Psychology came from the greek word

«Psychological» redirects here. For the Pet Shop Boys song, see Psychological (song).

Psychology is the scientific study of mind and behavior in humans and non-humans. Psychology includes the study of conscious and unconscious phenomena, including feelings and thoughts. It is an academic discipline of immense scope, crossing the boundaries between the natural and social sciences. Psychologists seek an understanding of the emergent properties of brains, linking the discipline to neuroscience. As social scientists, psychologists aim to understand the behavior of individuals and groups.[1][2] Ψ (psi), the first letter of the Greek word psyche from which the term psychology is derived (see below), is commonly associated with the science.

A professional practitioner or researcher involved in the discipline is called a psychologist. Some psychologists can also be classified as behavioral or cognitive scientists. Some psychologists attempt to understand the role of mental functions in individual and social behavior. Others explore the physiological and neurobiological processes that underlie cognitive functions and behaviors.

Psychologists are involved in research on perception, cognition, attention, emotion, intelligence, subjective experiences, motivation, brain functioning, and personality. Psychologists’ interests extend to interpersonal relationships, psychological resilience, family resilience, and other areas within social psychology. They also consider the unconscious mind.[3] Research psychologists employ empirical methods to infer causal and correlational relationships between psychosocial variables. Some, but not all, clinical and counseling psychologists rely on symbolic interpretation.

While psychological knowledge is often applied to the assessment and treatment of mental health problems, it is also directed towards understanding and solving problems in several spheres of human activity. By many accounts, psychology ultimately aims to benefit society.[4][5][6] Many psychologists are involved in some kind of therapeutic role, practicing psychotherapy in clinical, counseling, or school settings. Other psychologists conduct scientific research on a wide range of topics related to mental processes and behavior. Typically the latter group of psychologists work in academic settings (e.g., universities, medical schools, or hospitals). Another group of psychologists is employed in industrial and organizational settings.[7] Yet others are involved in work on human development, aging, sports, health, forensic science, education, and the media.

Etymology and definitions

The word psychology derives from the Greek word psyche, for spirit or soul. The latter part of the word «psychology» derives from -λογία -logia, which refers to «study» or «research».[8] The Latin word psychologia was first used by the Croatian humanist and Latinist Marko Marulić in his book, Psichiologia de ratione animae humanae (Psychology, on the Nature of the Human Soul) in the late 15th century or early 16th century.[9] The earliest known reference to the word psychology in English was by Steven Blankaart in 1694 in The Physical Dictionary. The dictionary refers to «Anatomy, which treats the Body, and Psychology, which treats of the Soul.»[10]

In 1890, William James defined psychology as «the science of mental life, both of its phenomena and their conditions.»[11] This definition enjoyed widespread currency for decades. However, this meaning was contested, notably by radical behaviorists such as John B. Watson, who in 1913 asserted that the discipline is a «natural science», the theoretical goal of which «is the prediction and control of behavior.»[12] Since James defined «psychology», the term more strongly implicates scientific experimentation.[13][12] Folk psychology refers to ordinary people’s, as contrasted with psychology professionals’, understanding of the mental states and behaviors of people.[14]

History

The ancient civilizations of Egypt, Greece, China, India, and Persia all engaged in the philosophical study of psychology. In Ancient Egypt the Ebers Papyrus mentioned depression and thought disorders.[15] Historians note that Greek philosophers, including Thales, Plato, and Aristotle (especially in his De Anima treatise),[16] addressed the workings of the mind.[17] As early as the 4th century BC, the Greek physician Hippocrates theorized that mental disorders had physical rather than supernatural causes.[18] In 387 BCE, Plato suggested that the brain is where mental processes take place, and in 335 BCE Aristotle suggested that it was the heart.[19]

In China, psychological understanding grew from the philosophical works of Laozi and Confucius, and later from the doctrines of Buddhism. This body of knowledge involves insights drawn from introspection and observation, as well as techniques for focused thinking and acting. It frames the universe in term of a division of physical reality and mental reality as well as the interaction between the physical and the mental. Chinese philosophy also emphasized purifying the mind in order to increase virtue and power. An ancient text known as The Yellow Emperor’s Classic of Internal Medicine identifies the brain as the nexus of wisdom and sensation, includes theories of personality based on yin–yang balance, and analyzes mental disorder in terms of physiological and social disequilibria. Chinese scholarship that focused on the brain advanced during the Qing Dynasty with the work of Western-educated Fang Yizhi (1611–1671), Liu Zhi (1660–1730), and Wang Qingren (1768–1831). Wang Qingren emphasized the importance of the brain as the center of the nervous system, linked mental disorder with brain diseases, investigated the causes of dreams and insomnia, and advanced a theory of hemispheric lateralization in brain function.[20]

Influenced by Hinduism, Indian philosophy explored distinctions in types of awareness. A central idea of the Upanishads and other Vedic texts that formed the foundations of Hinduism was the distinction between a person’s transient mundane self and their eternal, unchanging soul. Divergent Hindu doctrines and Buddhism have challenged this hierarchy of selves, but have all emphasized the importance of reaching higher awareness. Yoga encompasses a range of techniques used in pursuit of this goal. Theosophy, a religion established by Russian-American philosopher Helena Blavatsky, drew inspiration from these doctrines during her time in British India.[21][22]

Psychology was of interest to Enlightenment thinkers in Europe. In Germany, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) applied his principles of calculus to the mind, arguing that mental activity took place on an indivisible continuum. He suggested that the difference between conscious and unconscious awareness is only a matter of degree. Christian Wolff identified psychology as its own science, writing Psychologia Empirica in 1732 and Psychologia Rationalis in 1734. Immanuel Kant advanced the idea of anthropology as a discipline, with psychology an important subdivision. Kant, however, explicitly rejected the idea of an experimental psychology, writing that «the empirical doctrine of the soul can also never approach chemistry even as a systematic art of analysis or experimental doctrine, for in it the manifold of inner observation can be separated only by mere division in thought, and cannot then be held separate and recombined at will (but still less does another thinking subject suffer himself to be experimented upon to suit our purpose), and even observation by itself already changes and displaces the state of the observed object.» In 1783, Ferdinand Ueberwasser (1752–1812) designated himself Professor of Empirical Psychology and Logic and gave lectures on scientific psychology, though these developments were soon overshadowed by the Napoleonic Wars.[23] At the end of the Napoleonic era, Prussian authorities discontinued the Old University of Münster.[23] Having consulted philosophers Hegel and Herbart, however, in 1825 the Prussian state established psychology as a mandatory discipline in its rapidly expanding and highly influential educational system. However, this discipline did not yet embrace experimentation.[24] In England, early psychology involved phrenology and the response to social problems including alcoholism, violence, and the country’s crowded «lunatic» asylums.[25]

Beginning of experimental psychology

Wilhelm Wundt (seated) with colleagues in his psychological laboratory, the first of its kind

Philosopher John Stuart Mill believed that the human mind was open to scientific investigation, even if the science is in some ways inexact.[26] Mill proposed a «mental chemistry» in which elementary thoughts could combine into ideas of greater complexity.[26] Gustav Fechner began conducting psychophysics research in Leipzig in the 1830s. He articulated the principle that human perception of a stimulus varies logarithmically according to its intensity.[27]: 61  The principle became known as the Weber–Fechner law. Fechner’s 1860 Elements of Psychophysics challenged Kant’s negative view with regard to conducting quantitative research on the mind.[28][24] Fechner’s achievement was to show that «mental processes could not only be given numerical magnitudes, but also that these could be measured by experimental methods.»[24] In Heidelberg, Hermann von Helmholtz conducted parallel research on sensory perception, and trained physiologist Wilhelm Wundt. Wundt, in turn, came to Leipzig University, where he established the psychological laboratory that brought experimental psychology to the world. Wundt focused on breaking down mental processes into the most basic components, motivated in part by an analogy to recent advances in chemistry, and its successful investigation of the elements and structure of materials.[29] Paul Flechsig and Emil Kraepelin soon created another influential laboratory at Leipzig, a psychology-related lab, that focused more on experimental psychiatry.[24]

The German psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus, a researcher at the University of Berlin, was another 19th-century contributor to the field. He pioneered the experimental study of memory and developed quantitative models of learning and forgetting.[30] In the early twentieth century, Wolfgang Kohler, Max Wertheimer, and Kurt Koffka co-founded the school of Gestalt psychology (not to be confused with the Gestalt therapy of Fritz Perls). The approach of Gestalt psychology is based upon the idea that individuals experience things as unified wholes. Rather than reducing thoughts and behavior into smaller component elements, as in structuralism, the Gestaltists maintained that whole of experience is important, and differs from the sum of its parts.

Psychologists in Germany, Denmark, Austria, England, and the United States soon followed Wundt in setting up laboratories.[31] G. Stanley Hall, an American who studied with Wundt, founded a psychology lab that became internationally influential. The lab was located at Johns Hopkins University. Hall, in turn, trained Yujiro Motora, who brought experimental psychology, emphasizing psychophysics, to the Imperial University of Tokyo.[32] Wundt’s assistant, Hugo Münsterberg, taught psychology at Harvard to students such as Narendra Nath Sen Gupta—who, in 1905, founded a psychology department and laboratory at the University of Calcutta.[21] Wundt’s students Walter Dill Scott, Lightner Witmer, and James McKeen Cattell worked on developing tests of mental ability. Cattell, who also studied with eugenicist Francis Galton, went on to found the Psychological Corporation. Witmer focused on the mental testing of children; Scott, on employee selection.[27]: 60 

Another student of Wundt, the Englishman Edward Titchener, created the psychology program at Cornell University and advanced «structuralist» psychology. The idea behind structuralism was to analyze and classify different aspects of the mind, primarily through the method of introspection.[33] William James, John Dewey, and Harvey Carr advanced the idea of functionalism, an expansive approach to psychology that underlined the Darwinian idea of a behavior’s usefulness to the individual. In 1890, James wrote an influential book, The Principles of Psychology, which expanded on the structuralism. He memorably described «stream of consciousness.» James’s ideas interested many American students in the emerging discipline.[33][11][27]: 178–82  Dewey integrated psychology with societal concerns, most notably by promoting progressive education, inculcating moral values in children, and assimilating immigrants.[27]: 196–200 

A different strain of experimentalism, with a greater connection to physiology, emerged in South America, under the leadership of Horacio G. Piñero at the University of Buenos Aires.[34] In Russia, too, researchers placed greater emphasis on the biological basis for psychology, beginning with Ivan Sechenov’s 1873 essay, «Who Is to Develop Psychology and How?» Sechenov advanced the idea of brain reflexes and aggressively promoted a deterministic view of human behavior.[35] The Russian-Soviet physiologist Ivan Pavlov discovered in dogs a learning process that was later termed «classical conditioning» and applied the process to human beings.[36]

Consolidation and funding

One of the earliest psychology societies was La Société de Psychologie Physiologique in France, which lasted from 1885 to 1893. The first meeting of the International Congress of Psychology sponsored by the International Union of Psychological Science took place in Paris, in August 1889, amidst the World’s Fair celebrating the centennial of the French Revolution. William James was one of three Americans among the 400 attendees. The American Psychological Association (APA) was founded soon after, in 1892. The International Congress continued to be held at different locations in Europe and with wide international participation. The Sixth Congress, held in Geneva in 1909, included presentations in Russian, Chinese, and Japanese, as well as Esperanto. After a hiatus for World War I, the Seventh Congress met in Oxford, with substantially greater participation from the war-victorious Anglo-Americans. In 1929, the Congress took place at Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, attended by hundreds of members of the APA.[31] Tokyo Imperial University led the way in bringing new psychology to the East. New ideas about psychology diffused from Japan into China.[20][32]

American psychology gained status upon the U.S.’s entry into World War I. A standing committee headed by Robert Yerkes administered mental tests («Army Alpha» and «Army Beta») to almost 1.8 million soldiers.[37] Subsequently, the Rockefeller family, via the Social Science Research Council, began to provide funding for behavioral research.[38][39] Rockefeller charities funded the National Committee on Mental Hygiene, which disseminated the concept of mental illness and lobbied for applying ideas from psychology to child rearing.[37][40] Through the Bureau of Social Hygiene and later funding of Alfred Kinsey, Rockefeller foundations helped establish research on sexuality in the U.S.[41] Under the influence of the Carnegie-funded Eugenics Record Office, the Draper-funded Pioneer Fund, and other institutions, the eugenics movement also influenced American psychology. In the 1910s and 1920s, eugenics became a standard topic in psychology classes.[42] In contrast to the US, in the UK psychology was met with antagonism by the scientific and medical establishments, and up until 1939, there were only six psychology chairs in universities in England.[43]

During World War II and the Cold War, the U.S. military and intelligence agencies established themselves as leading funders of psychology by way of the armed forces and in the new Office of Strategic Services intelligence agency. University of Michigan psychologist Dorwin Cartwright reported that university researchers began large-scale propaganda research in 1939–1941. He observed that «the last few months of the war saw a social psychologist become chiefly responsible for determining the week-by-week-propaganda policy for the United States Government.» Cartwright also wrote that psychologists had significant roles in managing the domestic economy.[44] The Army rolled out its new General Classification Test to assess the ability of millions of soldiers. The Army also engaged in large-scale psychological research of troop morale and mental health.[45] In the 1950s, the Rockefeller Foundation and Ford Foundation collaborated with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to fund research on psychological warfare.[46] In 1965, public controversy called attention to the Army’s Project Camelot, the «Manhattan Project» of social science, an effort which enlisted psychologists and anthropologists to analyze the plans and policies of foreign countries for strategic purposes.[47][48]

In Germany after World War I, psychology held institutional power through the military, which was subsequently expanded along with the rest of the military during Nazi Germany.[24] Under the direction of Hermann Göring’s cousin Matthias Göring, the Berlin Psychoanalytic Institute was renamed the Göring Institute. Freudian psychoanalysts were expelled and persecuted under the anti-Jewish policies of the Nazi Party, and all psychologists had to distance themselves from Freud and Adler, founders of psychoanalysis who were also Jewish.[49] The Göring Institute was well-financed throughout the war with a mandate to create a «New German Psychotherapy.» This psychotherapy aimed to align suitable Germans with the overall goals of the Reich. As described by one physician, «Despite the importance of analysis, spiritual guidance and the active cooperation of the patient represent the best way to overcome individual mental problems and to subordinate them to the requirements of the Volk and the Gemeinschaft.» Psychologists were to provide Seelenführung [lit., soul guidance], the leadership of the mind, to integrate people into the new vision of a German community.[50] Harald Schultz-Hencke melded psychology with the Nazi theory of biology and racial origins, criticizing psychoanalysis as a study of the weak and deformed.[51] Johannes Heinrich Schultz, a German psychologist recognized for developing the technique of autogenic training, prominently advocated sterilization and euthanasia of men considered genetically undesirable, and devised techniques for facilitating this process.[52]

After the war, new institutions were created although some psychologists, because of their Nazi affiliation, were discredited. Alexander Mitscherlich founded a prominent applied psychoanalysis journal called Psyche. With funding from the Rockefeller Foundation, Mitscherlich established the first clinical psychosomatic medicine division at Heidelberg University. In 1970, psychology was integrated into the required studies of medical students.[53]

After the Russian Revolution, the Bolsheviks promoted psychology as a way to engineer the «New Man» of socialism. Consequently, university psychology departments trained large numbers of students in psychology. At the completion of training, positions were made available for those students at schools, workplaces, cultural institutions, and in the military. The Russian state emphasized pedology and the study of child development. Lev Vygotsky became prominent in the field of child development.[35] The Bolsheviks also promoted free love and embraced the doctrine of psychoanalysis as an antidote to sexual repression.[54]: 84–6[55] Although pedology and intelligence testing fell out of favor in 1936, psychology maintained its privileged position as an instrument of the Soviet Union.[35] Stalinist purges took a heavy toll and instilled a climate of fear in the profession, as elsewhere in Soviet society.[54]: 22 Following World War II, Jewish psychologists past and present, including Lev Vygotsky, A.R. Luria, and Aron Zalkind, were denounced; Ivan Pavlov (posthumously) and Stalin himself were celebrated as heroes of Soviet psychology.[54]: 25–6, 48–9  Soviet academics experienced a degree of liberalization during the Khrushchev Thaw. The topics of cybernetics, linguistics, and genetics became acceptable again. The new field of engineering psychology emerged. The field involved the study of the mental aspects of complex jobs (such as pilot and cosmonaut). Interdisciplinary studies became popular and scholars such as Georgy Shchedrovitsky developed systems theory approaches to human behavior.[54]: 27–33

