dewey argued that the actual whole serves the function of adapting the organism to its environment. I am not familiar with the reflex arc and for someone who started off with just his values and brains to come up with it is very interesting to me. I think about my own reflexes and it is intriguing to me that they just happen even when I don’t think about it, for example when I touch a hot surface I pull my hand away quickly without thinking knowing it could be hot. Another topic I found to be interesting throughout the chapter was the discussion/differences on structuralism and functionalism. Structuralism is just like anatomy, the purpose is analysis. Functionalism is like physiology, where psychologists examine how the various parts of the body operate and the functions they serve to help keep the individual alive. That goes into Titchener and his views and contributions to psychology. He was a young professor from Cornell University who had been in the United States for only six years and already had a reputation as a talented laboratory psychologist with some clear and uncompromising ideas about the nature of the new psychology. Titchener used the biology metaphor to argue that it was futile to study function before structure had been fully understood. Titchener’s ideas are a little confusing, this would be something I would like to learn more about and understand better. I believe he was a brilliant man but it does say his system was never widely popular in America, but he did eventually have a large impact on the nature of psychology. I am very curious to know what they are talking about as I have heard of Titchener but am not fully aware of everything he has done for psychology. I think something in this chapter that would be very important to know is being able to distinguish between a structuralist and a functionalist approach to psychology. I think this would be very important to understand to understand new information about these approaches and to understand where Titchener was coming from. The topic on Harvey Carr was the least interesting to me; this is because it was boring and vague. He was into mazes and the perception of the space; I feel you need to know this to understand Edward Thorndike’s view on how cats learned to escape mazes. Another topic I would like to learn about would be on Edward Thorndike and everything he came up with about the mazes and the cats. He was very interested in animal behavior, and his trial and error learning (trial and accidental success, which is very funny) is something that really stood out to me. For the way he grew up and the hardships he endured he was a very successful man and accomplished a lot that he is obviously very proud of, because he was always interested in that. I have never heard of Thorndike before, I have heard of Wundt and his lectures on Human and Animal Psychology (which is a build on from previous chapters) and I found his study creative.
The first thing I found interesting from this chapter was the idea of "drill courses" where students would learn from doing what other people had done before. I do believe that a combination of this method of teaching and the other mentioned method of doing your own research and own studies are both useful in university settings. I think that drill courses would be a great way for students to update their understanding of a concept as well as maybe understand something new. This connects well with Dewey's thoughts that children learn by doing.
The second thing that I thought was interesting was just how subjective the subject of introspection really is. They mentioned it in the book when they talked about "Evaluating Titchener's Contributions to Psychology". Trying to make even trained (which in this case basically means practiced) indivduals look at what their thinking and what is actually happening and write both things down as the experimentation is going on would be a very taxing task for most people not to mention a biased on from the eyes of the people on the outside.
The third thing that I found interesting from this chapter was Dewey's reflex arc in terms of the three separate elementary components: stimulus producing sensation, central processing producing an idea, and the act or motor response. I found it very interesting that if everyone were to think about it all of this does have to happen for anyone to have a reflex or a response to a stimulus but it happens within fractions of a second. In my opinion it's mostly unconscious and happens very quickly with little to no time for us to conciously think about what's going on. I found that interesting.
The one thing I disliked from this chapter was Titchener's idea that having women in his psychological club would disrupt the thinking that goes on as well as be a disturbance to the normal environment. I think this still happens today that men think they have to act differently when women are around and that becomes a hinderence to them in certain situation. I, like the book saw it as a setback and a slight point of disrespect for Titchener that he could respect and value women in all different environments (such as his classrooms) except when they were faced with an all male group.
I think learning about functionalism vs. structuralism was very important to the history of psychology. I feel like those basic ideas are taught to us again and again in classes because they are so desperately important. They are very opposing arguments about how to look at things but in my opinion you need both to succeed at getting the full picture. These two separate ideas, when learned together help the psychology student see the big picture as well as all the little components that make up that picture and are just as important.
I think this chapter went deeper into a broad category of psychology (structuralism vs. functionalism) and really told us about their meaning and their history of how they came about. This related well to the previous chapters because it mentions a specific example (Titchener's club) of oppression of the minority classes as well as builds on the idea of social darwinism mentioned in the previous chapter.
The topic that I am interested in learning more about was the topic of Dewey's lab school that he created in Chicago. This "laboratory school" seemed to be on the cutting edge of educational psychology during it's time and I think they may have changed a lot or at least contributed a lot to how we teach today and I find that fascinating.
Some ideas I had during this chapter were:
-That Dewey's idea of progressive education and that children learn by doing is kind of like the historic version of kinethestic learning which we know today can be very helpful to students.
-I wondered if there was any good research out there showing that the presence of women (as in Titchner's club) had any influence over the ideas spread or the atmosphere of any particular group. I feel as though it might have an effect but I don't know about a significant one and I think that would be an interesting topic to dive into.
-I wondered actually how popular social Darwinism really was, it seems as though it was very popular among the elite rich but they certainly were not the majority of the people, just the only ones with a voice and I believe not all of them agreed with that theory as well. So I think maybe someone could look more into that subject about just how many people, in numbers believed in social Darwinism
Titchener took up most of the chapter and was interesting to read about. He was so impressed by laboratory research that he often judged his colleagues by the amount of lab participation they had under their belts. Yet, though he wanted to work at Oxford or Cambridge he ended up teaching at Cornell. Titchener did something very important for American psychology when he translated some important German works into English. He also created manuals for teaching lab courses to psychology students. These lab courses broke down for the teachers step-by-step instructions for producing different lab studies that had been done in the past; one such study involved an olfactometer through which different odors could be smelled at varying degrees to judge which smell would overwhelm another or whether or not two smells might form to create a new odor.
Another interesting thing in the chapter, which involved Titchener, was the Experimentalists, a male-only group of research psychologists. Having resigned from the American Psychological Association three times for various reasons, he felt that an “informal” club would be a good place for psychologists to gather and discuss their current research—he wanted to help advance the field of psychology and he didn’t feel that the APA was doing that. While it may seem sexist that women were not included in the club, Titchener was alright with women in psychology, but wanted his club to be for men only so it might be more laidback.
Finally, I found it interesting that Thorndike experimented with cats in a study of comparative psychology. He discovered that through trial and error a cat could learn what to do to escape a box; however, he made it clear that cats were not capable of complex thought because if he were to put them in a box with a few of the mechanisms that they had learned to use for escape in previous boxes they were not able to understand a connection and complete each task necessary for escape. In addition, he realized that cats were able to learn more quickly in similar circumstances—such as putting them in a box that had a similar escape mechanism; he adapted this to humans with the idea that learning one subject that is completely unrelated to another will not improve a person’s ability to learn the new subject.
I thought the close-up on Titchenerian instrospection is the least interesting part of the chapter because I felt like it drew the subject out and I wasn’t really interested in it.
I think that learning about John Dewey will be very helpful in the future because his research was done in an attempt to change the way we learn—he was interested in finding out how children learn best and found that they learn best through interaction, that is, by doing. I think learning about these psychologists who made changes in the way we do things is important for understanding why things subsequently changed. I was also impressed that Dewey was involved in creating unions and spoke in support of women’s suffrage.
I would like to learn more about Herbert Spencer and Social Darwinism because I think it’s a very interesting subject and I would like to know more about his position on it—how he supported his idea, etc. I found it interesting that he thought our evolution should be left unchecked in an attempt to create a stronger human race—obviously this is a flawed idea because we cannot predict wholly how the offspring of a person will turn out.
I thought a lot about how teaching and learning were assessed in the past and how they have changed thanks to research done in the field of psychology. I also thought about how Social Darwinism could have changed our country had it continued to be a major view even today—it is scary that some intelligent people can produce ideas that could be so detrimental to society.
The first thing that I found interesting in Chapter 7 was how Titchener promoted experimental psychology at Cornell. Upon his arrival to Cornell, Titchener expanded his laboratory and started a research program and by the turn of the century, he and his students had published over sixty research articles. He also signed on with Hall in 1895 as an editor for the American Journal of Psychology, this move enabled him to control one-third of the journal’s pages. By 1900, after publishing a textbook and a revised version of another textbook, he was firmly established as a major player in the American psychological spotlight. In German laboratories, students gained first-hand experience by learning laboratory procedures on their own and developing, researching, and testing their own studies as well as questioning and observing their more experienced peers. These exercises later became known as drill courses. Students in these course did not actually produce their own research, but instead, repeat classic studies so that they could become properly acquainted with the laboratory. In Germany, and in the U.S. it was starting be realized that not all professors or teachers were able to adequately instruct the students in proper laboratory procedures. Therefore, in 1890, Edmund Sanford wrote the first laboratory instruction manual. Titchener saw many flaws in the manual and decided to write his own. This was a cool section because it showed the early beginnings of the laboratory in the discipline of psychology, as well as the development of the manuals of adequate practice in the laboratory procedures.