Twentieth-century Chinese psychology originally modeled itself on U.S. psychology, with translations from American authors like William James, the establishment of university psychology departments and journals, and the establishment of groups including the Chinese Association of Psychological Testing (1930) and the Chinese Psychological Society (1937). Chinese psychologists were encouraged to focus on education and language learning. Chinese psychologists were drawn to the idea that education would enable modernization. John Dewey, who lectured to Chinese audiences between 1919 and 1921, had a significant influence on psychology in China. Chancellor T’sai Yuan-p’ei introduced him at Peking University as a greater thinker than Confucius. Kuo Zing-yang who received a PhD at the University of California, Berkeley, became President of Zhejiang University and popularized behaviorism.[56]: 5–9  After the Chinese Communist Party gained control of the country, the Stalinist Soviet Union became the major influence, with Marxism–Leninism the leading social doctrine and Pavlovian conditioning the approved means of behavior change. Chinese psychologists elaborated on Lenin’s model of a «reflective» consciousness, envisioning an «active consciousness» (pinyin: tzu-chueh neng-tung-li) able to transcend material conditions through hard work and ideological struggle. They developed a concept of «recognition» (pinyin: jen-shih) which referred to the interface between individual perceptions and the socially accepted worldview; failure to correspond with party doctrine was «incorrect recognition.»[56]: 9–17 Psychology education was centralized under the Chinese Academy of Sciences, supervised by the State Council. In 1951, the academy created a Psychology Research Office, which in 1956 became the Institute of Psychology. Because most leading psychologists were educated in the United States, the first concern of the academy was the re-education of these psychologists in the Soviet doctrines. Child psychology and pedagogy for the purpose of a nationally cohesive education remained a central goal of the discipline.[56]: 18–24 

Disciplinary organization

Institutions

In 1920, Édouard Claparède and Pierre Bovet created a new applied psychology organization called the International Congress of Psychotechnics Applied to Vocational Guidance, later called the International Congress of Psychotechnics and then the International Association of Applied Psychology.[31] The IAAP is considered the oldest international psychology association.[57] Today, at least 65 international groups deal with specialized aspects of psychology.[57] In response to male predominance in the field, female psychologists in the U.S. formed the National Council of Women Psychologists in 1941. This organization became the International Council of Women Psychologists after World War II and the International Council of Psychologists in 1959. Several associations including the Association of Black Psychologists and the Asian American Psychological Association have arisen to promote the inclusion of non-European racial groups in the profession.[57]

The International Union of Psychological Science (IUPsyS) is the world federation of national psychological societies. The IUPsyS was founded in 1951 under the auspices of the United Nations Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (UNESCO).[31][58] Psychology departments have since proliferated around the world, based primarily on the Euro-American model.[21][58] Since 1966, the Union has published the International Journal of Psychology.[31] IAAP and IUPsyS agreed in 1976 each to hold a congress every four years, on a staggered basis.[57]

IUPsyS recognizes 66 national psychology associations and at least 15 others exist.[57] The American Psychological Association is the oldest and largest.[57] Its membership has increased from 5,000 in 1945 to 100,000 in the present day.[33] The APA includes 54 divisions, which since 1960 have steadily proliferated to include more specialties. Some of these divisions, such as the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues and the American Psychology–Law Society, began as autonomous groups.[57]

The Interamerican Psychological Society, founded in 1951, aspires to promote psychology across the Western Hemisphere. It holds the Interamerican Congress of Psychology and ha had 1,000 members in year 2000. The European Federation of Professional Psychology Associations, founded in 1981, represents 30 national associations with a total of 100,000 individual members. At least 30 other international organizations represent psychologists in different regions.[57]

In some places, governments legally regulate who can provide psychological services or represent themselves as a «psychologist.»[59] The APA defines a psychologist as someone with a doctoral degree in psychology.[60]

Boundaries

Early practitioners of experimental psychology distinguished themselves from parapsychology, which in the late nineteenth century enjoyed popularity (including the interest of scholars such as William James). Some people considered parapsychology to be part of «psychology.» Parapsychology, hypnotism, and psychism were major topics at the early International Congresses. But students of these fields were eventually ostracized, and more or less banished from the Congress in 1900–1905.[31] Parapsychology persisted for a time at Imperial University in Japan, with publications such as Clairvoyance and Thoughtography by Tomokichi Fukurai, but it was mostly shunned by 1913.[32]

As a discipline, psychology has long sought to fend off accusations that it is a «soft» science. Philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn’s 1962 critique implied psychology overall was in a pre-paradigm state, lacking agreement on the type of overarching theory found in mature sciences such as chemistry and physics.[61] Because some areas of psychology rely on research methods such as surveys and questionnaires, critics asserted that psychology is not an objective science. Skeptics have suggested that personality, thinking, and emotion cannot be directly measured and are often inferred from subjective self-reports, which may be problematic. Experimental psychologists have devised a variety of ways to indirectly measure these elusive phenomenological entities.[62][63][64]

Divisions still exist within the field, with some psychologists more oriented towards the unique experiences of individual humans, which cannot be understood only as data points within a larger population. Critics inside and outside the field have argued that mainstream psychology has become increasingly dominated by a «cult of empiricism,» which limits the scope of research because investigators restrict themselves to methods derived from the physical sciences.[65]: 36–7 Feminist critiques have argued that claims to scientific objectivity obscure the values and agenda of (historically) mostly male researchers.[37] Jean Grimshaw, for example, argues that mainstream psychological research has advanced a patriarchal agenda through its efforts to control behavior.[65]: 120

Major schools of thought

Biological

False-color representations of cerebral fiber pathways affected, per Van Horn et al.[V]: 3 

Psychologists generally consider biology the substrate of thought and feeling, and therefore an important area of study. Behaviorial neuroscience, also known as biological psychology, involves the application of biological principles to the study of physiological and genetic mechanisms underlying behavior in humans and other animals. The allied field of comparative psychology is the scientific study of the behavior and mental processes of non-human animals.[66] A leading question in behavioral neuroscience has been whether and how mental functions are localized in the brain. From Phineas Gage to H.M. and Clive Wearing, individual people with mental deficits traceable to physical brain damage have inspired new discoveries in this area.[67] Modern behavioral neuroscience could be said to originate in the 1870s, when in France Paul Broca traced production of speech to the left frontal gyrus, thereby also demonstrating hemispheric lateralization of brain function. Soon after, Carl Wernicke identified a related area necessary for the understanding of speech.[68]: 20–2 

The contemporary field of behavioral neuroscience focuses on the physical basis of behavior. Behaviorial neuroscientists use animal models, often relying on rats, to study the neural, genetic, and cellular mechanisms that underlie behaviors involved in learning, memory, and fear responses.[69] Cognitive neuroscientists, by using neural imaging tools, investigate the neural correlates of psychological processes in humans. Neuropsychologists conduct psychological assessments to determine how an individual’s behavior and cognition are related to the brain. The biopsychosocial model is a cross-disciplinary, holistic model that concerns the ways in which interrelationships of biological, psychological, and socio-environmental factors affect health and behavior.[70]

Evolutionary psychology approaches thought and behavior from a modern evolutionary perspective. This perspective suggests that psychological adaptations evolved to solve recurrent problems in human ancestral environments. Evolutionary psychologists attempt to find out how human psychological traits are evolved adaptations, the results of natural selection or sexual selection over the course of human evolution.[71]

The history of the biological foundations of psychology includes evidence of racism. The idea of white supremacy and indeed the modern concept of race itself arose during the process of world conquest by Europeans.[72] Carl von Linnaeus’s four-fold classification of humans classifies Europeans as intelligent and severe, Americans as contented and free, Asians as ritualistic, and Africans as lazy and capricious. Race was also used to justify the construction of socially specific mental disorders such as drapetomania and dysaesthesia aethiopica—the behavior of uncooperative African slaves.[73] After the creation of experimental psychology, «ethnical psychology» emerged as a subdiscipline, based on the assumption that studying primitive races would provide an important link between animal behavior and the psychology of more evolved humans.[74]

Behaviorist

A tenet of behavioral research is that a large part of both human and lower-animal behavior is learned. A principle associated with behavioral research is that the mechanisms involved in learning apply to humans and non-human animals. Behavioral researchers have developed a treatment known as behavior modification, which is used to help individuals replace undesirable behaviors with desirable ones.

The film of the Little Albert experiment

Early behavioral researchers studied stimulus–response pairings, now known as classical conditioning. They demonstrated that when a biologically potent stimulus (e.g., food that elicits salivation) is paired with a previously neutral stimulus (e.g., a bell) over several learning trials, the neutral stimulus by itself can come to elicit the response the biologically potent stimulus elicits. Ivan Pavlov—known best for inducing dogs to salivate in the presence of a stimulus previously linked with food—became a leading figure in the Soviet Union and inspired followers to use his methods on humans.[35] In the United States, Edward Lee Thorndike initiated «connectionist» studies by trapping animals in «puzzle boxes» and rewarding them for escaping. Thorndike wrote in 1911, «There can be no moral warrant for studying man’s nature unless the study will enable us to control his acts.»[27]: 212–5  From 1910 to 1913 the American Psychological Association went through a sea change of opinion, away from mentalism and towards «behavioralism.» In 1913, John B. Watson coined the term behaviorism for this school of thought.[27]: 218–27  Watson’s famous Little Albert experiment in 1920 was at first thought to demonstrate that repeated use of upsetting loud noises could instill phobias (aversions to other stimuli) in an infant human,[12][75] although such a conclusion was likely an exaggeration.[76] Karl Lashley, a close collaborator with Watson, examined biological manifestations of learning in the brain.[67]

Clark L. Hull, Edwin Guthrie, and others did much to help behaviorism become a widely used paradigm.[33] A new method of «instrumental» or «operant» conditioning added the concepts of reinforcement and punishment to the model of behavior change. Radical behaviorists avoided discussing the inner workings of the mind, especially the unconscious mind, which they considered impossible to assess scientifically.[77] Operant conditioning was first described by Miller and Kanorski and popularized in the U.S. by B.F. Skinner, who emerged as a leading intellectual of the behaviorist movement.[78][79]

Noam Chomsky published an influential critique of radical behaviorism on the grounds that behaviorist principles could not adequately explain the complex mental process of language acquisition and language use.[80][81] The review, which was scathing, did much to reduce the status of behaviorism within psychology.[27]: 282–5  Martin Seligman and his colleagues discovered that they could condition in dogs a state of «learned helplessness», which was not predicted by the behaviorist approach to psychology.[82][83] Edward C. Tolman advanced a hybrid «cognitive behavioral» model, most notably with his 1948 publication discussing the cognitive maps used by rats to guess at the location of food at the end of a maze.[84] Skinner’s behaviorism did not die, in part because it generated successful practical applications.[81]

The Association for Behavior Analysis International was founded in 1974 and by 2003 had members from 42 countries. The field has gained a foothold in Latin America and Japan.[85] Applied behavior analysis is the term used for the application of the principles of operant conditioning to change socially significant behavior (it supersedes the term, «behavior modification»).[86]

Cognitive

Green Red Blue
Purple Blue Purple


Blue Purple Red
Green Purple Green


The Stroop effect is the fact that naming the color of the first set of words is easier and quicker than the second.

Cognitive psychology involves the study of mental processes, including perception, attention, language comprehension and production, memory, and problem solving.[87] Researchers in the field of cognitive psychology are sometimes called cognitivists. They rely on an information processing model of mental functioning. Cognitivist research is informed by functionalism and experimental psychology.

Starting in the 1950s, the experimental techniques developed by Wundt, James, Ebbinghaus, and others re-emerged as experimental psychology became increasingly cognitivist and, eventually, constituted a part of the wider, interdisciplinary cognitive science.[88][89] Some called this development the cognitive revolution because it rejected the anti-mentalist dogma of behaviorism as well as the strictures of psychoanalysis.[89]

Albert Bandura helped along the transition in psychology from behaviorism to cognitive psychology. Bandura and other social learning theorists advanced the idea of vicarious learning. In other words, they advanced the view that a child can learn by observing the immediate social environment and not necessarily from having been reinforced for enacting a behavior, although they did not rule out the influence of reinforcement on learning a behavior.[90]

The Müller–Lyer illusion. Psychologists make inferences about mental processes from shared phenomena such as optical illusions.

Technological advances also renewed interest in mental states and mental representations. English neuroscientist Charles Sherrington and Canadian psychologist Donald O. Hebb used experimental methods to link psychological phenomena to the structure and function of the brain. The rise of computer science, cybernetics, and artificial intelligence underlined the value of comparing information processing in humans and machines.

A popular and representative topic in this area is cognitive bias, or irrational thought. Psychologists (and economists) have classified and described a sizeable catalogue of biases which recur frequently in human thought. The availability heuristic, for example, is the tendency to overestimate the importance of something which happens to come readily to mind.[91]

Elements of behaviorism and cognitive psychology were synthesized to form cognitive behavioral therapy, a form of psychotherapy modified from techniques developed by American psychologist Albert Ellis and American psychiatrist Aaron T. Beck.

On a broader level, cognitive science is an interdisciplinary enterprise involving cognitive psychologists, cognitive neuroscientists, linguists, and researchers in artificial intelligence, human–computer interaction, and computational neuroscience. The discipline of cognitive science covers cognitive psychology as well as philosophy of mind, computer science, and neuroscience.[92] Computer simulations are sometimes used to model phenomena of interest.

Social psychology is concerned with how behaviors, thoughts, feelings, and the social environment influence human interactions.[93] Social psychologists study such topics as the influence of others on an individual’s behavior (e.g. conformity, persuasion) and the formation of beliefs, attitudes, and stereotypes about other people. Social cognition fuses elements of social and cognitive psychology for the purpose of understanding how people process, remember, or distort social information. The study of group dynamics involves research on the nature of leadership, organizational communication, and related phenomena. In recent years, social psychologists have become interested in implicit measures, mediational models, and the interaction of person and social factors in accounting for behavior. Some concepts that sociologists have applied to the study of psychiatric disorders, concepts such as the social role, sick role, social class, life events, culture, migration, and total institution, have influenced social psychologists.[94]

Psychoanalytic

Psychoanalysis refers to the theories and therapeutic techniques applied to the unconscious mind and its impact on everyday life. These theories and techniques inform treatments for mental disorders.[95][96][97] Psychoanalysis originated in the 1890s, most prominently with the work of Sigmund Freud. Freud’s psychoanalytic theory was largely based on interpretive methods, introspection, and clinical observation. It became very well known, largely because it tackled subjects such as sexuality, repression, and the unconscious.[54]: 84–6  Freud pioneered the methods of free association and dream interpretation.[98][99]

Psychoanalytic theory is not monolithic. Other well-known psychoanalytic thinkers who diverged from Freud include Alfred Adler, Carl Jung, Erik Erikson, Melanie Klein, D.W. Winnicott, Karen Horney, Erich Fromm, John Bowlby, Freud’s daughter Anna Freud, and Harry Stack Sullivan. These individuals ensured that psychoanalysis would evolve into diverse schools of thought. Among these schools are ego psychology, object relations, and interpersonal, Lacanian, and relational psychoanalysis.

Psychologists such as Hans Eysenck and philosophers including Karl Popper sharply criticized psychoanalysis. Popper argued that psychoanalysis had been misrepresented as a scientific discipline,[100] whereas Eysenck advanced the view that psychoanalytic tenets had been contradicted by experimental data. By the end of the 20th century, psychology departments in American universities mostly had marginalized Freudian theory, dismissing it as a «desiccated and dead» historical artifact.[101] Researchers such as António Damásio, Oliver Sacks, and Joseph LeDoux; and individuals in the emerging field of neuro-psychoanalysis have defended some of Freud’s ideas on scientific grounds.[102]

Existential-humanistic

Psychologist Abraham Maslow in 1943 posited that humans have a hierarchy of needs, and it makes sense to fulfill the basic needs first (food, water etc.) before higher-order needs can be met.[103]

Humanistic psychology, which has been influenced by existentialism and phenomenology,[104] stresses free will and self-actualization.[105] It emerged in the 1950s as a movement within academic psychology, in reaction to both behaviorism and psychoanalysis.[106] The humanistic approach seeks to view the whole person, not just fragmented parts of the personality or isolated cognitions.[107] Humanistic psychology also focuses on personal growth, self-identity, death, aloneness, and freedom. It emphasizes subjective meaning, the rejection of determinism, and concern for positive growth rather than pathology. Some founders of the humanistic school of thought were American psychologists Abraham Maslow, who formulated a hierarchy of human needs, and Carl Rogers, who created and developed client-centered therapy.

Later, positive psychology opened up humanistic themes to scientific study. Positive psychology is the study of factors which contribute to human happiness and well-being, focusing more on people who are currently healthy. In 2010, Clinical Psychological Review published a special issue devoted to positive psychological interventions, such as gratitude journaling and the physical expression of gratitude. It is, however, far from clear that positive psychology is effective in making people happier.[108][109] Positive psychological interventions have been limited in scope, but their effects are thought to be somewhat better than placebo effects.