The second thing that I found interesting in the chapter was the section about the human conscious experience. Titchener identified three types of elementary mental processes; sensations, images, and affections. Sensations were the basic elements of the more complex processes of perceptions, images were the elementary components of ideas, and affections or feelings were the elements of emotions. Titchener also argued that elements of our emotional life differ in two distinct ways; first was that affect only had two fundamental qualities-pleasantness and unpleasantness. Second, affect has the attributes of quality, intensity, and duration, but it lacked in clearness. We must attend to the sensory elements in the situation and not the actual feelings themselves. Titchener’s structuralism continued to evolve over the years, but in the 1920’s he moved away from this emphasis and developed another model that explained sensory processes in terms of dimensions.
The third thing I found interesting in the chapter was the section on the Thorndike and Mills controversy. Thorndike was always able to handle the critics when it came to his writing. There was one authoritative person that was not amused by Throndike’s writings, this person was Wesley Mills. He was a comparative psychologist who criticized Thorndike’s research in 1898 at the meeting of the APA. He also followed up his criticism in a article in the Psychological Review. Mills started by criticizing Thorndike’s lack of respect for his elders. Furthermore, Mills rejected the study’s conclusion because of the artificiality of the environment created by Thorndike. Cats being placed in a box, cannot let cats act normally, this was the main argument from Mills. Thorndike rebuttaled with admitting to being unimpressed with animal research based on uncritical observation and anecdote and made no apology for it. He also pointed out that Mills should have repeated the studies to look and see if the cats would have panicked every time. This exchange was a good illustration to show the different viewpoints about the proper way to conduct laboratory methods. This issue still goes on in today’s world.
The thing that I did not like about this chapter was the section on the independent and dependent variable. This section talked about how these terms were invented and how Woodworth used them. The only reason that I didn’t find this interesting was because I don’t think it was needed in the chapter, I realize that it helped establish the point that Woodworth contributed to the discipline of psychology, but I think that it just wasn’t needed. I think the section that is most prominent in the study of the history of psychology was the section about structuralism and functionalism. By understanding these two concepts, we gain a solid understanding of these two contributions to the different schools in psychology. I would like to learn more about the Chicago functionalists.
The first thing I found interesting in this chapter was the elementary mental processes; sensations, images, and affections. What I thought was interesting was how each of these mental processes have attributions but how everyone has different levels of them. For example, they all have attributions of quality, intensity, duration, and clearness but each of us experience different levels of each of these. (Idea) By having different levels of these attributions, is this what causes people to become (for example) a serial killer? The second thing I found interesting was Titchener’s definition of psychology. To him psychology was the science of the “generalized adult mind”. Therefore Titchener was uninterested in individual differences between one mind and another and he excluded from his definition of psychology all research using children, animals, and the insane. This is interesting because when I think of psychology, studies with the insane and comparing people are the first things I think about. Social Darwinism was the third thing I found interesting. They believed any attempt on the part of humans to alter these forces was misdirected and harmful. Evolution must be left unchecked. Although I don’t have a pinpoint view on Darwinism, I do somewhat believe this idea. I think humans do a lot to harm the environment (pollution etc.). The one thing I found uninteresting in this chapter was the section on the manuals and drill courses. I feel like the author could have summed in up a bit better instead of having so much information on it. I think the most important thing to understand for the history of psychology is the terms functionalism and structuralism. These two terms are very important to understand because they are in all aspects of psychology. I would like to learn more about the topic of the elementary mental processes and the affects they have on people. As an education major I would like to learn more about this topic because I will be working with all types of people.
The first thing I found interesting in this chapter was the concept of “drill courses”. These courses were designed to teach students through doing what others had done before them. This idea makes sense because I think there is no better way to learn how to do something than to actually do it with your own two hands and/or mind. Another thing I found interesting was the Experimentalists. This was a group of male psychologists who discussed their current work and other research at the time. Titchener developed this group after he resigned from the APA because he felt it would be a good, laidback way for researchers to share and discuss the current ideas in psychology. I found it interesting that he only allowed men in this group, but he did say he was not opposed to women working in the field of psychology. Another thing I found interesting in this chapter, and the thing that really stood out to me, was Titchener’s definition of psychology. He explained psychology as a science of the “generalized human mind”. He excluded any research of children, animals, and the insane in his work. I find this extremely interesting because psychology is SO much deeper than just studying the “generalized mind”. Sure we can generalize similarities and differences between two individuals, but there are endless individual differences between human minds that can be studied. These differences are what make psychology so much more interesting than just studying what is “generalized”.
One thing I did not find interesting in this chapter was Titchener’s tool of introspection. I like learning about consciousness but this topic really did not interest me and it really drug this subject out.
I think that functionalism vs. structuralism is very important to understanding the history of psychology. Although these viewpoints suggest very opposing sides, it is important to understand both sides and learn how they interact. These concepts help us better understand situations, not just the situation itself, but all of the components that make up that specific circumstance.
This chapter builds on social Darwinism, as mentioned in previous chapters. This chapter also relates back to women being oppressed in the work field, giving the example that women were not allowed in Titchener’s “club”. It explains that there is a better acceptance of women in these fields, but there is still oppression and women are still a minority.
I would really like to learn more about Dewey’s reflex arc, more specifically the three separate elementary components. I find this very interesting, and even though none of us actually think about our reflexes, they still happen and I would like to learn how this process works.
During this chapter, I thought about Titchener’s group of research psychologists, and I thought it was a very good idea for people to do this. I find psychology very interesting (obviously) but I think almost anyone, researcher or not, could sit in on one of these group meetings and learn something or find a new topic interesting. I am sure people do this today, as well, but I think it should happen more often, but could be any field of science, not just psychology. I also thought about Social Darwinism and what an impact a few respected people can have on our whole society. I mean what if our country had continued to view Social Darwinism as an important concept as it use to?
One thing I found very interesting to read about was Thorndike’s puzzle box. I am taking a behavior modification class right now and it was something that I read about in that class as well this week, so it really stuck out to me. He started his studies of instinct and intelligence on baby chicks by having them escape simple types of mazes. During his fellowship at Columbia, Thorndike expanded his research to several different types of animals, including his work on cats in puzzle boxes. When the cat was hungry, he would put the animal in the puzzle box. In order to leave the box the cat had to pull a cord, press a lever, or step onto a platform which would make the door open, so the cat could escape. The length of time it took to escape the puzzle box would be recorded and eventually the cat would get faster each time at escaping. Thorndike invented two principles because if this study the Law of Effect (rewards are more effective than punishments in producing learning) and the Law of Exercise (the connection between stimulus situation and response would be strengthened with practice).
Another interesting topic in this chapter was Titchener’s view of psychology and its goals. He believed not only that psychology needs to synthesis and analysis, but also that it needs to try to explain. Specifically he wanted to know how the nervous system produced the cognition, senses, and percept. It is also kind of funny because he believes this should be a third goal, yet according to the text most of Titchener’s research didn’t focus on the third goal. He seems like a person who had a very big interest in psychology and loved doing the research that he did. I find it interesting to read about people when it appears that they really love what they do.
I also really enjoyed reading about John Dewey. He graduated from high school at age 15 and went on not only to get his degree, but also got his doctorate in philosophy. He focused about of his work and ideas on the reflex arc. He believed in a structural analysis for how the reflex arc works, instead of the functionalist concept that William James created. Dewey saw it as more of a continuous circuit rather than an “arc” with distinct ending and starting points. He also strongly believes that everyone should have an equal opportunity to advance educationally. I enjoyed this because he is the type of person who questions thinks and does not just accept what others say is how something is. He challenges them and encouraged his students I’m sure to do the same.
What I found the least interesting was reading about the manuals. I think I probably found this uninteresting because I don’t really the laboratory side or research side of psychology the most interesting part. I am a little scared to do my research in psychology requirement. I like reading more about people and situations that happen like Phineas Gage. The idea of drill courses sounds kind of dreadful. I also think that knowing the difference between a structuralism and a functionalism perspective is important. They are two completely different views on studying something in psychology.
I think seeing the connections between people will be the most useful in understanding the history of psychology. By this I mean like the fact that Titchener studied under Wundt and that Dewey studied under Stanley Hall. Learning how taught them can show us the ideas they were taught and brought up on. In the same way that understanding how someone’s parents raised them can teach you a lot about a person.
One big way this chapter was built on the previous chapters is that Titchener is talked about great deal within the chapter 7. He was trained by Wundt, someone we discussed and learned about earlier in this book. This chapter started to deal more with structuralism instead of functionalism. This is different because most of the psychologists we have read about in this book focused more on the brain’s function more than its structure.
I would like to learn more about the Law of Effect and the Law of Exercise. I would like learn of more example of this in order to fully understand what they are and not just what the definitions are. I would also like to learn more about S-O-R model and how Woodworth came up with it. I did not feel like the book went into a lot of detail about this.