The American Association for Humanistic Psychology, formed in 1963, declared:

Humanistic psychology is primarily an orientation toward the whole of psychology rather than a distinct area or school. It stands for respect for the worth of persons, respect for differences of approach, open-mindedness as to acceptable methods, and interest in exploration of new aspects of human behavior. As a «third force» in contemporary psychology, it is concerned with topics having little place in existing theories and systems: e.g., love, creativity, self, growth, organism, basic need-gratification, self-actualization, higher values, being, becoming, spontaneity, play, humor, affection, naturalness, warmth, ego-transcendence, objectivity, autonomy, responsibility, meaning, fair-play, transcendental experience, peak experience, courage, and related concepts.[110]

Existential psychology emphasizes the need to understand a client’s total orientation towards the world. Existential psychology is opposed to reductionism, behaviorism, and other methods that objectify the individual.[105] In the 1950s and 1960s, influenced by philosophers Søren Kierkegaard and Martin Heidegger, psychoanalytically trained American psychologist Rollo May helped to develop existential psychology. Existential psychotherapy, which follows from existential psychology, is a therapeutic approach that is based on the idea that a person’s inner conflict arises from that individual’s confrontation with the givens of existence. Swiss psychoanalyst Ludwig Binswanger and American psychologist George Kelly may also be said to belong to the existential school.[111] Existential psychologists tend to differ from more «humanistic» psychologists in the former’s relatively neutral view of human nature and relatively positive assessment of anxiety.[112] Existential psychologists emphasized the humanistic themes of death, free will, and meaning, suggesting that meaning can be shaped by myths and narratives; meaning can be deepened by the acceptance of free will, which is requisite to living an authentic life, albeit often with anxiety with regard to death.[113]

Austrian existential psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl drew evidence of meaning’s therapeutic power from reflections upon his own internment.[114] He created a variation of existential psychotherapy called logotherapy, a type of existentialist analysis that focuses on a will to meaning (in one’s life), as opposed to Adler’s Nietzschean doctrine of will to power or Freud’s will to pleasure.[115]

Themes

Personality

Personality psychology is concerned with enduring patterns of behavior, thought, and emotion. Theories of personality vary across different psychological schools of thought. Each theory carries different assumptions about such features as the role of the unconscious and the importance of childhood experience. According to Freud, personality is based on the dynamic interactions of the id, ego, and super-ego.[116] By contrast, trait theorists have developed taxonomies of personality constructs in describing personality in terms of key traits. Trait theorists have often employed statistical data-reduction methods, such as factor analysis. Although the number of proposed traits has varied widely, Hans Eysenck’s early biologically-based model suggests at least three major trait constructs are necessary to describe human personality, extraversion–introversion, neuroticism-stability, and psychoticism-normality. Raymond Cattell empirically derived a theory of 16 personality factors at the primary-factor level and up to eight broader second-stratum factors.[117][118][119][120]
Since the 1980s, the Big Five (openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism) emerged as an important trait theory of personality.[121] Dimensional models of personality are receiving increasing support, and a version of dimensional assessment has been included in the DSM-V. However, despite a plethora of research into the various versions of the «Big Five» personality dimensions, it appears necessary to move on from static conceptualizations of personality structure to a more dynamic orientation, acknowledging that personality constructs are subject to learning and change over the lifespan.[122][123]

An early example of personality assessment was the Woodworth Personal Data Sheet, constructed during World War I. The popular, although psychometrically inadequate, Myers–Briggs Type Indicator[124] was developed to assess individuals’ «personality types» according to the personality theories of Carl Jung. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), despite its name, is more a dimensional measure of psychopathology than a personality measure.[125] California Psychological Inventory contains 20 personality scales (e.g., independence, tolerance).[126] The International Personality Item Pool, which is in the public domain, has become a source of scales that can be used personality assessment.[127]

Unconscious mind

Study of the unconscious mind, a part of the psyche outside the individual’s awareness but that is believed to influence conscious thought and behavior, was a hallmark of early psychology. In one of the first psychology experiments conducted in the United States, C.S. Peirce and Joseph Jastrow found in 1884 that research subjects could choose the minutely heavier of two weights even if consciously uncertain of the difference.[128] Freud popularized the concept of the unconscious mind, particularly when he referred to an uncensored intrusion of unconscious thought into one’s speech (a Freudian slip) or to his efforts to interpret dreams.[129] His 1901 book The Psychopathology of Everyday Life catalogues hundreds of everyday events that Freud explains in terms of unconscious influence. Pierre Janet advanced the idea of a subconscious mind, which could contain autonomous mental elements unavailable to the direct scrutiny of the subject.[130]

The concept of unconscious processes has remained important in psychology. Cognitive psychologists have used a «filter» model of attention. According to the model, much information processing takes place below the threshold of consciousness, and only certain stimuli, limited by their nature and number, make their way through the filter. Much research has shown that subconscious priming of certain ideas can covertly influence thoughts and behavior.[130] Because of the unreliability of self-reporting, a major hurdle in this type of research involves demonstrating that a subject’s conscious mind has not perceived a target stimulus. For this reason, some psychologists prefer to distinguish between implicit and explicit memory. In another approach, one can also describe a subliminal stimulus as meeting an objective but not a subjective threshold.[131]

The automaticity model of John Bargh and others involves the ideas of automaticity and unconscious processing in our understanding of social behavior,[132][133] although there has been dispute with regard to replication.[134][135]
Some experimental data suggest that the brain begins to consider taking actions before the mind becomes aware of them.[136] The influence of unconscious forces on people’s choices bears on the philosophical question of free will. John Bargh, Daniel Wegner, and Ellen Langer describe free will as an illusion.[132][133][137]

Motivation

Some psychologists study motivation or the subject of why people or lower animals initiate a behavior at a particular time. It also involves the study of why humans and lower animals continue or terminate a behavior. Psychologists such as William James initially used the term motivation to refer to intention, in a sense similar to the concept of will in European philosophy. With the steady rise of Darwinian and Freudian thinking, instinct also came to be seen as a primary source of motivation.[138] According to drive theory, the forces of instinct combine into a single source of energy which exerts a constant influence. Psychoanalysis, like biology, regarded these forces as demands originating in the nervous system. Psychoanalysts believed that these forces, especially the sexual instincts, could become entangled and transmuted within the psyche. Classical psychoanalysis conceives of a struggle between the pleasure principle and the reality principle, roughly corresponding to id and ego. Later, in Beyond the Pleasure Principle, Freud introduced the concept of the death drive, a compulsion towards aggression, destruction, and psychic repetition of traumatic events.[139] Meanwhile, behaviorist researchers used simple dichotomous models (pleasure/pain, reward/punishment) and well-established principles such as the idea that a thirsty creature will take pleasure in drinking.[138][140] Clark Hull formalized the latter idea with his drive reduction model.[141]

Hunger, thirst, fear, sexual desire, and thermoregulation constitute fundamental motivations in animals.[140] Humans seem to exhibit a more complex set of motivations—though theoretically these could be explained as resulting from desires for belonging, positive self-image, self-consistency, truth, love, and control.[142][143]

Motivation can be modulated or manipulated in many different ways. Researchers have found that eating, for example, depends not only on the organism’s fundamental need for homeostasis—an important factor causing the experience of hunger—but also on circadian rhythms, food availability, food palatability, and cost.[140] Abstract motivations are also malleable, as evidenced by such phenomena as goal contagion: the adoption of goals, sometimes unconsciously, based on inferences about the goals of others.[144] Vohs and Baumeister suggest that contrary to the need-desire-fulfilment cycle of animal instincts, human motivations sometimes obey a «getting begets wanting» rule: the more you get a reward such as self-esteem, love, drugs, or money, the more you want it. They suggest that this principle can even apply to food, drink, sex, and sleep.[145]

Development psychology

Developmental psychologists would engage a child with a book and then make observations based on how the child interacts with the object.

Developmental psychology refers to the scientific study of how and why the thought processes, emotions, and behaviors of humans change over the course of their lives.[146] Some credit Charles Darwin with conducting the first systematic study within the rubric of developmental psychology, having published in 1877 a short paper detailing the development of innate forms of communication based on his observations of his infant son.[147] The main origins of the discipline, however, are found in the work of Jean Piaget. Like Piaget, developmental psychologists originally focused primarily on the development of cognition from infancy to adolescence. Later, developmental psychology extended itself to the study cognition over the life span. In addition to studying cognition, developmental psychologists have also come to focus on affective, behavioral, moral, social, and neural development.

Developmental psychologists who study children use a number of research methods. For example, they make observations of children in natural settings such as preschools[148] and engage them in experimental tasks.[149] Such tasks often resemble specially designed games and activities that are both enjoyable for the child and scientifically useful. Developmental researchers have even devised clever methods to study the mental processes of infants.[150] In addition to studying children, developmental psychologists also study aging and processes throughout the life span, including old age.[151] These psychologists draw on the full range of psychological theories to inform their research.[146]

Genes and environment

All researched psychological traits are influenced by both genes and environment, to varying degrees.[152][153] These two sources of influence are often confounded in observational research of individuals and families. An example of this confounding can be shown in the transmission of depression from a depressed mother to her offspring. A theory based on environmental transmission would hold that an offspring, by virtue of their having a problematic rearing environment managed by a depressed mother, is at risk for developing depression. On the other hand, a hereditarian theory would hold that depression risk in an offspring is influenced to some extent by genes passed to the child from the mother. Genes and environment in these simple transmission models are completely confounded. A depressed mother may both carry genes that contribute to depression in her offspring and also create a rearing environment that increases the risk of depression in her child.

Behavioral genetics researchers have employed methodologies that help to disentangle this confound and understand the nature and origins of individual differences in behavior.[71] Traditionally the research has involved twin studies and adoption studies, two designs where genetic and environmental influences can be partially un-confounded. More recently, gene-focused research has contributed to understanding genetic contributions to the development of psychological traits.

The availability of microarray molecular genetic or genome sequencing technologies allows researchers to measure participant DNA variation directly, and test whether individual genetic variants within genes are associated with psychological traits and psychopathology through methods including genome-wide association studies. One goal of such research is similar to that in positional cloning and its success in Huntington’s: once a causal gene is discovered biological research can be conducted to understand how that gene influences the phenotype. One major result of genetic association studies is the general finding that psychological traits and psychopathology, as well as complex medical diseases, are highly polygenic,[154][155][156][157][158] where a large number (on the order of hundreds to thousands) of genetic variants, each of small effect, contribute to individual differences in the behavioral trait or propensity to the disorder. Active research continues to work toward understanding the genetic and environmental bases of behavior and their interaction.

Applications

Psychology encompasses many subfields and includes different approaches to the study of mental processes and behavior.

Psychological testing

Psychological testing has ancient origins, dating as far back as 2200 BC, in the examinations for the Chinese civil service. Written exams began during the Han dynasty (202 BC – AD 200). By 1370, the Chinese system required a stratified series of tests, involving essay writing and knowledge of diverse topics. The system was ended in 1906.[159]: 41–2  In Europe, mental assessment took a different approach, with theories of physiognomy—judgment of character based on the face—described by Aristotle in 4th century BC Greece. Physiognomy remained current through the Enlightenment, and added the doctrine of phrenology: a study of mind and intelligence based on simple assessment of neuroanatomy.[159]: 42–3 

When experimental psychology came to Britain, Francis Galton was a leading practitioner. By virtue of his procedures for measuring reaction time and sensation, he is considered an inventor of modern mental testing (also known as psychometrics).[159]: 44–5  James McKeen Cattell, a student of Wundt and Galton, brought the idea of psychological testing to the United States, and in fact coined the term «mental test».[159]: 45–6  In 1901, Cattell’s student Clark Wissler published discouraging results, suggesting that mental testing of Columbia and Barnard students failed to predict academic performance.[159]: 45–6  In response to 1904 orders from the Minister of Public Instruction, French psychologists Alfred Binet and Théodore Simon developed and elaborated a new test of intelligence in 1905–1911. They used a range of questions diverse in their nature and difficulty. Binet and Simon introduced the concept of mental age and referred to the lowest scorers on their test as idiots. Henry H. Goddard put the Binet-Simon scale to work and introduced classifications of mental level such as imbecile and feebleminded. In 1916, (after Binet’s death), Stanford professor Lewis M. Terman modified the Binet-Simon scale (renamed the Stanford–Binet scale) and introduced the intelligence quotient as a score report.[159]: 50–56  Based on his test findings, and reflecting the racism common to that era, Terman concluded that intellectual disability «represents the level of intelligence which is very, very common among Spanish-Indians and Mexican families of the Southwest and also among negroes. Their dullness seems to be racial.»[160]

Following the Army Alpha and Army Beta tests, which was developed by psychologist Robert Yerkes in 1917 and then used in World War 1 by industrial and organizational psychologists for large-scale employee testing and selection of military personnel.[161] Mental testing also became popular in the U.S., where it was applied to schoolchildren. The federally created National Intelligence Test was administered to 7 million children in the 1920s. In 1926, the College Entrance Examination Board created the Scholastic Aptitude Test to standardize college admissions.[159]: 61  The results of intelligence tests were used to argue for segregated schools and economic functions, including the preferential training of Black Americans for manual labor. These practices were criticized by Black intellectuals such a Horace Mann Bond and Allison Davis.[160] Eugenicists used mental testing to justify and organize compulsory sterilization of individuals classified as mentally retarded (now referred to as intellectual disability).[42] In the United States, tens of thousands of men and women were sterilized. Setting a precedent that has never been overturned, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of this practice in the 1927 case Buck v. Bell.[162]

Today mental testing is a routine phenomenon for people of all ages in Western societies.[159]: 2 Modern testing aspires to criteria including standardization of procedure, consistency of results, output of an interpretable score, statistical norms describing population outcomes, and, ideally, effective prediction of behavior and life outcomes outside of testing situations.[159]: 4–6  Psychological testing is regularly used in forensic contexts to aid legal judgments and decisions.[163] Developments in psychometrics include work on test and scale reliability and validity.[164] Developments in item-response theory,[165] structural equation modeling,[166] and bifactor analysis[167] have helped in strengthening test and scale construction.

Mental health care

The provision of psychological health services is generally called clinical psychology in the U.S. Sometimes, however, members of the school psychology and counseling psychology professions engage in practices that resemble that of clinical psychologists. Clinical psychologists typically include people who have graduated from doctoral programs in clinical psychology. In Canada, some of the members of the abovementioned groups usually fall within the larger category of professional psychology. In Canada and the U.S., practitioners get bachelor’s degrees and doctorates; doctoral students in clinical psychology usually spend one year in a predoctoral internship and one year in postdoctoral internship. In Mexico and most other Latin American and European countries, psychologists do not get bachelor’s and doctoral degrees; instead, they take a three-year professional course following high school.[60] Clinical psychology is at present the largest specialization within psychology.[168] It includes the study and application of psychology for the purpose of understanding, preventing, and relieving psychological distress, dysfunction, and/or mental illness. Clinical psychologists also try to promote subjective well-being and personal growth. Central to the practice of clinical psychology are psychological assessment and psychotherapy although clinical psychologists may also engage in research, teaching, consultation, forensic testimony, and program development and administration.[169]

Credit for the first psychology clinic in the United States typically goes to Lightner Witmer, who established his practice in Philadelphia in 1896. Another modern psychotherapist was Morton Prince, an early advocate for the establishment of psychology as a clinical and academic discipline.[168] In the first part of the twentieth century, most mental health care in the United States was performed by psychiatrists, who are medical doctors. Psychology entered the field with its refinements of mental testing, which promised to improve the diagnosis of mental problems. For their part, some psychiatrists became interested in using psychoanalysis and other forms of psychodynamic psychotherapy to understand and treat the mentally ill.[37][170]

Psychotherapy as conducted by psychiatrists blurred the distinction between psychiatry and psychology, and this trend continued with the rise of community mental health facilities. Some in the clinical psychology community adopted behavioral therapy, a thoroughly non-psychodynamic model that used behaviorist learning theory to change the actions of patients. A key aspect of behavior therapy is empirical evaluation of the treatment’s effectiveness. In the 1970s, cognitive-behavior therapy emerged with the work of Albert Ellis and Aaron Beck. Although there are similarities between behavior therapy and cognitive-behavior therapy, cognitive-behavior therapy required the application of cognitive constructs. Since the 1970s, the popularity of cognitive-behavior therapy among clinical psychologists increased. A key practice in behavioral and cognitive-behavioral therapy is exposing patients to things they fear, based on the premise that their responses (fear, panic, anxiety) can be deconditioned.[171]

Mental health care today involves psychologists and social workers in increasing numbers. In 1977, National Institute of Mental Health director Bertram Brown described this shift as a source of «intense competition and role confusion.»[37] Graduate programs issuing doctorates in clinical psychology emerged in the 1950s and underwent rapid increase through the 1980s. The PhD degree is intended to train practitioners who could also conduct scientific research. The PsyD degree is more exclusively designed to train practitioners.[60]

Some clinical psychologists focus on the clinical management of patients with brain injury. This subspecialty is known as clinical neuropsychology. In many countries, clinical psychology is a regulated mental health profession. The emerging field of disaster psychology (see crisis intervention) involves professionals who respond to large-scale traumatic events.[172]

The work performed by clinical psychologists tends to be influenced by various therapeutic approaches, all of which involve a formal relationship between professional and client (usually an individual, couple, family, or small group). Typically, these approaches encourage new ways of thinking, feeling, or behaving. Four major theoretical perspectives are psychodynamic, cognitive behavioral, existential–humanistic, and systems or family therapy. There has been a growing movement to integrate the various therapeutic approaches, especially with an increased understanding of issues regarding culture, gender, spirituality, and sexual orientation. With the advent of more robust research findings regarding psychotherapy, there is evidence that most of the major therapies have equal effectiveness, with the key common element being a strong therapeutic alliance.[173][174] Because of this, more training programs and psychologists are now adopting an eclectic therapeutic orientation.[175][176][177][178][179]

Diagnosis in clinical psychology usually follows the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).[180] The study of mental illnesses is called abnormal psychology.