This chapter made we think about how in psychology you can look at something from many different ways and perspectives. A theory is right until it is proven wrong. Some theories we believe today to true may be proven to be fault by the time we die. Psychology is an ever changing science and is still so young. We have so many things to still learn and explore.
Chapter 7
I really enjoyed chapter seven and think that I found the most interesting things when reading compared to any other chapter. One of the first things that I found interesting was E.B. Titchener methods of experimental and laboratory psychology, including his group referred to as the Experimentalists. I understand the concepts and benefits of using a laboratory and conducting experiments, but what interested me so much was how Titchener trained students in such high of detail. The fact that he wrote such particular and precise manuals confuses me when I think of psychology. I know that science is a part of it, but I think being precise and specific is too scientific and not psychological. Part of experimenting, to me, means that nothing is precise and in fact sometimes it is unknown. There are no specific rules to psychology because it is such a broad subject. The word broad makes me think of the second thing that I found interesting when reading chapter seven, which was John Dewey’s approach to looking at reflex in a broader context. He described reflex as a coordinated system that served to adapt the organism to its environment. This was interesting to me because of how broad the thought it. I had never looked at reflex in this way before reading this chapter. I just thought of what my leg does at the doctor when they tap my knee with the little rubber hammer. Dewey’s theory made me think of it as also simply a reaction, but a reaction that is somewhat automatic. It is easy for us to notice when we are feeling or reacting a certain way, what is more difficult and not done often this actually thinking why we are feeling or reacting that way. Our environment affects us in different ways, but we all seem to be able to react or adapt to whatever it throws our way. To me, that ability is a reflex. Another thing that I found interesting about John Dewey was his progressive views on education and how he believed that students should be active learners. I found myself agreeing with Dewey’s views on education and think that actively experiencing something can teach more than simply reading about something. I do believe that, for the most part, I have learned a lot throughout my education, but I’m not sure if I would describe it as active learning. For every interesting thing that I learned, I can assume there were countless things that never got processed. Sometime sitting at a desk listening to a person talk can simply be a waste of time; I think kids or anybody for that matter can learn better when actively participating in what they are learning. Words are just words, whether they are heard or read, and our brain can only do so much with these words until it needs action. I really did enjoy this whole chapter and didn’t find anything too uninteresting. I guess if I had to pick anything, it would maybe be Edward Thorndike and that is only because he was the one thing in the chapter that I was already aware of so nothing new really caught my eye.
I think that the most important thing to remember when studying the history of psychology that came out of the chapter would be the difference between structuralism and functionalism. Coincidently it is also the title of the chapter, so the importance of this difference is pretty apparent. Many American psychologists were interested the functions of consciousness, whereas E.B. Titchener was more interested in the structure of consciousness. Because we are studying the history of psychology, Titchener and his methods are still important to know even though some were proved to be flawed. His presence in the study of psychology, and consciousness to be more specific, is still critical in the subject’s history. This chapter continues building on the study of consciousness and really digs into some actual answers to what purposes it serves. I feel like as I continue to read, each week fills in the blanks that I had the previous week. A topic that I would like to learn more about, in order to clear up any blanks in this chapter, would be Harvey Carr and his maze learning research. The chapter only touches on Carr and his development of Chicago into one of the country’s best graduate programs. I would like to get more details about his actual research about maze learning.
Many ideas popped into my head when reading chapter seven, but they were all pretty much related to the distinction in thinking behind functionalism and structuralism. When comparing Titchener’s thinking to the psychologists in America, you will find opposite points of views. The idea that two human minds can process so differently is crazy to actually think about. Titchener was interested in what consciousness was and American psychologists were interested is what consciousness is for, but why? What made it so that these people were interested in the same exact topic, but wanted two different answers? This is an idea that I thought about multiple times throughout reading the chapter and have thought many other times as well.
After reading chapter 7 I was interested in several parts of the chapter. The first part that got my attention was the part on structuralism and functionalism. E.B. Titchener wrote about these two in a review called The Postulates of a structural psychology. He described how structuralism was just like anatomy. You have to analyze it just like the human body. You organize the information and put it into structures to help keep it organized. Functionalism would be considered more like physiology. The study of how the mind adapts and helps serves in that individual environment. I found it interesting that he used two different fields to describe the terms as a metaphor. This got my attention of the terms and helped me to remember them better because of how he used them. Another thing I found interesting was how quickly Titchner promoted psychology at Cornell once he arrived. The section was very short but got me thinking how much of an influence he was in the short time he was there. He arrived in 1892 and by the turn of the century he and his students published over 60 articles. He also attracted students with the new labs and research he was doing. This helped Cornell become a prestigious school due to a few men. The third thing I found interesting was Titchener’s definition of psychology. He believed that psychology was the science of the generalized adult mind. Titchener found no interest in the individual differences between one mind and another. He also didn’t include research of the mind on children, the mentally insane and animals. I found this interesting because children and the insane account for different development levels and also different information such as disease. I was surprised that he only considered the adult generalized mind rather than all of the generalized minds which should include children and the insane. This could possibly help him explain many more things. One of the things in the chapter that seemed a little to information based was the section on the manuals and drill courses. I feel like the author could have summed in up a bit better instead of having so much information on it. It was ok to read at first and then just became a little repetitive towards the end. I got the concept easily enough without all the extra information thrown in there. A few things that this chapter built upon were social Darwinism which was mentioned some in the previous chapters. Another part I remember from the previous chapter was that women were not considered equals by most in the field of psychology. This chapter mentioned that women were not allowed in Titcheners club. This just built on the issue that women were not equal when it came to wanted to be educated and have similar rights that men had. It didn’t seem as harsh of a message as it did in previous chapters but the issue still existed.
Two things that I would like to learn more about would be social Darwinism. I found this theory to be very interesting after hearing other theories of evolution in past chapters. I have always been interested to learn more about where we came from and how we came to where we are now. This is just one idea that could play a part in the past history and development of human beings. Another thing I found interesting and would like to learn more about was the reflex arc. The book gave a general description of it but I would like to learn about it in more depth. I found both of these concepts appealing and very interesting.
Some of the ideas I had while reading were how one person (Titchener) could make such a big difference in education within a span of 8 years. He helped Cornell become a top notch school in a short time based on his desire to learn and teach others. It made me think that if you have a passion for something it can change things dramatically. I also wondered how women felt during this time especially intelligent women that wanted to learn but were denied the opportunity because of groups and schools that wouldn’t allow them admission. A few things I believe that will be useful in understanding the history are terms like structuralism and functionalism. These two terms are very different but they are beneficial to know due to the different viewpoints of opposite sides. Another term I think will be beneficial is social Darwinism. Again I feel this is important because of the different theories of evolution that we have already discussed in previous chapters. It helps build on those and even give different viewpoints on all the possible ways of human evolution.
The contrast between Structuralism and Functionalism was pretty interesting to me. The structuralist approach to psychology separates the mind into its basic elements and studies these basic units before trying to discover how they work. The functionalist approach to psychology entails studying the function of the separate parts of the brain before specifically figuring out the structure involved. Titchener was a supporter of the structuralist approach to psychology applying his "introspective" practices to research. He was fascinated by laboratory research which featured the roles of experimenter and observer. The experimenter is the one who would conduct the experiment itself and the observer is the research subject. The observer would take time during the experiment to note every mental process they experienced more specifically from a sensory point of view. This was pretty cool to read and contemplate. Imagine if in every class from elementary school to now we were expected to record mental processes during every activity. It would be a far-cry from the monotonous, auto-pilot learning we experienced and continue to experience on a daily basis. This kind of eccentric approach to lab research also can apply to education which leads me to the next thing I found interesting in the chapter: progressive education. This concept, pushed by John Dewey, emphasized children learning by interacting with their environment. The learned by acting instead of just reading. This kind of approach encourages children to learn on their own instead of through some kind of structure. The chapter itself wasn't as interesting as some of the previous chapters just because it didn't seem like the concepts were quite as revolutionary.
If there is any further discussion of structuralism vs functionalism or any application of the two concepts than a thorough understanding of both of them will help me to understand where psychology today has come from. This chapter also gave a pretty good introduction to behaviorism. Some of the individuals in the chapter were influenced by people and works introduced in earlier chapters for example William James' Principles of Psychology greatly influenced the thinking of James R Angell, a famous functionalist. I would like to learn more about progressive education and why it hasn't become the standard of american education. The book discussed how in Germany learning laboratory scientists would create their own experiments and do them independently, expanding their creative mindset. Why couldn't Americans learn something from the Germans? (Besides everything else we learned from them of course) My thoughts didn't drift too far from the material when I was reading this chapter. The bit on progressive education made me take a second to think about what education could look like if it was standard. I also was wondering if Price Lab was a progressive school?
Chapter 7
1. Independent and dependent variable- I thought this was very interesting learning the origins of the main features of the experimental method, 1st used by Robert Woodworth. Before Woodworth first used these terms, “experiment” was being used way too broadly. Woodworth used the main focus of study as the independent variable that would manipulate a factor, and dependent variable that would be the effect on some measure of behavior. However, Woodworth did not create the terms but used the words to narrow the definition in research. Woodworth also argued that correlational studies did not necessarily mean causation, and that is why he favored the experimental method.
2. Functionalism- this was the interest of functions of consciousness rather than its structure. I have always been interested in the questions of “what is consciousness for” not the structuralist view of “what is consciousness.” By the definition of functionalism, and the many analytical observations of the topic, abnormal psychology came about, and how psychology could be used to solve everyday problems.
3. Thorndike on Puzzle Box Learning- I have a big passion for animals, and I liked that Thorndike used his study to understand animal intelligence. He believed that so many psychologists were worried about the humans, but none of them really tried to understand the higher mental powers for a variety of animals. Thorndike used his maze to see if animals could escape a simple act and the amount of time it took to escape. The most interesting result of his study was that if a cat had learned to escape from one box and then put into a box that had a similar escape mechanism, the car would learn more quickly than a cat without prior experience. *The one thing I did not enjoy about this chapter were all the technical terms of research. Research origins and history is a major part of psychology, but I would rather watch a study, then read about it. *I believe that understanding the origins of independent and dependent variable are very crucial in understanding the history of psychology. These two definitions are used in a vast majority of psychology research and is very important to understand.
*Chapter 7 relates to the prior chapters because very important people created research, terms, trial & error learning that contributes to the world’s history. Each chapter provides knowledge and pictures of the people or studies that have changed modern society.
*I think I would like to watch/ learn more about the Puzzle Boxes and see how exactly Thorndike used his maze.
*One major idea I had while reading this chapter was - Do we as humans know when we are using “transfer” knowledge?? Like the cat example above that I mentioned, when humans “escape” a situation, do we remember a prior incident, or do we do it subconsciously?
After reading chapter seven on structuralism and functionalism, I found Titchener’s contribution to psychology interesting. Although he only found interest in studying the structure of the human mind, he put all his energy and focus into that resulting in psychology becoming scientific. He wanted to understand his research on the human mind through experiments. Titchener challenged systematic experimental introspection to make it more valid. By suggesting three different solutions, he challenged other psychologists to be knowledgeable about their research.
The second topic I found interesting is finding out that it was Herbert Spencer who came up with the phrase, “survival of the fittest.” Spencer’s ideas differed from Darwin’s in that Spencer believed that the wealthy should not be punished via taxes because they were just showing that they were one of the fittest. Spencer believed that government should not help out the poor because it was their own fault for being poor due to their lack of fitness.
The third topic I found to be of interest is John Dewey’s contribution to education and the movement of progressive education. Progressive education differed from the conventional approach of teaching using drill and practice and strict discipline. Instead, the new progressive education highlighted that students learn through doing. That interacting with the environment challenged students to think on their own and be an active learner.
The topic I found to be least interesting was Thorndike’s puzzle experiments. Although he gave support to trial and error, or in his words, “trial and accidental success,” I did not find it too interesting.
I think that knowing how each psychologist built on one another year after year is the most important in understanding the history of psychology. For example, Titchener studied at Leipzig where Wundt had created a laboratory.
This chapter builds on to the previous chapters because it goes in depth about certain areas of psychology. Also, the chapter further elaborated on previous ideas such as Darwinism.
I would enjoy learning more about social Darwinism. I found the topic to be very intriguing in how it has shaped the government throughout the years following. Also, if many people agreed with Spencer in that government should not interfere with businesses, then how did that influence the economy and did many people classified as “poor” suffer?
While reading chapter 7, one of the things I found interesting was the reflex arc which John Dewey argued is an integrated coordinated whole that serves the function of adapting the organism to the environment. I found this interesting because it builds on the concept of evolution and that the environment causes change. People built off of Dewey’s idea and called it progressive education. This is the idea that we build on past experiences and learn from them and those affect our behaviors
A second thing from the chapter that I found interesting was Titchener and his theory of structuralism, more specifically the experiments he did. Whether or not you think they are flawed or not, he definitely contributed to experimental psychology through his creating of methodology and the manuals. He also developed a journal. And he trained many students in experimental psychology.
The third thing from chapter 7 that I found interesting was Thorndike and puzzle box learning. Thorndike contributed much to the field of comparative psychology with his puzzle box. He would put a cat in one of these boxes and the cats would try to escape -- there would be a lever in the box to release the cat. When a cat was in the box for the first time it would try to escape by random movements and eventually open it by accident. After a while the cat would get better and better, that is faster, in escaping from the box. This is now called Trial and Error learning. Thorndikes’ work influenced many other psychologists, even those who disagreed with him in nearly every psychology class we read about the law of effect. Thorndike later turned to educational psychology had made many contributions in developing that field.
If I had to name one thing that to me wasn’t as interesting in chapter 7 it would be Robert S Woodworth. His work was not very interesting to me. I like his view and how wide ranging psychology is but the other things in his section just didn’t interest me. He was important, however, in getting us to think of experiments in terms of dependent and independent variables. This is how all experiments are now described in psychology. He contrasted this with the correlational method, where only the relationship between two variables is studied. These are very fundamental ideas in the methods of psychology.
The concept from this chapter most useful in understanding the history of psychology is the part where it discusses Darwin and how functionslim was built on his ideas. It again shows Darwin’s vast influence is on psychology and how the idea of adapting to the environment became important in psychology.
This chapter relates to previous chapters because it shows the development of experimental psychology - though in several different directions. Methods of experimentation now become important. Different kinds of learning are explored. Experimentation has become the main idea of the new field of psychology.
The topic would I would like to learn more about is Herbert Spencer and social Darwinism. I like reading about Francis Galton and the idea of eugenics. Spencer took these ideas and applied them to society and influenced many people’s political views. I didn’t know that he was the one who talked about the struggle for existence.
The main ideas I had while reading this chapter focused on the puzzle box and how it was related to behaviorism. I don’t know why, but I thought a lot about Skinner and his pigeons while reading this even though they are different and Skinner had much more in depth in his approach of operant behavior.
The first thing in the chapter I found interesting was the material on Edward Bradford Titchener. In particular, I enjoyed reading about how Titchener promoted experimental psychology during his time working at Cornell. As soon as he arrived to Cornell University in 1892, Titchener quickly got to work trying to expand the laboratory, attracting students, and starting a research program. By the end of the 1800s, he and his students had published over 60 research articles. Actually, in 1895, Titchener signed on as editor of the American Journal of Psychology. Being editor made him able to control a third of the journal’s pages. In the journal, he spread the word about German psychology by translating books by Wundt and Kulpe to English. Meanwhile, he began writing books of his own. He wrote A Textbook of Psychology in 1909. It was the clearest writing explaining the structuralist system. I really enjoyed learning about another important figure in psychology’s history. It was interesting how he introduced some German psychology to the people in America. Also, he had a lot of his own works that made him a very popular figure in the psychology field.
The next thing I found interesting was the material on John Dewey and the reflex arc. During Dewey’s career, he spent ten years in Chicago. While he was there, he came up with his own idea of the reflex arc. The reflex arc is in terms of three separate components. The three components are: the stimulus producing sensation, central processing producing an idea, and the act or motor response. This is in a structural analysis, and Dewey proposed a model in a functional analysis. Dewey argued that the reflex is best conceived as an integrated, coordinated whole that serves the function of helping organisms adapt to their environment. He also said that it’s more of a continuous circuit, rather than an arc. Dewey thought organisms learned and adapted to their environment as a result of experience. I think it’s great that Dewey came up with his own idea based off the original idea of the reflex arc. I understand both the original idea and Dewey’s idea, but if I had to choose one I’d prefer, I’d pick Dewey’s version. I thought he made a great point when he said reflexes were more of a continuous circuit, rather than an arc. This makes a lot of sense, because there’s not really a beginning and an end. Also, I agree with his statement that most people learn through experience. The easiest way to learn something is to just do it and correct any mistakes made along the way. Dewey was yet another important figure in the history of psychology, especially work involving education.
Another thing that interested me was the material on Edward L. Thorndike and puzzle box learning. Thorndike was very interested in animal intelligence, and he came up with different methods to test it. The method he normally used was putting hungry animals in enclosures from which they could escape by a simple act like pulling at a loop of cord or pressing a lever. He would then record their behavior and the time it took for them to escape. He tested it on cats. At first, they did normal things like clawing or biting to get out. Eventually, they would accidentally find their way out. Then, they’d pick up on what they did to get out, and they’d escape almost immediately. This is very similar to the idea of trial and error learning, but Thorndike preferred to call it trial and accidental success, because he thought the cats learned to make connections between stimuli in the boxes and successful escape responses. Thorndike’s model is sometimes called connectionism. These tests are always interesting to learn about. Most of the time, animal intelligence testing involves mice, so an experiment involving cats was very interesting. I like how Thorndike preferred to call it trial and accidental success, rather than trial and error learning, because that’s exactly what it is. They escaped by accidentally pulling the loop or accidentally pulling the lever, which eventually made them learn that’s what they needed to do to escape. It wasn’t by an error or mistake. This experiment is really great, and I’m sure this experiment and others like it intrigued people in the future to do animal intelligence experiments of their own.