Education

An example of an item from a cognitive abilities test used in educational psychology

Educational psychology is the study of how humans learn in educational settings, the effectiveness of educational interventions, the psychology of teaching, and the social psychology of schools as organizations. Educational psychologists can be found in preschools, schools of all levels including post secondary institutions, community organizations and learning centers, Government or private research firms, and independent or private consultant.[181] The work of developmental psychologists such as Lev Vygotsky, Jean Piaget, and Jerome Bruner has been influential in creating teaching methods and educational practices. Educational psychology is often included in teacher education programs in places such as North America, Australia, and New Zealand.

School psychology combines principles from educational psychology and clinical psychology to understand and treat students with learning disabilities; to foster the intellectual growth of gifted students; to facilitate prosocial behaviors in adolescents; and otherwise to promote safe, supportive, and effective learning environments. School psychologists are trained in educational and behavioral assessment, intervention, prevention, and consultation, and many have extensive training in research.[182]

Work

Industrial and organizational (I/O) psychology involves research and practices that apply psychological theories and principles to organizations and individuals’ work-lives.[183] In the field’s beginnings, industrialists brought the nascent field of psychology to bear on the study of scientific management techniques for improving workplace efficiency. The field was at first called economic psychology or business psychology; later, industrial psychology, employment psychology, or psychotechnology.[184] An influential early study examined workers at Western Electric’s Hawthorne plant in Cicero, Illinois from 1924 to 1932. Western Electric experimented on factory workers to assess their responses to changes in illumination, breaks, food, and wages. The researchers came to focus on workers’ responses to observation itself, and the term Hawthorne effect is now used to describe the fact that people’s behavior can change when they think they’re being observed.[185] Although the Hawthorne research can be found in psychology textbooks, the research and its findings were weak at best.[186][187]

The name industrial and organizational psychology emerged in the 1960s. In 1973, it became enshrined in the name of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Division 14 of the American Psychological Association.[184] One goal of the discipline is to optimize human potential in the workplace. Personnel psychology is a subfield of I/O psychology. Personnel psychologists apply the methods and principles of psychology in selecting and evaluating workers. Another subfield, organizational psychology, examines the effects of work environments and management styles on worker motivation, job satisfaction, and productivity.[188] Most I/O psychologists work outside of academia, for private and public organizations and as consultants.[184] A psychology consultant working in business today might expect to provide executives with information and ideas about their industry, their target markets, and the organization of their company.[189][190]

Organizational behavior (OB) is an allied field involved in the study of human behavior within organizations.[191] One way to differentiate I/O psychology from OB is to note that I/O psychologists train in university psychology departments and OB specialists, in business schools.

Military and intelligence

One role for psychologists in the military has been to evaluate and counsel soldiers and other personnel. In the U.S., this function began during World War I, when Robert Yerkes established the School of Military Psychology at Fort Oglethorpe in Georgia. The school provided psychological training for military staff.[37][192] Today, U.S. Army psychologists perform psychological screening, clinical psychotherapy, suicide prevention, and treatment for post-traumatic stress, as well as provide prevention-related services, for example, smoking cessation.[193] The United States Army’s Mental Health Advisory Teams implement psychological interventions to help combat troops experiencing mental problems.[194][195]

Psychologists may also work on a diverse set of campaigns known broadly as psychological warfare. Psychological warfare chiefly involves the use of propaganda to influence enemy soldiers and civilians. This so-called black propaganda is designed to seem as if it originates from a source other than the Army.[196] The CIA’s MKULTRA program involved more individualized efforts at mind control, involving techniques such as hypnosis, torture, and covert involuntary administration of LSD.[197] The U.S. military used the name Psychological Operations (PSYOP) until 2010, when these activities were reclassified as Military Information Support Operations (MISO), part of Information Operations (IO).[198] Psychologists have sometimes been involved in assisting the interrogation and torture of suspects, staining the records of the psychologists involved.[199]

Health, well-being, and social change

An example of the contribution of psychologists to social change involves the research of Kenneth and Mamie Phipps Clark. These two African American psychologists studied segregation’s adverse psychological impact on Black children. Their research findings played a role in the desegregation case Brown v. Board of Education (1954).[200]

The impact of psychology on social change includes the discipline’s broad influence on teaching and learning. Research has shown that compared to the «whole word» or «whole language» approach, the phonics approach to reading instruction is more efficacious.[201]

Medical applications

Medical facilities increasingly employ psychologists to perform various roles. One aspect of health psychology is the psychoeducation of patients: instructing them in how to follow a medical regimen. Health psychologists can also educate doctors and conduct research on patient compliance.[202][203] Psychologists in the field of public health use a wide variety of interventions to influence human behavior. These range from public relations campaigns and outreach to governmental laws and policies. Psychologists study the composite influence of all these different tools in an effort to influence whole populations of people.[204]

Worker health, safety and wellbeing

Psychologists work with organizations to apply findings from psychological research to improve the health and well-being of employees. Some work as external consultants hired by organizations to solve specific problems, whereas others are full-time employees of the organization. Applications include conducting surveys to identify issues and designing interventions to make work healthier. Some of the specific health areas include:

  • Accidents and injuries: A major contribution is the concept of safety climate, which is employee shared perceptions of the behaviors that are encouraged (e.g., wearing safety gear) and discouraged (not following safety rules) at work.[205] Organizations with strong safety climates have fewer work accidents and injuries.[206]
  • Cardiovascular disease: Cardiovascular disease has been related to lack of job control.[207]
  • Mental health: Exposure to occupational stress is associated with mental health disorder.[208]
  • Musculoskeletal disorder: These are injuries in bones, nerves and tendons due to overexertion and repetitive strain. They have been linked to job satisfaction and workplace stress.[209]
  • Physical health symptoms: Occupational stress has been linked to physical symptoms such as digestive distress and headache.[210]
  • Workplace violence: Violence prevention climate is related to being physically assaulted and psychologically mistreated at work.[211]

Interventions that improve climates are a way to address accidents and violence. Interventions that reduce stress at work or provide employees with tools to better manage it can help in areas where stress is an important component.

Industrial psychology became interested in worker fatigue during World War I, when government ministers in Britain were concerned about the impact of fatigue on workers in munitions factories but not other types of factories.[212][213] In the U. K. some interest in worker well-being emerged with the efforts of Charles Samuel Myers and his National Institute of Industrial Psychology (NIIP) during the inter-War years.[214] In the U. S. during the mid-twentieth century industrial psychologist Arthur Kornhauser pioneered the study of occupational mental health, linking industrial working conditions to mental health as well as the spillover of an unsatisfying job into a worker’s personal life.[215][216] Zickar accumulated evidence to show that «no other industrial psychologist of his era was as devoted to advocating management and labor practices that would improve the lives of working people.»[215]

Occupational health psychology

As interest in the worker health expanded toward the end of the twentieth century, the field of occupational health psychology (OHP) emerged. OHP is a branch of psychology that is interdisciplinary.[217][218][45][219] OHP is concerned with the health and safety of workers.[45][219] OHP addresses topic areas such as the impact of occupational stressors on physical and mental health, mistreatment of workers (e.g., bullying and violence), work-family balance, the impact of involuntary unemployment on physical and mental health, the influence of psychosocial factors on safety and accidents, and interventions designed to improve/protect worker health.[45][220] OHP grew out of health psychology, industrial and organizational psychology, and occupational medicine.[221] OHP has also been informed by disciplines outside psychology, including industrial engineering, sociology, and economics.[222][223]

Research methods

Quantitative psychological research lends itself to the statistical testing of hypotheses. Although the field makes abundant use of randomized and controlled experiments in laboratory settings, such research can only assess a limited range of short-term phenomena. Some psychologists rely on less rigorously controlled, but more ecologically valid, field experiments as well. Other research psychologists rely on statistical methods to glean knowledge from population data.[224] The statistical methods research psychologists employ include the Pearson product–moment correlation coefficient, the analysis of variance, multiple linear regression, logistic regression, structural equation modeling, and hierarchical linear modeling. The measurement and operationalization of important constructs is an essential part of these research designs.

Although this type of psychological research is much less abundant than quantitative research, some psychologists conduct qualitative research. This type of research can involve interviews, questionnaires, and first-hand observation.[225] While hypothesis testing is rare, virtually impossible, in qualitative research, qualitative studies can be helpful in theory and hypothesis generation, interpreting seemingly contradictory quantitative findings, and understanding why some interventions fail and others succeed.[226]

Controlled experiments

Flowchart of four phases (enrollment, intervention allocation, follow-up, and data analysis) of a parallel randomized trial of two groups, modified from the CONSORT 2010 Statement[227]

The experimenter (E) orders the teacher (T), the subject of the experiment, to give what the latter believes are painful electric shocks to a learner (L), who is actually an actor and confederate. The subject believes that for each wrong answer, the learner was receiving actual electric shocks, though in reality there were no such punishments. Being separated from the subject, the confederate set up a tape recorder integrated with the electro-shock generator, which played pre-recorded sounds for each shock level etc.[228]

A true experiment with random assignment of research participants (sometimes called subjects) to rival conditions allows researchers to make strong inferences about causal relationships. When there are large numbers of research participants, the random assignment (also called random allocation) of those participants to rival conditions ensures that the individuals in those conditions will, on average, be similar on most characteristics, including characteristics that went unmeasured. In an experiment, the researcher alters one or more variables of influence, called independent variables, and measures resulting changes in the factors of interest, called dependent variables. Prototypical experimental research is conducted in a laboratory with a carefully controlled environment.

A quasi-experiment refers to a situation in which there are rival conditions under study but random assignment to the different conditions is not possible. Investigators must work with preexisting groups of people. Researchers can use common sense to consider how much the nonrandom assignment threatens the study’s validity.[229] For example, in research on the best way to affect reading achievement in the first three grades of school, school administrators may not permit educational psychologists to randomly assign children to phonics and whole language classrooms, in which case the psychologists must work with preexisting classroom assignments. Psychologists will compare the achievement of children attending phonics and whole language classes and, perhaps, statistically adjust for any initial differences in reading level.

Experimental researchers typically use a statistical hypothesis testing model which involves making predictions before conducting the experiment, then assessing how well the data collected are consistent with the predictions. These predictions are likely to originate from one or more abstract scientific hypotheses about how the phenomenon under study actually works.[230]

Other types of studies

Surveys are used in psychology for the purpose of measuring attitudes and traits, monitoring changes in mood, and checking the validity of experimental manipulations (checking research participants’ perception of the condition they were assigned to). Psychologists have commonly used paper-and-pencil surveys. However, surveys are also conducted over the phone or through e-mail. Web-based surveys are increasingly used to conveniently reach many subjects.

Observational studies are commonly conducted in psychology. In cross-sectional observational studies, psychologists collect data at a single point in time. The goal of many cross-sectional studies is the assess the extent factors are correlated with each other. By contrast, in longitudinal studies psychologists collect data on the same sample at two or more points in time. Sometimes the purpose of longitudinal research is to study trends across time such as the stability of traits or age-related changes in behavior. Because some studies involve endpoints that psychologists cannot ethically study from an experimental standpoint, such as identifying the causes of depression, they conduct longitudinal studies a large group of depression-free people, periodically assessing what is happening in the individuals’ lives. In this way psychologists have an opportunity to test causal hypotheses regarding conditions that commonly arise in people’s lives that put them at risk for depression. Problems that affect longitudinal studies include selective attrition, the type of problem in which bias is introduced when a certain type of research participant disproportionately leaves a study.

Exploratory data analysis refers to a variety of practices that researchers use to reduce a great many variables to a small number overarching factors. In Peirce’s three modes of inference, exploratory data analysis corresponds to abduction.[231] Meta-analysis is the technique research psychologists use to integrate results from many studies of the same variables and arriving at a grand average of the findings.[232]

Direct brain observation/manipulation

A classic and popular tool used to relate mental and neural activity is the electroencephalogram (EEG), a technique using amplified electrodes on a person’s scalp to measure voltage changes in different parts of the brain. Hans Berger, the first researcher to use EEG on an unopened skull, quickly found that brains exhibit signature «brain waves»: electric oscillations which correspond to different states of consciousness. Researchers subsequently refined statistical methods for synthesizing the electrode data, and identified unique brain wave patterns such as the delta wave observed during non-REM sleep.[233]

Newer functional neuroimaging techniques include functional magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography, both of which track the flow of blood through the brain. These technologies provide more localized information about activity in the brain and create representations of the brain with widespread appeal. They also provide insight which avoids the classic problems of subjective self-reporting. It remains challenging to draw hard conclusions about where in the brain specific thoughts originate—or even how usefully such localization corresponds with reality. However, neuroimaging has delivered unmistakable results showing the existence of correlations between mind and brain. Some of these draw on a systemic neural network model rather than a localized function model.[234][235][236]

Interventions such as transcranial magnetic stimulation and drugs also provide information about brain–mind interactions. Psychopharmacology is the study of drug-induced mental effects.

Artificial neural network with two layers, an interconnected group of nodes, akin to the vast network of neurons in the human brain

.

Computer simulation

Computational modeling is a tool used in mathematical psychology and cognitive psychology to simulate behavior.[237] This method has several advantages. Since modern computers process information quickly, simulations can be run in a short time, allowing for high statistical power. Modeling also allows psychologists to visualize hypotheses about the functional organization of mental events that couldn’t be directly observed in a human. Computational neuroscience uses mathematical models to simulate the brain. Another method is symbolic modeling, which represents many mental objects using variables and rules. Other types of modeling include dynamic systems and stochastic modeling.

Animal studies

Animal experiments aid in investigating many aspects of human psychology, including perception, emotion, learning, memory, and thought, to name a few. In the 1890s, Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov famously used dogs to demonstrate classical conditioning. Non-human primates, cats, dogs, pigeons, and rats and other rodents are often used in psychological experiments. Ideally, controlled experiments introduce only one independent variable at a time, in order to ascertain its unique effects upon dependent variables. These conditions are approximated best in laboratory settings. In contrast, human environments and genetic backgrounds vary so widely, and depend upon so many factors, that it is difficult to control important variables for human subjects. There are pitfalls, however, in generalizing findings from animal studies to humans through animal models.[238]

Comparative psychology refers to the scientific study of the behavior and mental processes of non-human animals, especially as these relate to the phylogenetic history, adaptive significance, and development of behavior. Research in this area explores the behavior of many species, from insects to primates. It is closely related to other disciplines that study animal behavior such as ethology.[239] Research in comparative psychology sometimes appears to shed light on human behavior, but some attempts to connect the two have been quite controversial, for example the Sociobiology of E.O. Wilson.[240] Animal models are often used to study neural processes related to human behavior, e.g. in cognitive neuroscience.

Qualitative research

Qualitative research is often designed to answer questions about the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of individuals. Qualitative research involving first-hand observation can help describe events as they occur, with the goal of capturing the richness of everyday behavior and with the hope of discovering and understanding phenomena that might have been missed if only more cursory examinations are made.

Qualitative psychological research methods include interviews, first-hand observation, and participant observation. Creswell (2003) identified five main possibilities for qualitative research, including narrative, phenomenology, ethnography, case study, and grounded theory. Qualitative researchers[241] sometimes aim to enrich our understanding of symbols, subjective experiences, or social structures. Sometimes hermeneutic and critical aims can give rise to quantitative research, as in Erich Fromm’s application of psychological and sociological theories, in his book Escape from Freedom, to understanding why many ordinary Germans supported Hitler.[242]

Phineas P. Gage survived an accident in which a large iron rod was driven completely through his head, destroying much of his brain’s left frontal lobe, and is remembered for that injury’s reported effects on his personality and behavior.[243]

Just as Jane Goodall studied chimpanzee social and family life by careful observation of chimpanzee behavior in the field, psychologists conduct naturalistic observation of ongoing human social, professional, and family life. Sometimes the participants are aware they are being observed, and other times the participants do not know they are being observed. Strict ethical guidelines must be followed when covert observation is being carried out.

Program evaluation

Program evaluation involves the systematic collection, analysis, and application of information to answer questions about projects, policies and programs, particularly about their effectiveness.[244][245] In both the public and private sectors, stakeholders often want to know the extent which the programs they are funding, implementing, voting for, receiving, or objecting to are producing the intended effects. While program evaluation first focuses on effectiveness, important considerations often include how much the program costs per participant, how the program could be improved, whether the program is worthwhile, whether there are better alternatives, if there are unintended outcomes, and whether the program goals are appropriate and useful.[246]

Contemporary issues in methodology and practice

Metascience

Metascience involves the application of scientific methodology to study science itself. The field of metascience has revealed problems in psychological research. Some psychological research has suffered from bias,[247] problematic reproducibility,[248] and misuse of statistics.[249] These findings have led to calls for reform from within and from outside the scientific community.[250]

Confirmation bias

In 1959, statistician Theodore Sterling examined the results of psychological studies and discovered that 97% of them supported their initial hypotheses, implying possible publication bias.[251][252][253] Similarly, Fanelli (2010)[254] found that 91.5% of psychiatry/psychology studies confirmed the effects they were looking for, and concluded that the odds of this happening (a positive result) was around five times higher than in fields such as space science or geosciences. Fanelli argued that this is because researchers in «softer» sciences have fewer constraints to their conscious and unconscious biases.

Replication

A replication crisis in psychology has emerged. Many notable findings in the field have not been replicated. Some researchers were even accused of publishing fraudulent results.[255][256][257] Systematic efforts, including efforts by the Reproducibility Project of the Center for Open Science, to assess the extent of the problem found that as many as two-thirds of highly publicized findings in psychology failed to be replicated.[258] Reproducibility has generally been stronger in cognitive psychology (in studies and journals) than social psychology[258] and subfields of differential psychology.[259][260] Other subfields of psychology have also been implicated in the replication crisis, including clinical psychology,[261][262][263] developmental psychology,[264][265][266] and a field closely related to psychology, educational research.[267][268][269][270][271]

Focus on the replication crisis has led to other renewed efforts in the discipline to re-test important findings.[272][273] In response to concerns about publication bias and data dredging (conducting a large number of statistical tests on a great many variables but restricting reporting to the results that were statistically significant), 295 psychology and medical journals have adopted result-blind peer review where studies are accepted not on the basis of their findings and after the studies are completed, but before the studies are conducted and upon the basis of the methodological rigor of their experimental designs and the theoretical justifications for their proposed statistical analysis before data collection or analysis is conducted.[274][275] In addition, large-scale collaborations among researchers working in multiple labs in different countries have taken place. The collaborators regularly make their data openly available for different researchers to assess.[276] Allen and Mehler[277] estimated that 61 percent of result-blind studies have yielded null results, in contrast to an estimated 5 to 20 percent in traditional research.

Misuse of statistics

Some critics view statistical hypothesis testing as misplaced. Psychologist and statistician Jacob Cohen wrote in 1994 that psychologists routinely confuse statistical significance with practical importance, enthusiastically reporting great certainty in unimportant facts.[278] Some psychologists have responded with an increased use of effect size statistics, rather than sole reliance on p-values.[279]

WEIRD bias

«WEIRD» redirects here. For other uses, see Weird.

In 2008, Arnett pointed out that most articles in American Psychological Association journals were about U.S. populations when U.S. citizens are only 5% of the world’s population. He complained that psychologists had no basis for assuming psychological processes to be universal and generalizing research findings to the rest of the global population.[280] In 2010, Henrich, Heine, and Norenzayan reported a bias in conducting psychology studies with participants from «WEIRD» («Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic») societies.[281][282] Henrich et al. found that «96% of psychological samples come from countries with only 12% of the world’s population» (p. 63). The article gave examples of results that differ significantly between people from WEIRD and tribal cultures, including the Müller-Lyer illusion. Arnett (2008), Altmaier and Hall (2008) and Morgan-Consoli et al. (2018) view the Western bias in research and theory as a serious problem considering psychologists are increasingly applying psychological principles developed in WEIRD regions in their research, clinical work, and consultation with populations around the world.[280][283][284] In 2018, Rad, Martingano, and Ginges showed that nearly a decade after Henrich et al.’s paper, over 80% of the samples used in studies published in the journal Psychological Science employed WEIRD samples. Moreover, their analysis showed that several studies did not fully disclose the origin of their samples; the authors offered a set of recommendations to editors and reviewers to reduce WEIRD bias.[285]

STRANGE bias

Similar to the WEIRD bias, starting in 2020, researchers of non-human behavior have started to emphasize the need to document the possibility of the STRANGE (Social background, Trappability and self-selection, Rearing history, Acclimation and habituation, Natural changes in responsiveness, Genetic makeup, and Experience) bias in study conclusions.[286]

Unscientific mental health training

Some observers perceive a gap between scientific theory and its application—in particular, the application of unsupported or unsound clinical practices.[287] Critics say there has been an increase in the number of mental health training programs that do not instill scientific competence.[288] Practices such as «facilitated communication for infantile autism»; memory-recovery techniques including body work; and other therapies, such as rebirthing and reparenting, may be dubious or even dangerous, despite their popularity.[289] These practices, however, are outside the mainstream practices taught in clinical psychology doctoral programs.

Ethics

Ethical standards in the discipline have changed over time. Some famous past studies are today considered unethical and in violation of established codes (the Canadian Code of Conduct for Research Involving Humans, and the Belmont Report). The American Psychological Association has advanced a set of ethical principles and a code of conduct for the profession.[290]

The most important contemporary standards include informed and voluntary consent. After World War II, the Nuremberg Code was established because of Nazi abuses of experimental subjects. Later, most countries (and scientific journals) adopted the Declaration of Helsinki. In the U.S., the National Institutes of Health established the Institutional Review Board in 1966, and in 1974 adopted the National Research Act (HR 7724). All of these measures encouraged researchers to obtain informed consent from human participants in experimental studies. A number of influential but ethically dubious studies led to the establishment of this rule; such studies included the MIT-Harvard Fernald School radioisotope studies, the Thalidomide tragedy, the Willowbrook hepatitis study, and Stanley Milgram’s studies of obedience to authority.

Humans

Universities have ethics committees dedicated to protecting the rights (e.g., voluntary nature of participation in the research, privacy) and well-being (e.g., minimizing distress) of research participants. University ethics committees evaluate proposed research to ensure that researchers protect the rights and well-being of participants; an investigator’s research project cannot be conducted unless approved by such an ethics committee.[291]

The ethics code of the American Psychological Association originated in 1951 as «Ethical Standards of Psychologists». This code has guided the formation of licensing laws in most American states. It has changed multiple times over the decades since its adoption. In 1989, the APA revised its policies on advertising and referral fees to negotiate the end of an investigation by the Federal Trade Commission. The 1992 incarnation was the first to distinguish between «aspirational» ethical standards and «enforceable» ones. Members of the public have a five-year window to file ethics complaints about APA members with the APA ethics committee; members of the APA have a three-year window.[292]

Some of the ethical issues considered most important are the requirement to practice only within the area of competence, to maintain confidentiality with the patients, and to avoid sexual relations with them. Another important principle is informed consent, the idea that a patient or research subject must understand and freely choose a procedure they are undergoing.[292] Some of the most common complaints against clinical psychologists include sexual misconduct.[292]

Other animals

Research on other animals is also governed by university ethics committees. Research on nonhuman animals cannot proceed without permission of the ethics committee of the researcher’s home institution. Current ethical guidelines state that using non-human animals for scientific purposes is only acceptable when the harm (physical or psychological) done to animals is outweighed by the benefits of the research.[293] Keeping this in mind, psychologists can use certain research techniques on animals that could not be used on humans.

  • Comparative psychologist Harry Harlow drew moral condemnation for isolation experiments on rhesus macaque monkeys at the University of Wisconsin–Madison in the 1970s.[294] The aim of the research was to produce an animal model of clinical depression. Harlow also devised what he called a «rape rack», to which the female isolates were tied in normal monkey mating posture.[295] In 1974, American literary critic Wayne C. Booth wrote that, «Harry Harlow and his colleagues go on torturing their nonhuman primates decade after decade, invariably proving what we all knew in advance—that social creatures can be destroyed by destroying their social ties.» He writes that Harlow made no mention of the criticism of the morality of his work.[296]