One thing that didn’t really interest me was the material on the Thorndike-Mills controversy. I really enjoyed learning about Thorndike’s experiment with cats, but this part of the chapter focused on Wesley Mills criticizing his method. This kind of stuff happens all the time when it comes to experiments. There are a lot of people who will criticize things, because they may think their method or another method is better. In this case, I think the experiment is a very good one, so it wasn’t very interesting to me to learn about Mills’ reasoning for thinking otherwise. Fact of the matter is, everyone has their own opinion. Thorndike has his own opinion, Mills has his own opinion, and so do I. In this case, I didn’t find their differing opinions to be intriguing.
The thing that will be most useful to me in understanding the history of psychology is the material E. B. Titchener. He did a lot of great things while he was at Cornell University. He worked very hard to encourage students to study psychology and help him with his research program. He introduced German psychology while also writing some of his own works. He wrote A Textbook of Psychology, which turned out to be a great book describing the structuralist system. This built on the previous chapters continuing to branch off of other ideas, theories, and individuals. New things are brought up, and new people are brought up. Also, it’s interesting how the book brings up different things happening in different countries regarding psychology. As the time moves forward, it seems like more and more of the world becomes more and more interested in psychology.
I would like to learn more about animal intelligence testing as a whole, not only what contributions Edward Thorndike made toward the subject. It’s always fun to learn about the intelligence levels of different animals. It’d be interesting to learn how animal intelligence testing was in the beginning, and how it is now. While reading the chapter, I was wondering what animals have all been used for animal intelligence testing. The normal animal used are mice, and I learned cats were used in a different study, so it made me wonder what other animals have been tested. Also, I found myself wondering what kind of impact international studies in psychology has had on psychology in the United States. I wondered just how important works done out of the United States were, and I wondered what kind of material does the United States refuse to use, if any.
One thing I found interesting where it talked about Thorndike’s puzzle box learning. He came up with a more systematic way to “test claims for animal intelligence.” I guess I just found it interesting that he used hungry animals as a way to test his experiment. The book told how he used pulling a loop cord, pressing a lever, or stepping on a plat form as part of his experiment for the animals. He watched how long it took them to figure out and complete this and created a box construction to do so. He also made a box to observe cats’ behaviors. Thorndike used trial and error learning. He did these experiments multiple times to see what worked and what didn’t. Sometimes this learning model he used was called connectionism.
I found interesting was where it discussed Titchener’s laboratory science that was focused on finding “the basic structure of human consciousness.” He used systematic experimental introspection as the main method used, because it needs much training. The issue was that he was not interested in the differences of minds and left out “children, animals, and the insane.” The text also went on to say that it became “isolated from American psychology,” because of the “shortcomings” and because of how he thought there was no other way but his. Tichener also wanted to understand how the nervous system made different sensory, perceptual, and cognitive phenomena’s. I found this interesting because it obviously told that Tichener was no open to other views or methods.
The third thing I found interesting was where it talked about the Thorndike-Mills controversy. Mills I thought brought up a good point on how when cats are placed in a small confinement, they are not expected to act naturally. I think this is a very good point, because the cat is not free to roam about like it is use to and putting it in a small place may make it very confused and anxious.
To me the least interesting was the part about the three types of elementary process. This was the least interesting for me because I already knew about sensations, images, and affections. I have learned about them many times before.
I would like to learn more about the structural elements of human conscious experience. This really interested me. And Titchener interests me because he studied it. I think this is interesting because he left out some pretty big studies such as “children, animals, and the insane.” These human conscious experiences are going to or could be much different than the average persons.
I think there were many most useful parts of this chapter in understanding the history of psychology for example the different theories and experiments that were used such as Thorndikes’s puzzle box learning on animals.
This built on from previous chapters by giving more theories and also by more experimenting on animals to test their intelligence and behaviors. It also went on to study the consciousness of the mind.
The first thing I noticed while reading this chapter was that a topic that I wrote about for a blog a few weeks ago was brought up. I wrote more in depth about Darwin’s contributions to psychology, in particular his contributions to natural selection. While researching this topic further, I encountered the name of Herbert Spencer, who coined the term “Survival of the Fittest.” I thought it was pretty cool that he was discussed in the chapter, since I already had some general knowledge about him. He was most famous for coming up with what we know today as “social Darwinism.” Many psychologists would later become known as evolutionary psychologists, who were mainly interested in studying individual differences, animal behavior, human and animal development, and abnormal behavior. These functionalists were extremely happy when the University of Chicago opened its doors in 1892 with an enrollment larger than John Hopkins and Clark University combined.
Another part of the chapter that was quite interesting was the section on Thorndike. Thorndike’s views were not main stream at first. In fact, he was a strong critic of other psychologists of his time. The quote that was provided in our reading was actually pretty funny, yet true. Basically, Thorndike said “Hundreds of dogs get lost and no one writes to a journal about that, but once one finds its way home, everyone gets excited”. Thorndike used experimental methods in order to study animal intelligence. He put hungry animals into boxes, which they could escape by simply pulling a cord, pressing a lever, or stepping on a button. Thorndike observed these animals and recorded the behavior of the animals, as well as the length of time it took them to escape. He did not rely on nonexperimental methods to study animals. His experiments were very logical and clear in theory, but the actual method was not. Unfortunately at this time, psychologists did not have the means that we have today to complete experiments. In the chapter, you can see a few pictures of the boxes he used for his “puzzle boxes.” I’m not quite sure what an appropriate description of them would entail, but the chapter says, “to describe them as crude would be an understatement.”
Going back to the beginning of the chapter, I found Titchener’s Structuralism to be pretty interesting. He worked with Wudnt in Leipzig and came back to America. He was a professor at the Cornell University. He worked with structuralism, which focused on conscious human experience.
This chapter made me think a lot about the controversies surrounding psychology back in that time period. I’d like to learn about some competing views BESIDES evolution. I think it’d be interesting to be part of a study that is competing with a widely held view. Right now, studies working with stem cell research and abortion would be fantastic if put into a psychological study. Think about it: Studies that worked to determine women’s emotional state after abortions. This could go either way I think.
Three things that I found interesting from this chapter were Tichener’s comparisons of structuralism and functionalism to anatomy and physiology, Dewey’s views on education, and Spencer’s beliefs about evolution. While reading this section, I found grasping the concepts of structuralism and functionalism to be a little confusing. Tichener helped me understand the two by relating them to anatomy and physiology. He said that structuralism is like anatomy in that the purpose of both is analysis. Just like anatomists organize knowledge of the human body, structuralists analyze the human mind in the same way and then organize it into smaller units. He then related functionalism to physiology, because the physiologist studies how parts of the body function, and functionalists examine how the mind helps an individual adapt to their environment. He used this metaphor to show that on must study structuralism before they study functionalism. I really enjoyed reading about Dewey’s thoughts on education, because I think that they were really advanced for his time. He didn’t like how the school system was set up, and thought it created an adversive learning environment for children. He knew the importance of education, so he set up a “laboratory school” in Chicago to study how children learned best. He found that children learned best by interacting with the environment around them, and believed that schools should encourage their creativity. Most people think of Darwin when they hear the term “survival of the fittest”, but after reading this section I discovered that it was actually Herbert Spencer. Spencer was pro-evolution just like Darwin, but their theories differed. Darwin believed that attributes helped species to survive, while Spencer believed that survivors were the winners of fierce battles. An example that would be relatable to 2012 would be the business world. He says that successful businesses succeed because they are the fittest, and the ones that fail are not “fit”.
I found most everything interesting in this chapter, but the one thing that I really didn’t like is Spencer’s evolutionary theory. Even though I find it very interesting, I don’t think it is all that ethical. He says that because the fit are meant to survive, we should not help the unfit. An example would be soup kitchens. According to Spencer’s beliefs, there should be no soup kitchen to help out the poor, and we should just let them die off. I feel that it is our responsibility to help others out, so this theory did not sit well with me.
One thing that I think will help me to better understand about the history of psychology is Tichener’s system of psychology. Even though it is not popular this day, it was widely practiced, but his manuals for laboratory psychology made a huge impact and trained many experimental psychologists.
This chapter builds on previous chapters, because it talks a lot about Tichener and he was trained by Wundt. Also, chapter 7 relates to chapter 6, because Angell used James’s textbook that was talked about in chapter 6 while he was in college. He said that the textbook affected his thinking for the next 20 years.
One topic that I would like to learn more about is Carr’s mazes. I think it would be interesting to look at all the different types of mazes he came up with.
One idea that I had while reading this chapter was how popular Spencer’s theory of evolution was when it first came about, and for how long. I know that it would have never caught on today in 2012, so it is hard for me to see how it was ever accepted.
The first topic that I was interested in was over Titchener as an experimentalist. I thought that it was interesting that he tried to join and repeatedly quit and rejoin the American Psychological Association. The APA described in this section does not seem anything like the APA today with its strict structure and rules. I also found it interesting that it took Titchener so long to create a group of his own, even if it was informal. I would have expected him to act immediately on the aspects of the APA he disliked and not wait 12 years.
The second area I was interested in was over John Dewey. He was a genius, like many of the other people who intrigue me, and graduated high school at 15 years old. He is also responsible for coming up with “The Reflex Ark” concept. This was that “reflex is best conceived as an integrated, coordinated whole that serves the function of adapting the organism to its environment.” Dewey intrigued me because he was a genius and worked on the area of reflex.
The final topic I was interested in was on “Puzzle Box Learning.” I like how this section starts with Thorndike’s ideas on higher mental powers in animals. Just because one animal out of many shows some intelligent sign does not mean that that is the norm. This sparked him to build puzzle boxes for animals to try an escape from and their performance would be recorded. This is very similar to the Skinner box but from the pictures shown in the chapter, it was still a very “crude” experiment.
The section I found the least interesting is the area over experiments and Woodworth's Independent and dependent variables. I have been learning of these variables in my research methods class and while it is a simple concept, it is bothersome and I really dislike having to identify the different parts of studies so while it is very important to the experimental method I have little interest in its history.
For best understanding psychologies history I think the section on Titchener and the experimentalists is very important. Here you can see the progress from simply crating on organization, the APA, to actually setting a structure and rules for how studies will be conducted and how research will be presented. This is the beginning for why now all psychological research articles are written in APA format, which is very meticulous about how information is presented.
This chapter built on the previous chapter by going deeper into the research of familiar names like Titchener and Thorndike. These psychologists were written about in previous chapters and this chapter really let us look at some of their contributions to psychology, Titchener with experimentalism and Thorndike with puzzle box learning.
I would like to learn more about puzzle box learning. I feel like this is a very important part of psychologies history because many well know psychologists, like Thorndike and Skinner, used this method of learning and it seems to be able to explain some of the learning processes in animals and sometimes humans very well. While reading the chapter I thought of how poorly made Thorndike’s puzzle boxes were. The photos of them look like he just broke boards apart and threw them together with no real care. In addition, the fact that the boxes did not look like you could see inside very well. How could you effectively watch the process of what was going on inside the box with so many blind spots.
I found it interesting that Titchener was so rigid in his views of what psychology was. His comparison to anatomy/biology was interesting but it did not quite make sense to me. This stuff was for the most boring but with some interesting little facts or stories in there. This introspection to me did not seem very scientific because how can anyone really know if their reality is close to the reality of others? It seemed tricky to have these very trained observers, and then would that not change their perceptions? I guess one of the reasons structuralism faded was because of introspection but also because Titchener was not willing to compromise- it was “his way or the highway.” I found the critique of Titchener interesting. He was faulted for not being interested in the differences between minds and was also uninterested in children, animals and the insane. He also did not include industrial or educational psychology because of his pure lab view.
I found it interesting that Titchener was very important while alive but later his style lost its importance. I guess he was important and is still because of what he did for psychology in the laboratory. He helped “make psychology scientific.”
I thought the part on Chicago functionalists was interesting. I lived in Chicago for 6 years and still love it so I liked reading about some of its history in relation to education and psychology that I was completely unaware of. I really liked reading about Dewey and his work to improve education.
I think functionalism is much more interesting than structuralism. So the least interesting part of the chapter would be structuralism because it seemed less reasonable to me.
I think that understanding the difference between structuralism and functionalism will be most helpful. Also knowing who Titchener is and what he did will be helpful. Knowing the different schools of psychology and their placement in time is also important.
This chapter built on the history of the laboratory, how lab procedures were taught in college and the process of how laboratory procedures changed. New psychology was also talked about. Other famous men were mentioned as influencing the men in this chapter.
I would like to learn more about some of the educational related psychology topics maybe Dewey. A lot of the men in this chapter helped to improve education and I would like to learn something like this.
It occurred to me that a lot of the men we have read about were going to become some sort of clergy but changed their minds. That a lot of them did not start out in psychology is always interesting and that many of them studied many things. I also wondered a lot about why is Tichener being covered if his work lost respect, there was a lot on him and I wondered why?
The work of Titchener was really fascinating. It seems that he really did a lot for American Psychology. He was very interested in conducting good experiments and believed that Psychology needed a good laboratory with strict procedures to follow. His section on how to fail in the lab was a riot! I think most professors could read this in all of their classes , I’m pretty sure I’ve met one or two of these types of students in every class I have been in these past two years.
John Dewey also did some interesting work with the reflex arc and progressive education. It was interesting to really see his study being used practically in the education system.
Thorndike’s work was interesting in how he did these experiments with animals in boxes and went on to be able to take that knowledge to practical application. His Law of Effect was that rewards work better than punishment. It’s interesting that this is widely accepted in schools, workplaces and even prisons.
I think that reading about the stiff competition between the Psychologists gave me a better understanding of the history of Psychology. Although there was some fierce competition and showmanship and a kind of idea that each had the best ideas and ways to study, they really did seem to respect the work of one another. This was not always true but there was a comradery of sorts. It kind of reminds me of a pre-cursor to what we know as the peer review process.
This chapter builds on how Psychology was grown from just a study in European countries to the work of renowned researchers of Psychology here in the United States.
While I was reading I wondered why it took a Psychologist working with animals to understand the idea of what motivates people. I find that work the most interesting and I would like to learn more about how that research has affected other areas of Psychology in regards to education and workplace motivation. I am really interested in Industrial/Organizational branches of Pscyhology.
Thorndike and his Puzzle box learning was very interesting to read about. The puzzle box was to test animals to see their intelligence levels. He studied their behavior and the amount of time it took to escape the box. He noticed they were using the trial and error learning meaning that at first the animals would act randomly but eventually either by accident or on purpose would find their way out. The ideas I had for this were the online games called escape. It’s a game that you start off in an area and you have to find clues to find your way out of the areas. You use the theory of trial and error and eventually you stumble upon the way out. Another idea I had during this was what If we tried this on human babies or toddlers. Would that be ethical? And if so, how would this prove our intelligence as people. Perhaps a study like this has occurred somewhere and it is just a matter of looking it up.
The first thing that I found interesting in Chapter seven was the development of "drill courses". This courses ere developed to help train people how to use the "brass instruments" and to get them a general foundation for research in the laboratory. The foundations for this coursework was first laid by Edmund Sanford in an early standarized laboratory manual for instruction in the lab. Titchener saw the value in this manual, but also saw that there was some flaws in his friend's manual, so Titchner made his own lab manuals and they were used into the 1930's. What I find most interesting about these manuals is the mear fact that there was a need for them. This shows that psychology, particularly experimantal psychology was on the rise and many people were going in to the new and exciting field of psychology.
The next subject that I found to be interesting was in the section of the book entitled "The Experimentalists". Even though Titchener was one of the charter members of the American Psychological Associations, but throughout his years he would have many trials with the organization and would join an quit three times before starting his own organization known as the Experimentalists. This was because he did not feel welcome at the organization, because he refuse to censure someone that had been accused of plagerising. In his organization he wanted smaller groups of peer to get together, rather than large groups, that could come together and read each others work. Anoter interesting point to Titchener's group was the fact that he did not want females to attend, not because there were not capable of knowledge, but because he wanted an environment were men could act in a manner that they wanted and would not have to censor themselve due to females in the room.
The final thing that I found interesting was Herbert Spencer and the idea of social darwinism. He described the idea of evolution as they relate to human activities and society. He argued that people should be left to themselves to suceed or fail and the goverment should not get involoved. Wealth of course would be a sign of "fitness" and poverty a sign of being unfit. This idea futhered instilled in the minds of rich white men that they were superior, because they had the wealth and women and minorities very seldomly did.
One thing that I found to be uninteresting was the section on Harvey Carr. The concept that relates to him on mazes interesting, but it was nothing that could not have been added in at some other point in the book. To be honest I felt like this entire section of the book was just through in and had very little value to the concept of the book.
Something that was curious about that I felt was preceed on by the chapter on Darwinism was the concept of social darwinism. In the most recent chapter that we have read it talked about Herbert Spencer being the developer of the system of social darwinism, but in chapter five on the section on Francis Galton something similar was described. Galton wrote about Heriditary Genius which described very attributes to that of social darwinism almost 100 years ealier. I wonder if there is any connection between these two concepts?