References

  1. ^ Fernald LD (2008). Psychology: Six perspectives Archived 8 June 2020 at the Wayback Machine (pp.12–15). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  2. ^ Hockenbury & Hockenbury. Psychology. Worth Publishers, 2010.
  3. ^ Psychoanalysis and other forms of depth psychology are most typically associated with theories about the unconscious mind. By contrast, behaviorists consider such phenomena as classical conditioning and operant conditioning. Cognitivists explore implicit memory, automaticity, and subliminal messages, all of which are understood either to bypass or to occur outside of conscious effort or attention. Indeed, cognitive-behavioral therapists counsel their clients to become aware of maladaptive thought patterns, the nature of which the clients previously had not been conscious.
  4. ^ O’Neil, H.F.; cited in Coon, D.; Mitterer, J.O. (2008). Introduction to psychology: Gateways to mind and behavior Archived 18 September 2015 at the Wayback Machine (12th ed., pp. 15–16). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
  5. ^ «The mission of the APA [American Psychological Association] is to advance the creation, communication and application of psychological knowledge to benefit society and improve people’s lives»; APA (2010). About APA. Archived 2 September 2017 at the Wayback Machine Retrieved 20 October 2010.
  6. ^ Farberow NL, Eiduson B (1971). «To petition to join APA as a section of Division 12, the Division of Clinical Psychology». Journal of Personality Assessment. Taylor & Francis Online. 35 (3): 205–206. doi:10.1080/00223891.1971.10119654. Archived from the original on 3 March 2022. Retrieved 2 March 2022. Clinical psychology is the practice of psychology, especially as a means of furthering human welfare and knowledge.
  7. ^ Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2010–11 Edition, Psychologists, on the Internet at bls.gov Archived 4 January 2012 at the Wayback Machine (visited 8 July 2010).
  8. ^ Online Etymology Dictionary. (2001). «Psychology» Archived 18 July 2017 at the Wayback Machine.
  9. ^ «Classics in the History of Psychology – Marko Marulic – The Author of the Term «Psychology»«. Psychclassics.yorku.ca. Archived from the original on 20 January 2017. Retrieved 10 December 2011.
  10. ^ (Steven Blankaart, p. 13) as quoted in «psychology n.» A Dictionary of Psychology. Edited by Andrew M. Colman. Oxford University Press 2009. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. oxfordreference.com Archived 15 September 2019 at the Wayback Machine
  11. ^ a b James, William (1890). The principles of psychology. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-70625-0. OCLC 9557883.
  12. ^ a b c Watson, John B. (1913). «Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It» (PDF). Psychological Review. 20 (2): 158–177. doi:10.1037/h0074428. hdl:21.11116/0000-0001-9182-7. Archived (PDF) from the original on 8 January 2016. Retrieved 24 April 2015.
  13. ^ Derek Russell Davis (DRD), «psychology», in Richard L. Gregory (ed.), The Oxford Companion to the Mind, second edition; Oxford University Press, 1987/2004; ISBN 978-0-19-866224-2 (pp. 763–764).
  14. ^ The term «folk psychology» is itself contentious: see Daniel D. Hutto & Matthew Ratcliffe (eds.), Folk Psychology Re-Assessed; Dorndrecht, the Netherlands: Springer, 2007; ISBN 978-1-4020-5557-7
  15. ^ Okasha, Ahmed (2005). «Mental Health in Egypt». The Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences. 42 (2): 116–25. PMID 16342608.
  16. ^ «Aristotle’s Psychology Archived 9 July 2010 at the Wayback Machine». Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  17. ^ Green, C.D. & Groff, P.R. (2003). Early psychological thought: Ancient accounts of mind and soul. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger.
  18. ^ T.L. Brink. (2008) Psychology: A Student Friendly Approach. «Unit One: The Definition and History of Psychology.» pp 9 [1] Archived 24 July 2012 at the Wayback Machine.
  19. ^ «Psychology: Definitions, branches, history, and how to become one». www.medicalnewstoday.com. 1 February 2018. Archived from the original on 20 March 2021. Retrieved 20 September 2021.
  20. ^ a b Yeh Hsueh and Benyu Guo, «China», in Baker (ed.), Oxford Handbook of the History of Psychology (2012).
  21. ^ a b c Anand C. Paranjpe, «From Tradition through Colonialism to Globalization: Reflections on the History of Psychology in India», in Brock (ed.), Internationalizing the History of Psychology (2006).
  22. ^ PT Raju (1985), Structural Depths of Indian Thought, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0887061394, pages 35-36
  23. ^ a b Schwarz, Katharina A.; Pfister, Roland (2016). «Scientific psychology in the 18th century: A historical rediscovery». Perspectives on Psychological Science. SAGE Publications. 11 (3): 399–407. doi:10.1177/1745691616635601. ISSN 1745-6916. PMID 27217252. S2CID 6784135.
  24. ^ a b c d e Horst U.K. Gundlach, «Germany», in Baker (ed.), Oxford Handbook of the History of Psychology (2012).
  25. ^ Alan Collins, «England», in Baker (ed.), Oxford Handbook of the History of Psychology (2012).
  26. ^ a b Henley TB (2019). Hergenhahn’s An introduction to the history of psychology (8th ed.). Boston: Cengage. pp. 143–145. ISBN 978-1-337-56415-1. Archived from the original on 30 July 2022. Retrieved 4 March 2022.
  27. ^ a b c d e f g Leahey, Thomas (2001). A history of modern psychology (Third ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. ISBN 978-0-13-017573-1. OCLC 43657139.
  28. ^ Fechner, G. T. (1860). Elemente der Psychophysik. Breitkopf u. Härtel. (Elements of Psychophysics)
  29. ^ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2006). «Wilhelm Maximilian Wundt» Archived 8 August 2019 at the Wayback Machine.
  30. ^ Wozniak, R.H. (1999). Introduction to memory: Hermann Ebbinghaus (1885/1913). Classics in the history of psychology Archived 6 June 2019 at the Wayback Machine
  31. ^ a b c d e f Ludy T. Benjamin, Jr., and David B. Baker, «The Internationalization of Psychology: A History», in Baker (ed.), Oxford Handbook of the History of Psychology (2012).
  32. ^ a b c Miki Takasuna, «Japan», in Baker (ed.), Oxford Handbook of the History of Psychology (2012).
  33. ^ a b c d C. James Goodwin, «United States», in Baker (ed.), Oxford Handbook of the History of Psychology (2012).
  34. ^ Cecilia Taiana, «Transatlantic Migration of the Disciplines of Mind: Examination of the Reception of Wundt’s and Freud’s Theories in Argentina», in Brock (ed.), Internationalizing the History of Psychology (2006).
  35. ^ a b c d Irina Sirotkina and Roger Smith, «Russian Federation», in Baker (ed.), Oxford Handbook of the History of Psychology (2012).
  36. ^ Windholz, G. (1997). «Ivan P. Pavlov: An overview of his life and psychological work». American Psychologist. 52 (9): 941–946. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.9.941.
  37. ^ a b c d e f Nancy Tomes, «The Development of Clinical Psychology, Social Work, and Psychiatric Nursing: 1900–1980s», in Wallace & Gach (eds.), History of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology (2008).
  38. ^ Franz Samuelson, «Organizing for the Kingdom of Behavior: Academic Battles and the Organizational Policies in the Twenties»; Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 21, January 1985.
  39. ^ Hans Pols, «The World as Laboratory: Strategies of Field Research Developed by Mental Hygiene Psychologists in Toronto, 1920–1940» in Theresa Richardson & Donald Fisher (eds.), The Development of the Social Sciences in the United States and Canada: The Role of Philanthropy; Stamford, CT: Ablex Publishing, 1999; ISBN 1-56750-405-1
  40. ^ Sol Cohen, «The Mental Hygiene Movement, the Development of Personality and the School: The Medicalization of American Education»; History of Education Quarterly 23.2, Summer 1983.
  41. ^ Vern L. Bullough, «The Rockefellers and Sex Research»; Journal of Sex Research 21.2, May 1985. «Their importance is hard to overestimate. In fact, in the period between 1914 and 1954, the Rockefellers were almost the sole support of sex research in the United States. The decisions made by their scientific advisers about the nature of the research to be supported and how it was conducted, as well as the topics eligible for research support, shaped the whole field of sex research and, in many ways, still continue to support it.»
  42. ^ a b Guthrie, Even the Rat was White (1998), Chapter 4: «Psychology and Race» (pp. 88–110). «Psychology courses often became the vehicles for eugenics propaganda. One graduate of the Record Office training program wrote, ‘I hope to serve the cause by infiltrating eugenics into the minds of teachers. It may interest you to know that each student who takes psychology here works up his family history and plots his family tree.’ Harvard, Columbia, Brown, Cornell, Wisconsin, and Northwestern were among the leading academic institutions teaching eugenics in psychology courses.»
  43. ^ Michell, J, (1999) Measurement in Psychology: A Critical History of a Methodological Concept Archived 9 February 2021 at the Wayback Machine, p.143
  44. ^ Dorwin Cartwright, «Social Psychology in the United States During the Second World War», Human Relations 1.3, June 1948, p. 340; quoted in Cina, «Social Science For Whom?» (1981), p. 269.
  45. ^ a b c d Schonfeld, I.S., & Chang, C.-H. (2017). Occupational health psychology: Work, stress, and health. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.
  46. ^ Catherine Lutz, «Epistemology of the Bunker: The Brainwashed and Other New Subjects of Permanent War Archived 19 September 2015 at the Wayback Machine», in Joel Pfister & Nancy Schnog (eds.), Inventing the Psychological: Toward a Cultural History of Emotional Life in America; Yale University Press, 1997; ISBN 0-300-06809-3
  47. ^ Cina, «Social Science For Whom?» (1981), pp. 315–325.
  48. ^ Herman, «Psychology as Politics» (1993), p. 288. «Had it come to fruition, CAMELOT would have been the largest, and certainly the most generously funded, behavioral research project in U.S. history. With a $4–6 million contract over a period of 3 years, it was considered, and often called, a veritable Manhattan Project for the behavioral sciences, at least by many of the intellectuals whose services were in heavy demand.»
  49. ^ Cocks, Psychotherapy in the Third Reich (1997), pp. 75–77.
  50. ^ Cocks, Psychotherapy in the Third Reich (1997), p. 93.
  51. ^ Cocks, Psychotherapy in the Third Reich (1997), pp. 86–87. «For Schultz-Hencke in this 1934 essay, life goals were determined by ideology, not by science. In the case of psychotherapy, he defined health in terms of blood, strong will, proficiency, discipline, (Zucht und Ordnung), community, heroic bearing, and physical fitness. Schultz-Hencke also took the opportunity in 1934 to criticize psychoanalysis for providing an unfortunate tendency toward the exculpation of the criminal.»
  52. ^ Jürgen Brunner, Matthias Schrempf, & Florian Steger, «Johannes Heinrich Schultz and National Socialism Archived 12 September 2014 at the Wayback Machine», Israel Journal of Psychiatry & Related Sciences 45.4, 2008. «Bringing these people to a right and deep understanding of every German’s duty in the New Germany, such as preparatory mental aid and psychotherapy in general and in particular for persons to be sterilized, and for people having been sterilized, is a great, important and rewarding medical duty.»
  53. ^ Cocks, Psychotherapy in the Third Reich (1997), Chapter 14: «Reconstruction and Repression», pp. 351–375.
  54. ^ a b c d e Kozulin, Alex (1984). Psychology in Utopia: toward a social history of Soviet psychology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. ISBN 0-262-11087-3. OCLC 10122631.
  55. ^ c.f. Hannah Proctor, «Reason Displaces All Love Archived 27 May 2015 at the Wayback Machine», The New Inquiry, 14 February 2014.
  56. ^ a b c Chin, Robert; Chin, Ai-li S. (1969). Psychological research in Communist China, 1949-1966. Cambridge, Mass: M.I.T. Press. ISBN 978-0-262-03032-8. OCLC 192767.
  57. ^ a b c d e f g h Wade Pickren & Raymond D. Fowler, «Professional Organizations», in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 1: History of Psychology.
  58. ^ a b Irmingard Staeuble, «Psychology in the Eurocentric Order of the Social Sciences: Colonial Constitution, Cultural Imperialist Expansion, Postcolonial Critique» in Brock (ed.), Internationalizing the History of Psychology (2006).
  59. ^ For example, see Oregon State Law, Chapter 675 (2013 edition) at Statutes & Rules Relating to the Practice of Psychology Archived 21 May 2016 at the Portuguese Web Archive.
  60. ^ a b c Judy E. Hall and George Hurley, «North American Perspectives on Education, Training, Licensing, and Credentialing», in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 8: Clinical Psychology.
  61. ^ T.S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 1st. ed., Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Pr., 1962.
  62. ^ Beveridge, Allan (2002). «Time to abandon the subjective–objective divide?». Psychiatric Bulletin. 26 (3): 101–103. doi:10.1192/pb.26.3.101.
  63. ^ Peterson, C. (23 May 2009). «Subjective and objective research in positive psychology: A biological characteristic is linked to well-being» Archived 30 July 2022 at the Wayback Machine. Psychology Today. Retrieved 20 April 2010.
  64. ^ Panksepp, J. (1998). Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal emotions Archived 18 September 2015 at the Wayback Machine. New York: Oxford University Press, p. 9.
  65. ^ a b Teo, Thomas (2005). The critique of psychology: from Kant to postcolonial theory. New York: Springer. ISBN 978-0-387-25355-8. OCLC 209833302.
  66. ^ Michela Gallagher & Randy J. Nelson, «Volume Preface», in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 3: Biological Psychology.
  67. ^ a b Richard F. Thompson & Stuart M. Zola, «Biological Psychology», in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 1: History of Psychology.
  68. ^ Luria, A. R. (1973). The working brain: an introduction to neuropsychology. Translated by Haigh, Basil. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-09208-X. OCLC 832187.
  69. ^ Pinel, John (2010). Biopsychology. New York: Prentice Hall. ISBN 978-0-205-83256-9.
  70. ^ Richard Frankel; Timothy Quill; Susan McDaniel (2003). The Biopsychosocial Approach: Past, Present, Future. Boydell & Brewer. ISBN 978-1-58046-102-3.
  71. ^ a b McGue M, Gottesman II (2015). «Behavior Genetics». The Encyclopedia of Clinical Psychology. pp. 1–11. doi:10.1002/9781118625392.wbecp578. ISBN 978-1-118-62539-2.
  72. ^ Guthrie, Even the Rat was White (1998), Chapter 1: «‘The Noble Savage’ and Science» (pp. 3–33)
  73. ^ Guthrie, Even the Rat was White (1998), Chapter 5: «The Psychology of Survival and Education» (pp. 113–134)
  74. ^ Guthrie, Even the Rat was White (1998), Chapter 2: «Brass Instruments and Dark Skins» (pp. 34–54)
  75. ^ J.B. Watson & R. Rayner, «Conditioned emotional responses», Journal of Experimental Psychology 3, 1920; in Hock, Forty Studies (2002), pp. 70–76.
  76. ^ Harris, B. (1979). Whatever happened to Little Albert? American Psychologist, 34, 151-160. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.2.151 Archived 30 July 2022 at the Wayback Machine https://archive.today/20120803155410/http://htpprints.yorku.ca/archive/00000198/01/BHARRIS.HTM#selection-15.0-15.35
  77. ^ Overskeid, Geir (2007). «Looking for Skinner and finding Freud». American Psychologist. 62 (6): 590–595. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.321.6288. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.62.6.590. PMID 17874899.
  78. ^ Miller, S.; Konorski, J. (1928). «Sur une forme particulière des reflexes conditionels» [On a particular form of conditional reflexes]. Comptes Rendus des Séances de la Société de Biologie et de Ses Filiales (in French). 99: 1155–1157.
  79. ^ Skinner, B.F. (1932) The Behavior of Organisms[page needed]
  80. ^ Chomsky, N. (1959). Review of Skinner’s Verbal Behavior. Language, 35, 26–58. [2] Archived 29 September 2015 at the Wayback Machine
  81. ^ a b Schlinger, H.D. (2008). «The long good-bye: why B.F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior is alive and well on the 50th anniversary of its publication». The Psychological Record. 58 (3): 329–337. doi:10.1007/BF03395622. S2CID 18114690. Archived from the original on 17 January 2020. Retrieved 21 July 2019.
  82. ^ Seligman M.E.P.; Maier S.F. (1967). «Failure to escape traumatic shock». Journal of Experimental Psychology. 74 (1): 1–9. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.611.8411. doi:10.1037/h0024514. PMID 6032570.
  83. ^ Overmier J.B.; Seligman M.E.P. (1967). «Effects of inescapable shock upon subsequent escape and avoidance responding». Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology. 63 (1): 28–33. doi:10.1037/h0024166. PMID 6029715. S2CID 17310110. Archived from the original on 30 July 2022. Retrieved 7 January 2020.
  84. ^ Tolman, Edward C. (1948). «Cognitive maps in rats and men». Psychological Review. 55 (4): 189–208. doi:10.1037/h0061626. PMID 18870876. S2CID 42496633. Archived from the original on 30 July 2022. Retrieved 7 January 2020.
  85. ^ Ruben Ardila, «Behavior Analysis in an International Context», in Brock (ed.), Internationalizing the History of Psychology (2006).
  86. ^ Pierce, W. David; Cheney, Carl D. (16 June 2017) [1995]. Behavior Analysis and Learning: A Biobehavioral Approach (6 ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 1–622. ISBN 978-1138898585. Archived from the original on 3 June 2021. Retrieved 3 June 2021.
  87. ^ «American Psychological Association (2013). Glossary of psychological terms». Apa.org. Archived from the original on 27 January 2019. Retrieved 13 August 2014.
  88. ^ Gardner, H. (1985). The mind’s new science: A history of the cognitive revolution. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-04635-5
  89. ^ a b Mandler, G. (2007). A history of modern experimental psychology: From James and Wundt to cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.[page needed]
  90. ^ Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  91. ^ Juslin, Peter (2013), «Availability Heuristic», Encyclopedia of the Mind, SAGE Publications, Inc., doi:10.4135/9781452257044.n39, ISBN 978-1-4129-5057-2
  92. ^ Thagard, Paul (2020), «Cognitive Science», in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2020 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, archived from the original on 1 March 2021, retrieved 22 January 2021
  93. ^ Allport, G. W (1985). «The Historical Background of Social Psychology». In G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (ed.). The Handbook of Social Psychology. New York: McGraw Hill. p. 5.
  94. ^ Tausig, M., & Fenwick, R. (2011). Work and mental health in social context. New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-0625-9
  95. ^ Thompson, C. & Mullahy, P. (1951). Psychoanalysis: Evolution and development (3rd ed.). New York: Hermitage House.
  96. ^ Brenner, C. (1974). An elementary textbook of psychoanalysis. Garden City, NY: Anchor.
  97. ^ Moore, B.E.; Fine, B.D. (1968), A Glossary of Psychoanalytic Terms and Concepts, Amer Psychoanalytic Assn, p. 78, ISBN 978-0-318-13125-2
  98. ^ Freud, S (1900). The Interpretation of Dreams. Vol. IV and V (2nd ed.). Hogarth Press, 1955.
  99. ^ Freud, S (1915). The Unconscious. Vol. XIV (2nd ed.). Hogarth Press, 1955.
  100. ^ Karl Popper, Conjectures and Refutations, London: Routledge and Keagan Paul, 1963, pp. 33–39; from Theodore Schick, ed., Readings in the Philosophy of Science, Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company, 2000, pp. 9–13. Faculty.washington.edu Archived 26 March 2009 at the Wayback Machine
  101. ^ Cohen, Patricia (25 November 2007). «June 2008 study». The New York Times. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 23 February 2017.
  102. ^ See:
    • Damásio, A. (1994). Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain.
    • Damásio, A. (1996). The somatic marker hypothesis and the possible functions of the prefrontal cortex.
    • Damásio, A. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness.
    • Damásio, A. (2003). Looking for Spinoza: Joy, sorrow, and the feeling brain.
    • LeDoux, J.E. (1998). The emotional brain: The mysterious underpinnings of emotional life (Touchstone ed.). Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-684-83659-9
    • Panksepp, J. (1998). Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal emotions. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Sacks, O. (1984). A leg to stand on. New York: Summit Books/Simon and Schuster.