Something that I found interesting yet confusing was John Dewey's concept of the Reflex Arc. I didn't really understand it, but what I gathered was that it may be to the concept of learning tha is seperated into three parts the sensation, the processing and the response. This may be something that I would be interested in to do a little more research on and try to understand the concept more fully.
One thing I found rather interesting was the way in which prominent individuals become to be prominent. A lot of people that have been discussed in the past can be guilty of this as well. Titchener, like others, repeatedly found himself in great positions to become a very influential person in psychology. Titchener had the great opportunity of studying alongside George Romanes and then later underneath Wilhelm Wundt at Leipzig. All of the so called “players” in science and psychology seem to have keen networking skills with one another. I think this shows how influential great minds can be on other like-minded individuals.
Titcheners write-up in his, “Instructors Manual for the Qualitative Experiments” was not only humorous, but interesting. This manual that was illustrated in the chapter appears to be a manual showing students how to fail in laboratory psychology. It’s humorous because in most cases in which he’s talking about, it seems to come off as common sense, but he puts it in a way that tends to be “less” offensive to prospective students.
The experimentalists group founded by E.B. Titchener had to be the most interesting/coolest topic I read about. Titchener simply rejected the views and methods of the APA and didn’t think it was up to his “gentlemen-like” standards. So, he didn’t participate in the American Psychological Association any longer than he had to. After leaving the APA, he created his own club, “The Experimentalists”. Entrance to the group was very selective and had strict rules. Titchener was the leader and ultimately decided who got in and who didn’t. Despite the groups radical break away from the APA, the organization was considered to be very prestigious. Its members often resided in prominent positions at well known Universities. Another interesting characteristic of the group was that no women were allowed. The club was supposed to be gentlemen oriented and they didn’t want women ruining that for them. They didn’t want women being around during their meetings for risk of offending them during their heated debates. Smoking cigars was also very common at these meetings, which added to the message that women weren’t allowed.
I found John Dewey’s reflex arc theory to be the least interesting. Dewey’s theory proposed that reflexes were more of a learned event and served a functional purpose. I find it true that some reflexes consequently lead to learning processes about which things to avoid in certain environments but, I believe most reflexes that normally happen to us occur too fast for any type of conscious thought about what’s going on. Today, we know that reflexes can be improved through specific training. For example, athletes train in various ways to improve their reflex speed. The point I’m trying to convey is that we don’t consciously cause our reflexes, they happen without conscious thought. It’s instinct.
Reading about structuralism and functionalism really helped me further understand the history of psychology. I say this because psychology started out as a very broad discipline and now we have these concepts of structuralism and functionalism. This is just showing how psychology has been progressing over the decades, becoming a true discipline. From broad to specific.
I think this chapter shows how serious E.B. Titchener was about experimentalism (the lab) by how he separated himself from the APA and created the experimentalists group. This chapter is showing how a recently formed way of researching (laboratory experiments) is gaining popularity and momentum. It’s worth noting how many scientists are moving away from religious and philosophical views for real empirical evidence that can be proved through experimentation done within the laboratory.
I would like to learn more about Titchener’s experimentalists. I think it was very courageous of Titchener to put this group together, given the time period. I also think their appeal (cigars, hats, trench coats, etc) appears very mob-like and would like to learn more interesting facts about them.
Ideas I had while reading the chapter:
-Whether or not reflexes are evolutionary features that nature has created to enable an organism better chances of survival
-If nerves have their own memory. They can act without the help of the brain. Reflexes happen without reliance on the brain? (chicken with its head cut off still runs around for hours)
The first part I thought was very interesting was learning about John Dewey and his Reflex Arc Theory. Dewey was a teacher and later a graduate in philosophy which enabled him to really think about how our mind works. He was not a largely known psychologist and didn’t have a known name to show his credibility, but he believed in solid hard work which paid off later with his Theory. The Reflex Arc Theory was made of in three basic parts: the stimulus producing sensation, central processing producing an idea, and the act or motor response. Through Dewey’s evolutionary thinking he believed that an organism as a whole may adapt to its environment. I believe this is such a simple concept that is very interesting and is one that amazes me to think about. They also talk a lot about two different subjects called struralism and functualism which I believe are both very important to psychology as well. Titchener was a revolutionary psychologist in this field and stated that it was pointless to know study how something works if you don’t know the anatomy of it first. Structualism is based mainly on how a psychologist analyzes a person’s anatomy. Functionalism is based on how a psychologist bases the physiology of different body parts and how they are used. Titchener seemed to help the ideas become a much bigger topic after he gained popularity for being a great experimenter in the U.S. Some aspects I didn’t like about this chapter is how it was vague on what some psychologist’s did such as Tichener and a few others. It also went over independent and dependent variables which I thought weren’t really needed. I would like to learn more about Herbert Spencer’s work with social Darwinism as well as I think it is a very interesting topic even though it has been proved quite wrong in places. This chapter is becoming much more specific in how they are coming up with new theories and I can tell how a lot of these ideas will be much more useful later.
While reading chapter 7, the first thing that I found to be interesting and kind of amusing was E.B Titchener and his close knit male researchers that referred to themselves as the experimentalists. I love that they found such a common bond for their love of psychology and research and formed what almost sounds like a club. I think it is also pretty interesting that he introduced students and staff to very precise laboratory work and used manuals as well. I wonder how much of what I have practiced previously in labs was first introduced by Titchener. The second thing from this chapter that I found pretty interesting also related to Titchener. The section discussed that conscious experience was made up of affect, sensations, and images. This actually makes a lot of sense to me when I think about it, especially the fact that images would not be as clear as sensations. The third thing I enjoyed learning about in this chapter was how Chicago and Columbia came to be such prominent universities in the United States and that functionalism is associated so heavily with the two of them.
One topic from this chapter that I did not find especially interesting to learn about was the reflex arc. It was pretty boring and a little difficult for me to follow, however, it also helps build on from previous chapters when we learn how different psychologists began to discover what a reflex was in the first place. Now they are learning that it is somewhat of a continuous circuit.
I think the topic from this chapter that will be most useful to me understanding the history of psychology is a lot of the little contributions that Titchener had in the field. I think it is pretty fascinating that he was able to make such headway within the laboratories and I love how enthused he was with working with students and faculty and getting them interested in psychology as well. I also liked learning about how fast the University of Chicago grew and how prominent it became, even though it was far away from the east coast where most of the prestigious schools were.
Some ideas I had while reading this chapter was honestly that I found chapter seven to be a little dull. It was hard for me to keep interest during a lot of it but for me to stay focused I had to envision what it would all be like around the 1900’s, and think about how amazing it would really be to experience everything like they were in that time.
One topic from this chapter that I think I would like to learn a little more about is Titchener's life. I think there are certain things about him that are fascinating, such as the fact that Boring was one of his students, and the claims that he was anti-female. his club was rather exclusive and I would like to find articles that may tell things from his point of view.
I liked the part about the elements of human conscious experience. It refers to there being three processes: sensation, images, and affections. I found it interesting that all sensations had attributes of quality, intensity, duration, and clearness because it made me think about each of them in regards to my own perceptions. You could categorize telling the difference in it being cold or warm and put it in the quality section of the mind and duration would be how long the sensation lasts.
I enjoyed the section about Dewey’s movement known as progressive education. I always think it’s cool to see psychologists in other fields, like how Dewey was a schoolteacher or how other psychologists didn’t join that field until later on in life though they were already in a career themselves. This section brought up how Dewey did research on how children learn best in classrooms. I think I would’ve liked having Dewey as a teacher because it said he didn’t like the conventional approach to teaching because it didn’t make kids want to learn. I think we learn a lot by experience and doing things more hands on than just reading a textbook. It’s kind of like this class because we have to learn to think more critically and speak up about what we think.
I liked reading the part about Thorndike’s puzzle box. He made a lot of sense trying to use animals in a setting where they have to be challenged while hungry to not only make them do the study, but get a reward at the end of it. I remember reading about this in Behavior Modification and the part about trial and error learning. It’s something we do every day. For me, cooking is a trial and error every time I attempt it. You don’t know until you try it one way only to find out you can do it differently and it’d be more successful.
The topic I found the least interesting was in the beginning about structuralism. It talks about how it similar to anatomy though a psychologist organizes the mind into units. The whole section just lost my attention though it did contrast with functionalism which is like physiology. Then I realized this whole chapter was about structuralism and functionalism and grew to find it more interesting as I read more about them.
I think reading more and more about how studies on animals can be related to us is a big thing in psychology. Reading about Thorndike’s box just made a connection with me and it shows just how relatable the research is from animals to humans. I’m sure animal research will continue to be a part of psychology’s history, present, and future.
This chapter relates to other chapters by always referring to previous psychologists work. When reading about John Dewey’s reflex arc in the functionalism section, they mention Bell and Magendie’s work with reflexes. I think each chapter always reflects on another psychologist’s work from a previous chapter to help you recall what psychologists did not only earlier in the book, but earlier in the history of psychology.