  103. ^ «Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs». Honolulu.hawaii.edu. Archived from the original on 11 February 2010. Retrieved 10 December 2011.
  104. ^ Benjafield, John G. (2010). A History of Psychology: Third Edition. Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press. pp. 357–362. ISBN 978-0-19-543021-9.
  105. ^ a b Oxford University Press. (2015). A Dictionary of Psychology, 4th ed. Edited by Andrew M. Colman. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford: Author. ISBN 9780199657681
  106. ^ Gazzaniga, Michael (2010). Psychological Science. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. p. 23. ISBN 978-0-393-93421-2.
  107. ^ Rowan, John. (2001). Ordinary Ecstasy: The Dialectics of Humanistic Psychology. London, UK: Brunner-Routledge. ISBN 0-415-23633-9
  108. ^ Ehrenreich, B. (2009). Bright-sided: How the relentless promotion of positive thinking has undermined America. New York: Henry Holt. ISBN 978-0-8050-8749-9
  109. ^ Singal, J. (2021, June 7). Positive psychology goes to war: How the Army adopted an untested, evidence-free approach to fighting PTSD. Chronicle of Higher Education.
  110. ^ A.J. Sutich, American association for humanistic psychology, Articles of association. Palo Alto, CA (mimeographed): August 28, 1963; in Severin (ed.), Humanistic Viewpoints in Psychology (1965), pp. xv–xvi.
  111. ^ Hergenhahn, B.R. (2005). An introduction to the history of psychology. Belmont, California: Thomson Wadsworth. pp. 528–536.
  112. ^ Hergenhahn, B.R. (2005). An introduction to the history of psychology. Belmont, California: Thomson Wadsworth. pp. 546–547.
  113. ^ Hergenhahn, B.R. (2005). An introduction to the history of psychology. Belmont, California: Thomson Wadsworth. pp. 523–532.
  114. ^ Frankl, V.E. (1984). Man’s search for meaning (rev. ed.). New York: Washington Square Press. p. 86.
  115. ^ Seidner, Stanley S. (10 June 2009) «A Trojan Horse: Logotherapeutic Transcendence and its Secular Implications for Theology» Archived 1 May 2011 at the Wayback Machine. Mater Dei Institute. p 2.
  116. ^ Carver, C., & Scheier, M. (2004). Perspectives on Personality (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
  117. ^ Cattell, R.B. (1995). «The fallacy of five factors in the personality sphere». The Psychologist, May, 207–208.
  118. ^ Cattell, Raymond B.; Nichols, K. Ernest (1972). «An Improved Definition, from 10 Researchers, of Second Order Personality Factors in Q Data (with Cross-Cultural Checks)». The Journal of Social Psychology. 86 (2): 187–203. doi:10.1080/00224545.1972.9918617.
  119. ^ Block, Jack (1995). «A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description». Psychological Bulletin. 117 (2): 187–215. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.187. PMID 7724687.
  120. ^ Boyle, G.J. (2008). Critique of Five-Factor Model (FFM). In G.J. Boyle, G. Matthews, & D.H. Saklofske. (Eds.), ThBy coe SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment: Vol. 1 – Personality theories and models. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE. ISBN 978-1-4129-4651-3
  121. ^ Lucas, Richard E.; Baird, Brendan M. (2004). «Extraversion and Emotional Reactivity». Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 86 (3): 473–485. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.473. PMID 15008650.
  122. ^ Boyle, G.J. (2011). Changes in personality traits in adulthood. In D. Westen, L. Burton, & R. Kowalski (Eds.), Psychology: Australian and New Zealand 3rd edition (pp. 448–449). Milton, Queensland: Wiley. ISBN 978-1-74216-644-5
  123. ^ Cattell, Raymond B.; Boyle, Gregory J.; Chant, David (2002). «Enriched behavioral prediction equation and its impact on structured learning and the dynamic calculus». Psychological Review. 109 (1): 202–205. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.109.1.202. PMID 11863038.
  124. ^ Boyle, Gregory J. (1995). «Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI): Some Psychometric Limitations». Australian Psychologist. 30: 71–74. doi:10.1111/j.1742-9544.1995.tb01750.x.
  125. ^ Leslie C. Morey, «Measuring Personality and Psychopathology» in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 2: Research Methods in Psychology.
  126. ^ Gough, H.G. (1987) California Psychological Inventory Administrator’s Guide. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.
  127. ^ Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. C. (2006). The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84-96.[3] Archived 20 August 2019 at the Wayback Machine
  128. ^ Charles Sanders Peirce & Joseph Jastrow, «On Small Differences in Sensation Archived 9 June 2019 at the Wayback Machine», Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences 3, 17 October 1884; cited in William P. Banks & Ilya Farber, «Consciousness», in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 4: Experimental Psychology; and in Deber, James A; Jacoby, Larry L. (1994). «Unconscious Perception: Attention, Awareness, and Control». Journal of Experimental Psychology. 20 (2): 304–317. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.412.4083. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.20.2.304. PMID 8151275.
  129. ^ The full text of The Interpretation of Dreams at Wikisource, a faithful copy of the third edition translated in English by Abraham Arden Brill and published in 1913 by The Macmillan Company
  130. ^ a b John F. Kihlstrom, «The Psychological Unconscious Archived 19 September 2015 at the Wayback Machine», in Lawrence Pervin & Oliver John (eds.), Handbook of Personality; New York: Guilford Press, 1999. Also see web version Archived 9 October 2016 at the Wayback Machine.
  131. ^ William P. Banks & Ilya Farber, «Consciousness», in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 4: Experimental Psychology.[page needed]
  132. ^ a b Bargh, John A.; Chartrand, Tanya L. (1999). «The unbearable automaticity of being». American Psychologist. 54 (7): 462–479. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.54.7.462. S2CID 5726030. Archived from the original on 30 July 2022. Retrieved 7 January 2020. Also see: John A. Bargh, «The Automaticity of Everyday Life», in Robert S. Wyer Jr. (ed.), The Automaticity of Everyday Life, Advances in Social Cognition, Volume X; Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1997; ISBN 978-0-8058-1699-0[page needed]
  133. ^ a b John F. Kihlstrom, «The Automaticity Juggernaut—or, Are We Automatons After All? Archived 10 March 2015 at the Wayback Machine», in John Baer, James C. Kaufmna, & Roy F. Baumeister (eds.), Are We Free? Psychology and Free Will; Oxford University Press, 2008. ISBN 978-0-19-518963-6
  134. ^ S. Doyen, O. Klein, C. L. Pichon and A. Cleeremans. (2012). Behavioral priming: it’s all in the mind, but whose mind? PLoS One, 7, e29081 Archived 30 July 2022 at the Wayback Machine
  135. ^ Pashler, H; Harris, C; Coburn, N (15 September 2011). «Elderly-Related Words Prime Slow Walking». psychfiledrawer.org. Archived from the original on 21 October 2016. Retrieved 17 October 2016.
  136. ^ Soon, Chun Siong; Brass, Marcel; Heinze, Hans-Jochen; Haynes, John-Dylan (2008). «Unconscious determinants of free decisions in the human brain». Nature Neuroscience. 11 (5): 543–545. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.520.2204. doi:10.1038/nn.2112. PMID 18408715. S2CID 2652613.
  137. ^ Baumeister, Roy F. (2008). «Free Will in Scientific Psychology». Perspectives on Psychological Science. 3 (1): 14–19. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.476.102. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00057.x. PMID 26158665. S2CID 9630921.
  138. ^ a b Forgas, Williams, & Laham, «Social Motivation: Introduction and Overview», in Forgas, Williams, & Laham, Social Motivation (2005).
  139. ^ Weiner, Human Motivation (2013), Chapter 2, «The Psychoanalytic Theory of Motivation» (pp. 9–84).
  140. ^ a b c Bill P. Godsil, Matthew R. Tinsley, & Michael S. Fanselow, «Motivation», in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 4: Experimental Psychology.
  141. ^ Weiner, Human Motivation (2013), Chapter 3, «Drive Theory» (pp. 85–138).
  142. ^ E. Tory Higgins, Beyond Pleasure and Pain: How Motivation Works; Oxford University Press, 2012; ISBN 978-0-19-976582-9[page needed]
  143. ^ Shah & Gardner, Handbook of Motivation Science (2008), entire volume.[page needed]
  144. ^ Hank Aarts, Ap Dijksterhuis, & Giel Dik, «Goal Contagion: Inferring goals from others’ actions—and what it leads to», in Shah & Gardner, Handbook of Motivation Science (2008). «In short, then, the studies presented above indicate that humans are keen to act on the goals of other social beings that are implied in behavioral scenarios or scripts.» Also see: Aarts; Hassin; Gollwitzer (2004). «Goal Contagion: Perceiving is for Pursuing». Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 87 (1): 23–37. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.312.5507. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.1.23. PMID 15250790.
  145. ^ Kathleen D. Vohs & Roy F. Baumeister, «Can Satisfaction Reinforce Wanting? A new theory about long-term changes in strength of motivation», in Shah & Gardner, Handbook of Motivation Science (2008).
  146. ^ a b Crain, W. (2014). Theories of development: Concepts and applications. 6th ed. Edinburgh: Pearson. ISBN 978-0205810468
  147. ^ «Developmental Psychology | Simply Psychology». www.simplypsychology.org. Archived from the original on 29 October 2021. Retrieved 15 October 2021.
  148. ^ Lionetti, F., Aron, E. N., Aron, A., Klein, D. N., & Pluess, M. (2019). Observer-rated environmental sensitivity moderates children’s response to parenting quality in early childhood. Developmental Psychology, 55, 2389–2402. doi:10.1037/dev0000795.supp (Supplemental)
  149. ^ Schonfeld, I. S. (1986). The Genevan and Cattell-Horn conceptions of intelligence compared: The early implementation of numerical solution aids. Developmental Psychology, 22, 204–212. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.22.2.204 [4] Archived 14 April 2021 at the Wayback Machine
  150. ^ Hunnius, S., & Bekkering, H. (2010). The early development of object knowledge: A study of infants’ visual anticipations during action observation. Developmental Psychology, 46, 446–454. doi:10.1037/a0016543
  151. ^ Finkel, D., Reynolds, C. A., McArdle, J. J., Gatz, M., & Pedersen, N. L. (2003). Latent growth curve analyses of accelerating decline in cognitive abilities in late adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 39, 535–550. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.3.535
  152. ^ Polderman, Tinca J C.; Benyamin, Beben; De Leeuw, Christiaan A.; Sullivan, Patrick F.; Van Bochoven, Arjen; Visscher, Peter M.; Posthuma, Danielle (2015). «Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies» (PDF). Nature Genetics. 47 (7): 702–709. doi:10.1038/ng.3285. PMID 25985137. S2CID 205349969.
  153. ^ Turkheimer, Eric (2000). «Three Laws of Behavior Genetics and What They Mean». Current Directions in Psychological Science. 9 (5): 160–164. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00084. S2CID 2861437.
  154. ^ Visscher, Peter M.; Brown, Matthew A.; McCarthy, Mark I.; Yang, Jian (2012). «Five Years of GWAS Discovery». The American Journal of Human Genetics. 90 (1): 7–24. doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.11.029. PMC 3257326. PMID 22243964.
  155. ^ Ripke, Stephan; Neale, Benjamin M.; Corvin, Aiden; Walters, James T. R.; Farh, Kai-How; Holmans, Peter A.; Lee, Phil; Bulik-Sullivan, Brendan; Collier, David A.; Huang, Hailiang; Pers, Tune H.; Agartz, Ingrid; Agerbo, Esben; Albus, Margot; Alexander, Madeline; Amin, Farooq; Bacanu, Silviu A.; Begemann, Martin; Belliveau, Richard A.; Bene, Judit; Bergen, Sarah E.; Bevilacqua, Elizabeth; Bigdeli, Tim B.; Black, Donald W.; Bruggeman, Richard; Buccola, Nancy G.; Buckner, Randy L.; Byerley, William; Cahn, Wiepke; et al. (2014). «Biological insights from 108 schizophrenia-associated genetic loci». Nature. 511 (7510): 421–427. Bibcode:2014Natur.511..421S. doi:10.1038/nature13595. PMC 4112379. PMID 25056061.
  156. ^ Lee, S Hong; Decandia, Teresa R.; Ripke, Stephan; Yang, Jian; Sullivan, Patrick F.; Goddard, Michael E.; Keller, Matthew C.; Visscher, Peter M.; Wray, Naomi R. (2012). «Estimating the proportion of variation in susceptibility to schizophrenia captured by common SNPs». Nature Genetics. 44 (3): 247–250. doi:10.1038/ng.1108. PMC 3327879. PMID 22344220.
  157. ^ Sullivan, Patrick F.; Daly, Mark J.; O’Donovan, Michael (2012). «Genetic architectures of psychiatric disorders: The emerging picture and its implications». Nature Reviews Genetics. 13 (8): 537–551. doi:10.1038/nrg3240. PMC 4110909. PMID 22777127.
  158. ^ De Moor, Marleen H. M.; Van Den Berg, Stéphanie M.; Verweij, Karin J. H.; Krueger, Robert F.; Luciano, Michelle; Arias Vasquez, Alejandro; Matteson, Lindsay K.; Derringer, Jaime; Esko, Tõnu; Amin, Najaf; Gordon, Scott D.; Hansell, Narelle K.; Hart, Amy B.; Seppälä, Ilkka; Huffman, Jennifer E.; Konte, Bettina; Lahti, Jari; Lee, Minyoung; Miller, Mike; Nutile, Teresa; Tanaka, Toshiko; Teumer, Alexander; Viktorin, Alexander; Wedenoja, Juho; Abecasis, Goncalo R.; Adkins, Daniel E.; Agrawal, Arpana; Allik, Jüri; Appel, Katja; et al. (2015). «Meta-analysis of Genome-wide Association Studies for Neuroticism, and the Polygenic Association with Major Depressive Disorder». JAMA Psychiatry. 72 (7): 642–50. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.0554. PMC 4667957. PMID 25993607.
  159. ^ a b c d e f g h i Gregory, Robert (2011). Psychological testing: history, principles, and applications (Sixth ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. ISBN 978-0-205-78214-7. OCLC 620302854.
  160. ^ a b Guthrie, Even the Rat was White (1998), Chapter 3: «Psychometric Scientism» (pp. 55–87)
  161. ^ «Army Alpha and Beta tests». Oxford Reference. Archived from the original on 19 January 2022. Retrieved 18 January 2022.
  162. ^ Berry, Robert M. (2012). «From Involuntary Sterilization to Genetic Enhancement: The Unsettled Legacy of Buck v. Bell». Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics, & Public Policy. 12. Archived from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 24 April 2015.
  163. ^ Neal, Tess M.S. (2018). «Forensic psychology and correctional psychology: Distinct but related subfields of psychological science and practice». American Psychologist. 73 (5): 651–662. doi:10.1037/amp0000227. ISSN 1935-990X. PMID 29431456. S2CID 46817929.
  164. ^ Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory, 3rd ed., New York: McGraw-Hill.
  165. ^ Embretson, S.E., & Reise, S.P. (2000). Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  166. ^ Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 4th ed.New York: Guilford Press.
  167. ^ Rodriguez, A., Reise, S. P., & Haviland, M. G. (2016). Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices. Psychological Methods, 21, 137–150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/met0000045 Archived 28 July 2020 at the Wayback Machine
  168. ^ a b George Stricker & Thomas A. Widiger, «Volume Preface», in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 8: Clinical Psychology.
  169. ^ Brain, Christine. (2002). Advanced psychology: applications, issues and perspectives. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes. ISBN 0-17-490058-9
  170. ^ Nancy McWilliams and Joel Weinberger, «Psychodynamic Psychotherapy», in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 8: Clinical Psychology.
  171. ^ W. Edward Craighead & Linda Wilcoxon Craighead, «Behavioral and Cognitive-Behavioral Psychotherapy» in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 8: Clinical Psychology.
  172. ^ Teri L. Elliott, «Disaster Psychology: Keep Clients out of Your Office—Get into the Field!» in Morgan et al. (ed.), Life After Graduate School in Psychology (2005). «…it is the disaster psychologist’s role to utilize crisis intervention processes with the goal of preventing natural distress due to the critical event from developing into a more harmful, long-term psychological condition.»
  173. ^ Leichsenring, Falk; Leibing, Eric (2003). «The effectiveness of psychodynamic therapy and cognitive behavior therapy in the treatment of personality disorders: A meta-analysis». The American Journal of Psychiatry. 160 (7): 1223–1233. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.160.7.1223. PMID 12832233.
  174. ^ Reisner, Andrew (2005). «The common factors, empirically validated treatments, and recovery models of therapeutic change». The Psychological Record. 55 (3): 377–400. doi:10.1007/BF03395517. S2CID 142840311. Archived from the original on 6 August 2020. Retrieved 21 July 2019.
  175. ^ Jensen, J.P.; Bergin, A.E.; Greaves, D.W. (1990). «The meaning of eclecticism: New survey and analysis of components». Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 21 (2): 124–130. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.21.2.124.
  176. ^ Palmer, S.; Woolfe, R. (eds.) (1999). Integrative and eclectic counselling and psychotherapy. London: Sage.
  177. ^ Clarkson, P. (1996). The eclectic and integrative paradigm: Between the Scylla of confluence and the Charybdis of confusion. In Handbook of Counselling Psychology (R. Woolfe & W.L. Dryden, eds.). London: Sage, pp. 258–283. ISBN 0-8039-8991-1
  178. ^ Goldfried, M.R.; Wolfe, B.E. (1998). «Toward a more clinically valid approach to therapy research» (PDF). Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 66 (1): 143–150. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.475.7156. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.66.1.143. PMID 9489268. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 August 2017. Retrieved 25 October 2017.
  179. ^ Seligman, M.E.P. (1995). «The effectiveness of psychotherapy: The Consumer Reports study» (PDF). American Psychologist. 50 (12): 965–974. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.50.12.965. PMID 8561380. Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 July 2018. Retrieved 25 October 2017.
  180. ^ Peter E. Nathan & James Langenbucher, «Diagnosis and Classification», in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 8: Clinical Psychology.
  181. ^ «What Does An Educational Psychologist Do | Touro University | Psychology». Touro University WorldWide. Archived from the original on 30 September 2021. Retrieved 30 September 2021.
  182. ^ National Association of School Psychologists. «Who are school psychologists?». Archived from the original on 17 May 2008. Retrieved 1 June 2008.
  183. ^ Truxillo, D. M., Bauer, T. N., & Erdogan, B. (2016). Psychology and work: Perspectives on industrial and organizational psychology. New York: Psychology Press. ISBN 1134705697
  184. ^ a b c Laura L. Koppes, «Industrial-Organizational Psychology», in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 1: History of Psychology.
  185. ^ Yeh Hsueh, «The Hawthorne experiments and the introduction of Jean Piaget in American industrial psychology, 1929–1932»; History of Psychology 5.2, May 2002.
  186. ^ Parsons, H. M. (1974). «What happened at Hawthorne?: New evidence suggests the Hawthorne effect resulted from operant reinforcement contingencies». Science. 183 (4128): 922–932. doi:10.1126/science.183.4128.922. PMID 17756742. S2CID 38816592.