I would like to learn more about children’s learning in a classroom and what strategies Dewey used to achieve the greatest success. He said it was about connecting children to the environment and letting their minds think creatively.
I liked Dewey’s whole approach to education. I just wonder if his methods were the ‘correct’ way to educate kids. Not all kids learn in the same environment. Some people like the more structured setting of a classroom taking notes while others like to see real world examples and how they can apply them in their own lives. The other idea that comes to mind is how we can be categorized into being visual or auditory or both types of learners. I know I am an auditory learner and it takes me a while to takes notes on a powerpoint because I have to look up at the screen every few seconds whereas if I hear the words being said I can remember them more clearly.
Something I found interesting in this chapter was the relationship between Edward Titchener and John Watson. Watson didn’t agree with Titchener’s structuralism beliefs and Titchener disliked everything about Watson’s beliefs about behaviorism. However, Titchener respected the fact that Watson was a true laboratory scientist, which was sufficient ground for respect and friendship. After meeting Watson for the first time Titchener even wrote to a colleague that “I think he has a big career, and I like him very much personally”. It was intriguing to me that two great minds were able to see past their differences and maintain a mutual respect for each other.
Another interesting topic in this chapter was Titchener’s contribution to drill courses. Drill courses were used in American universities to get students prepared to conduct research and become acclimated to the laboratory. However, as laboratory psychology expanded a need developed for a text that could explain how to train students in basic laboratory procedures. Titchener recognized the need and published his own manuals under the title of Experimental Psychology: A Manual of Laboratory Practice. They became his best-known work, serving for years as the guide into the complexities of laboratory investigation. The manuals contained separate texts for students and instructors. Although Titchener’s system of psychology faded rapidly after his death, the use of his manuals lived on. The manuals remained in use well into the 1930s and trained several generations of experimental psychologists.
The experimentalists were another interesting topic covered in this chapter. The experimentalists were known as a “club” created by Titchener. He felt that the American Psychological Association didn’t advance the psychology that he believed in. This, among other reasons, resulted in the creation of the club. He didn’t intend to rival the APA, but to provide a better means of for researchers to present their work to their peers. The group met two or three times every spring. They discussed ongoing research, tinkered with apparatuses, and tried to keep the spirit of laboratory psychology alive.
A section that I found to be less interesting was the discussion of independent and dependent variables. I understand the importance they have in research and also understand the concept of them. However, I have learned about them countless times, they have become known facts and less interesting to read about.
The chapter relates to previous chapters by continuing to discuss the expansion of psychology in America. This chapter goes into more detail about previously mentioned psychologists as well as introduces new ones. This chapter also discusses Darwinism and the evolutionary theory, which are topics that have also been discussed in previous chapters.
An important aspect to better understand the history of psychology is to understand the importance of structuralism and functionalism. The text uses a biology metaphor to make these terms clear. It is important to understand that Titchener believed that functionalism relied on structuralism. This meant that a thorough understanding of the structure of the human mind must be a necessary prerequisite to study its function. Although structuralism virtually died with Titchener, it still remains important to the history of psychology.
A topic I would like to learn more about is the experimentalists group. I found myself intrigued by this group, and thinking they were the “outlaws” of American psychology during this time. I also found myself wondering why Titchener kept returning to the APA when he was so dissatisfied, why didn’t he just create the club sooner?
I was interested in three guys discussed at length in Chapter 7Dewey, Titchener, and Thorndike.
I found Dewey most interesting. I really liked to learn about the reflex arc. The arc consists of 3 basic parts: stimulus producing sensations, central processing producing, and motor responses/actions. The reflex arc as a whole is what helps an organism to adapt to the environment in which it lives. What’s most interesting is that all of these parts of an arc happen in order for a reflex response to occur. However, when you think about the process itself, it’s easy to see that we don’t really think about what is happening. All of this occurs in less than a fraction of a second. That’s why it’s a reflex. Our brain doesn’t even consciously have to think about it. When something is hot, we put away before we get burned. If something is cold, we pull away before we freeze/hurt. If we had to think about this process before we pulled away, we would all be more prone to injury. Sometimes our body reacts unconsciously to protect us from harm and our conscious didn’t even seem to think about what was going on. This is the beauty of reflexes and why I found Dewey’s findings to be interesting.
To talk about another psychologist mentioned, Thorndike is interesting because he worked with cats instead of rats, or people, or other more normal mammals. It’s not a common thing to hear about psychologists using cat’s for studies. Especially since I don’t really think that cats have all that much in common with humans. Thorndike was the psychologist that first talked about trial and error and how it was used in the learning process…even the learning process of a cat. It’s also interesting that Thorndike seemed to have a link between familiarity or a situation in which a circumstance is similar to another circumstance and expediated learning. People learn more quickly as a heightened degree of circumstance similarity where they could make connections to previously learned things. I also found it incredibly interesting how Thorndike related this idea to humans. He stated that humans who try to learn a subject that is not related to something will not improve their ability to learn something
new. In other words, the more two things are alike, the easier they will be to learn.
Despite my dislike for Titchener’s comments about women, I found the fact that he translated German psychological works into English pretty cool! Further, when translating, Titchener looked at teaching methods (as did Dewey) and created manuals for learning and teaching in the lab world. It’s interesting to think about there being a specific person who helped to ensure the knowledge exchange by helping in the interpretation process. I am interested in the fact that in addition to Dewey’s hands-on/drill course teaching methods, Titchener also had teaching metho ideas and information. The labs were broken down to step-by-step instruction for past studies. I think it’s interesting to think about learning and how Titchener and Dewey seemed to relate on these specific thoughts.
Though Titchener’s idea about women were interested, I was not interested in learning about how he was a sexist pig who
wouldn’t allow women to come into his psychology club and “disrupt the thinking that goes on” or “disturb the normal environment”. Basically I lost interest in learning about him (though his info. Took up a huge section of the chapter) when I learned how much of a close minded A-hole he was. In general, I’m interested in everything in the readings. I do find it interesting that he judged groups based on the dynamics of a group (ex. Women in an all male group). I suppose that it didn’t necessarily say that Titchener disrespected women, but it did say that he thought there had a bad effect on the group dynamics when the group is male. The only reason I picked this as the point that I wasn’t interested in was because I feel like this specific discussion topic is more relevant to the studies of sociology or philosophy than psychology. I thought it was a little bit of a waste of time and space in the reading.
Dewey’s research on learning was really interesting and perhaps most helpful in the understanding of the history of psychology. Dewey’s findings about learning and effective learning styles helped to make changes in the methods of teaching, both in and out of the field of psychology. I feel like what he found is pretty common knowledge today. People/children learn best by interaction or doing something--this lead to changes in teaching methodology. When you know how and why something is taught in any specific way, you are better able and prepared to answer why questions and make connections on subject matter. The way that psychology is taught today is a direct reflection of various past findings in the field. Thus, even our teaching methods prove to be most useful in the understanding of psychological history.
I would like to learn more about John Dewey. I would especially like to learn more about his involvement with women’s suffrage. I was interested in the information about him speaking in support of women’s rights. I also like that he aided in the creation of unions. He seemed like an all around good guy and I would like to learn more about how he left a positive mark on society.
This chapter builds on the previously discussed topics of structuralism and functionalism. I originally learned about these terms in my high school anatomy and physiology class. The terms apply similarly with psychology. This concept is like the foundation for what we have learned and what we are learning now. Each section of our reading builds on both the structure (frame, foundation, base, purpose…anatomy) of an idea, study, etc. and the function (what it does, how it works, operations, what purpose it serves, how it helps….physiology). the section about Titchener refers to functionalism and structuralism when talking about his contributions. This of course builds off of the previously discussed chapters and material as functionalism and structuralism are both basic terms from the past chapters of this book.
The ideas that I had while reading this week were mostly just me agreeing with the ideas of the psychologists. Dewey was right that our reflexes are unconscious and happen faster than conscious thoughts (if you asked me). I also wonder why Titchener thought what he did about women. What facts and evidence did he base that off of? Was there any research to back him up or was he just an arrogant male/jerk? I had a lot of personal ideas about the character of the individuals and why the individuals came up with the things they did. I also had the idea that Dewey was pretty cool for coming up with information about hands-on teaching styles.
I may be wrong, but I feel like we’ve gone over the ideas of structuralism and functionalism at some point in this class. Regardless, E.B. Titchner defined his own terms of structuralism, he saw it as similar to anatomy in which things have elements and components.
Titchener was a pupil of Wundt, and focused a lot of his work on introspection. However, he understood that it wasn’t plausible to be conscious in an experience to the point of being able to reflect and analyze it. While this interesting, I don’t fully understand it so I can’t elaborate more.
With this, he also revealed that any form of introspection would also be unable to be tested on children, the insane, and animals because they couldn’t introspect in the fashion that researchers could draw conclusions from.