  187. ^ Levitt, Steven D.; List, John A. (2011). «Was There Really a Hawthorne Effect at the Hawthorne Plant? An Analysis of the Original Illumination Experiments» (PDF). American Economic Journal: Applied Economics. 3 (1): 224–238. doi:10.1257/app.3.1.224. S2CID 16678444. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2 June 2018. Retrieved 9 June 2021.
  188. ^ Myers (2004). Motivation and work. Psychology. New York, NY: Worth Publishers
  189. ^ Steven Williams, «Executive Management: Helping Executives Manage Their Organizations through Organizational and Market Research» in Morgan et al. (ed.), Life After Graduate School in Psychology (2005).
  190. ^ See also for example Baden Eunson: Behaving – Managing Yourself and Others. McGraw-Hill, Sidney/New York City 1987, ISBN 978-0-0745-2022-2.
  191. ^ Moorhead, G., & Griffin, R. W. (2017). Organizational behavior: Managing people and organizations, 12th ed.. Boston: Cengage. ISBN 978-1-305-50139-3
  192. ^ Robert M. Yerkes, «Measuring the Mental Strength of an Army Archived 20 January 2017 at the Wayback Machine»; Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 4.10, 15 October 1918.
  193. ^ Joshua N. Friedlander, «Military Psychology: An Army Clinical Psychologist» in Morgan et al. (ed.), Life After Graduate School in Psychology (2005).
  194. ^ Thomas, J.L. (2008). OHP Research and Practice in the US Army: Mental Health Advisory Teams. Newsletter of the Society for Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 4–5. [5] Archived 4 November 2021 at the Wayback Machine
  195. ^ Genderson, M.R., Schonfeld, I.S., Kaplan, M.S., & Lyons, M.J. (2009).Suicide associated with military service. Newsletter of the Society for Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 5–7. [6] Archived 22 September 2017 at the Wayback Machine
  196. ^ Paul M.A. Linebarger, Psychological Warfare; Washington: Combat Forces Press, 1954.
  197. ^ See «Project MKULTRA, the CIA’s Program of Research in Behavioral Modification Archived 29 April 2011 at the Wayback Machine»; Joint Hearing before the Senate Committee on Intelligence and the Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research of the Committee on Human Resources, United States Senate, Ninety Fifth Congress, First Session, 3 August 1997; and John D. Marks, The Search for the Manchurian Candidate, New York: Times Books, 1979.
  198. ^ Alfred Paddock, Jr., «PSYOP: On a Complete Change in Organization, Practice, and Doctrine Archived 12 July 2015 at the Wayback Machine», Small Wars Journal 2010.
  199. ^ US torture report: psychologists should no longer aid military, group says Archived 14 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine The Guardian, 11 July 2015
  200. ^ Guthrie, Even the Rat was White (1998), Chapter 7: «Production of Black Psychologists in America» (pp. 155–213).
  201. ^ Chall, J. S. (1995). Learning to read: The great debate, 3rd ed. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace.
  202. ^ Marilu Price Berry, «Interdisciplinary Medical Setting: The Multiple Roles of a Health Psychologist» in Morgan et al. (ed.), Life After Graduate School in Psychology (2005).
  203. ^ Robiner, W. N., & Seime, R. J. (2008). Psychologists in academic health centers: Traditions and innovations in education, science, and practice. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 15, 3–6. doi:10.1007/s10880-008-9091-1
  204. ^ Monica L. Baskin, «Public Health: Career Opportunities for Psychologists in Public Health», in Morgan et al. (ed.), Life After Graduate School in Psychology (2005). «Prevention strategies of late have largely concentrated on community-based interventions, which have been shown to be effective in changing the health of large populations. Behavioral and social scientists, such as psychologists, are helpful in this arena as we are trained to view individuals as belonging to complex and dynamic social systems, including immediate and extended family systems, acquaintance and friendship networks, neighborhood and community systems, and cultural groups (Schneiderman & Spee4, 2001).»
  205. ^ Zohar, D. (2010). Thirty years of safety climate research: Reflections and future directions. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 1517-1522.
  206. ^ Beus, J. M., McCord, M. A., & Zohar, D. (2016). Workplace safety:A review and research synthesis. Organizational Psychology Review, 6, 352-381. doi:10.1177/2041386615626243
  207. ^ Clays, E., De Bacquer, D., Delanghe, J., Kittel, F., Van Renterghem, L., & De Backer, G. (2005). Associations Between Dimensions of Job Stress and Biomarkers of Inflammation and Infection. Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine, 47, 878-883
  208. ^ Brown, A. D., Schultebraucks, K., Qian, M., Li, M., Horesh, D., Siegel, C., Brody, Y., Amer, A. M., Lev-Ari, R. K., Mas, F., Marmar, C. R., & Farmer, J. (2020). Mental health disorders and utilization of mental healthcare services in United Nations personnel. Global Mental Health, 7. doi:10.1017/gmh.2019.29
  209. ^ Amiri, S., & Behnezhad, S. (2020). Is job strain a risk factor for musculoskeletal pain? A systematic review and meta-analysis of 21 longitudinal studies. Public Health, 181, 158-167. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2019.11.023
  210. ^ Nixon, A. E., Mazzola, J. J., Bauer, J., Krueger, J. R., & Spector, P. E. (2011). Can work make you sick? A meta-analysis of the relationships between job stressors and physical symptoms. Work & Stress, 25, 1-22. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2011.569175
  211. ^ Yang, L.-Q., Caughlin, D. E., Gazica, M. W., Truxillo, D. M., & Spector, P. E. (2014). Workplace mistreatment climate and potential employee and organizational outcomes: A meta-analytic review from the target’s perspective. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19, 315-335. doi:10.1037/a0036905
  212. ^ Hochschild, A. (2011). To End All Wars: A Story of Loyalty and Rebellion, 1914–1918. ISBN 978-0-547-75031-6
  213. ^ Kreis, S. (1995). Early experiments in British scientific management: the Health of Munitions Workers’ Committee, 1915-1920. Journal of Management History (archive), 1, 65-78. doi.org/10.1108/13552529510088330
  214. ^ Kwiatkowski, R., Duncan, D. C., & Shimmin, S. (2006). What have we forgotten — and why? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79(2), 183-201. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1348/096317905X70832
  215. ^ a b Zickar, M. J. (2003). Remembering Arthur Kornhauser: Industrial psychology’s advocate for worker well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 363–369. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.363
  216. ^ Kornhauser, A. (1965). Mental health of the industrial worker. New York: Wiley.
  217. ^ «Spector, P. (2019). What Is Occupational Health Psychology?». 30 December 2019. Archived from the original on 28 June 2021. Retrieved 14 July 2021.
  218. ^ Spector, P. E. (2021). From occupational fatigue to occupational health. In L. M. Lapierre & C. Cooper (Eds.). Cambridge companion to organizational stress and well-being. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  219. ^ a b Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Occupational Health Psychology (OHP). [7] Archived 10 September 2019 at the Wayback Machine
  220. ^ Houdmont, J., & Leka, S. (2010). An introduction to occupational health psychology. In S. Leka & J. Houdmont (Eds.). Occupational health psychology (pp. 1–30). John Wiley: Hoboken, NJ.
  221. ^ Everly, G.S., Jr. (1986). An introduction to occupational health psychology. In P.A. Keller & L.G. Ritt (Eds.), Innovations in clinical practice: A source book (Vol. 5, pp. 331–338). Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Exchange.
  222. ^ Society for Occupational Health Psychology. Field of OHP. What is occupational health psychology [8] Archived 4 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine
  223. ^ Tetrick, L.E., & Quick, J.C. (2011). Overview of occupational health psychology: Public health in occupational settings. In J.C. Quick & L.E. Tetrick (Eds.), Handbook of occupational health psychology (2nd ed., pp. 3–20). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
  224. ^ John A. Schinka & Wayne F. Velicer, «Volume Preface» in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 2: Research Methods in Psychology.
  225. ^ Alasuutari, Pertti (2010). «The rise and relevance of qualitative research». International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 13 (2): 139–55. doi:10.1080/13645570902966056. S2CID 143736805.
  226. ^ Schonfeld, I.S., & Mazzola, J.J. (2013). Strengths and limitations of qualitative approaches to research in occupational health psychology. In R. Sinclair, M. Wang, & L. Tetrick (Eds.), Research methods in occupational health psychology: State of the art in measurement, design, and data analysis (pp. 268-289). New York: Routledge.
  227. ^ Schulz, K.F.; Altman, D.G.; Moher, D.; for the CONSORT Group (2010). «CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials». BMJ. 340: c332. doi:10.1136/bmj.c332. PMC 2844940. PMID 20332509.
  228. ^ Milgram, Stanley (1963). «Behavioral Study of Obedience». Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 67 (4): 371–378. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.599.92. doi:10.1037/h0040525. PMID 14049516. Archived from the original on 17 July 2012. Retrieved 24 May 2010. Full-text PDF. Archived 11 June 2011 at the Wayback Machine
  229. ^ Melvin M. Mark, «Program Evaluation» in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 2: Research Methods in Psychology.
  230. ^ Roger E. Kirk, «Experimental Design» in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 2: Research Methods in Psychology.
  231. ^ John T. Behrens and Chong-Ho Yu, «Exploratory Data Analysis» in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 2: Research Methods in Psychology.
  232. ^ Frank L. Schmidt and John E. Hunter, «Meta-Analysis», Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 2: Research Methods in Psychology.
  233. ^ Rösler, Frank (2005). «From Single-Channel Recordings to Brain-Mapping Devices: The Impact of Electroencephalography on Experimental Psychology» (PDF). History of Psychology. 8 (1): 95–117. doi:10.1037/1093-4510.8.1.95. PMID 16021767. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 September 2015. Retrieved 24 April 2015.
  234. ^ Moran, Joseph M.; Zaki, Jamil (2013). «Functional Neuroimaging and Psychology: What Have You Done for Me Lately?». Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 25 (6): 834–842. doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00380. PMID 23469884. S2CID 12546790. Archived from the original on 2 February 2016. Retrieved 24 April 2015.
  235. ^ Cacioppo, John T.; Berntson, Gary G.; Nusbaum, Howard C. (2008). «Neuroimaging as a New Tool in the Toolbox of Psychological Science» (PDF). Current Directions in Psychological Science. 17 (2): 62–67. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00550.x. S2CID 14565940. Archived from the original (PDF) on 31 October 2014.
  236. ^ Aue, Tatjana; Lavelle, Leah A.; Cacioppo, John T. (2009). «Great expectations: What can fMRI research tell us about psychological phenomena?» (PDF). International Journal of Psychophysiology. 73 (1): 10–16. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2008.12.017. PMID 19232374. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 January 2016.
  237. ^ Ron Sun, (2008). The Cambridge Handbook of Computational Psychology. Cambridge University Press, New York. 2008.
  238. ^ «Ncabr.Org: About Biomedical Research: Faq». Archived from the original on 8 July 2008. Retrieved 1 July 2008.
  239. ^ Shettleworth, S.J. (2010) Cognition, Evolution and Behavior (2nd Ed), New York: Oxford.
  240. ^ Wilson, E.O. (1978) On Human Nature p. x, Cambridge, Ma: Harvard
  241. ^ Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
  242. ^ Fromm, E. (1941). Escape from freedom. New York: Farrar & Rinehart. ISBN 0-7448-0014-5
  243. ^ Harlow (1868), Fig. 2, p. 347 Harlow, John Martyn (1868). «Recovery from the Passage of an Iron Bar through the Head.» Publications of the Massachusetts Medical Society 2:327–347 (Republished in Macmillan 2000).
  244. ^ Fitzpatrick, J.L., Sanders, J.R., & Worthen, B.R. (2011). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. New York: Pearson Higher Education. ISBN 978-0-205-57935-8.
  245. ^ Administration for Children and Families (2010) The Program Manager’s Guide to Evaluation Archived 25 August 2012 at the Wayback Machine. Chapter 2: What is program evaluation?.
  246. ^
  247. ^ Franco, Annie; Malhotra, Neil; Simonovits, Gabor (1 January 2016). «Underreporting in Psychology Experiments: Evidence From a Study Registry». Social Psychological and Personality Science. 7 (1): 8–12. doi:10.1177/1948550615598377. ISSN 1948-5506. S2CID 143182733.
  248. ^ Munafò, Marcus (29 March 2017). «Metascience: Reproducibility blues». Nature. 543 (7647): 619–620. Bibcode:2017Natur.543..619M. doi:10.1038/543619a. ISSN 1476-4687.
  249. ^ StokstadSep. 20, Erik (19 September 2018). «This research group seeks to expose weaknesses in science—and they’ll step on some toes if they have to». Science | AAAS. Archived from the original on 18 March 2022. Retrieved 24 May 2019.
  250. ^ Stevens, Jeffrey R. (2017). «Replicability and Reproducibility in Comparative Psychology». Frontiers in Psychology. 8: 862. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00862. ISSN 1664-1078. PMC 5445189. PMID 28603511.
  251. ^ Arjo Klamer; Robert M. Solow; Donald N. McCloskey (1989). The Consequences of economic rhetoric. Cambridge University Press. pp. 173–174. ISBN 978-0-521-34286-5.
  252. ^ Lehrer, Jonah (13 December 2010). «The Truth Wears Off». The New Yorker. Archived from the original on 12 July 2014. Retrieved 10 April 2011.
  253. ^ Sterling, Theodore D. (March 1959). «Publication decisions and their possible effects on inferences drawn from tests of significance—or vice versa». Journal of the American Statistical Association. 54 (285): 30–34. doi:10.2307/2282137. JSTOR 2282137.
  254. ^ Fanelli, Daniele (2010). Enrico Scalas (ed.). «Positive’ Results Increase Down the Hierarchy of the Sciences». PLOS ONE. 5 (4): e10068. Bibcode:2010PLoSO…510068F. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0010068. PMC 2850928. PMID 20383332.
  255. ^ Marcus, Gary (1 May 2013). «The Crisis in Social Psychology That Isn’t». The New Yorker. Archived from the original on 7 July 2018. Retrieved 19 December 2018.
  256. ^ Meyer, Michelle N.; Chabris, Christopher (31 July 2014). «Why Psychologists’ Food Fight Matters». Slate. Archived from the original on 10 January 2019. Retrieved 19 December 2018.
  257. ^ Aschwanden, Christie (27 August 2015). «Psychology Is Starting To Deal With Its Replication Problem». FiveThirtyEight. Archived from the original on 19 August 2017. Retrieved 19 December 2018.
  258. ^ a b Open Science Collaboration (2015). «Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science» (PDF). Science. 349 (6251): aac4716. doi:10.1126/science.aac4716. hdl:10722/230596. PMID 26315443. S2CID 218065162. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 October 2019. Retrieved 9 February 2019.
  259. ^ Hunt, Earl B. (2011). Human Intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press. p. 94. ISBN 978-0521707817.
  260. ^ Baumeister, Roy (September 2016), «Charting the future of social psychology on stormy seas: Winners, losers, and recommendations», Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66: 153–158, doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2016.02.003, …shifting the dominant conceptual paradigm from Freudian psychoanalytic theory to Big Five research has reduced the chances of being wrong but palpably increased the fact of being boring. In making that transition, personality psychology became more accurate but less broadly interesting.
  261. ^ Duncan, Laramie E.; Keller, Matthew C. (October 2011). «A critical review of the first 10 years of candidate gene-by-environment interaction research in psychiatry». The American Journal of Psychiatry. 168 (10): 1041–1049. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.11020191. PMC 3222234. PMID 21890791.
  262. ^ Leichsenring, F.; Abbass, A.; Hilsenroth, M. J.; Leweke, F.; Luyten, P.; Keefe, J. R.; Midgley, N.; Rabung, S.; Salzer, S.; Steinert, C. (2017). «Biases in research: Risk factors for non-replicability in psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy research». Psychological Medicine. 47 (6): 1000–1011. doi:10.1017/S003329171600324X. PMID 27955715. S2CID 1872762. Archived from the original on 6 July 2019. Retrieved 28 December 2018.
  263. ^ Hengartner, Michael P. (2018). «Raising Awareness for the Replication Crisis in Clinical Psychology by Focusing on Inconsistencies in Psychotherapy Research: How Much Can We Rely on Published Findings from Efficacy Trials?». Frontiers in Psychology. 9: 256. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00256. PMC 5835722. PMID 29541051.
  264. ^ Frank, Michael C.; Bergelson, Elika; Bergmann, Christina; Cristia, Alejandrina; Floccia, Caroline; Gervain, Judit; Hamlin, J. Kiley; Hannon, Erin E.; Kline, Melissa; Levelt, Claartje; Lew-Williams, Casey; Nazzi, Thierry; Panneton, Robin; Rabagliati, Hugh; Soderstrom, Melanie; Sullivan, Jessica; Waxman, Sandra; Yurovsky, Daniel (2017). «A Collaborative Approach to Infant Research: Promoting Reproducibility, Best Practices, and Theory-Building». Infancy. 22 (4): 421–435. doi:10.1111/infa.12182. PMC 6879177. PMID 31772509. Archived from the original on 27 February 2020. Retrieved 21 July 2019.
  265. ^ Harris, Judith Rich (2009) [1998]. The Nurture Assumption: Why Children Turn Out the Way They Do (2nd ed.). New York: Free Press. ISBN 978-1439101650.
  266. ^ Harris, Judith Rich (2006). No Two Alike: Human Nature and Human Individuality. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 978-0393329711.
  267. ^ Tyson, Charlie (14 August 2014). «Failure to Replicate». Inside Higher Ed. Archived from the original on 23 December 2019. Retrieved 19 December 2018.
  268. ^ Makel, Matthew C.; Plucker, Jonathan A. (2014). «Facts Are More Important Than Novelty». Educational Researcher. 43 (6): 304–316. doi:10.3102/0013189X14545513. S2CID 145571836.
  269. ^ Kirschner, Paul A.; Sweller, John; Clark, Richard E. (2006). «Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching». Educational Psychologist. Routledge. 41 (2): 75–86. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1. S2CID 17067829.
  270. ^ Foundations for Success: The Final Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel (PDF) (Report). United States Department of Education. 2008. pp. 45–46. Archived (PDF) from the original on 18 January 2018. Retrieved 3 November 2020.
  271. ^ Pashler, Harold; McDaniel, Mark; Rohrer, Doug; Bjork, Robert (2008). «Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence». Psychological Science in the Public Interest. SAGE Publications. 9 (3): 105–119. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x. PMID 26162104. S2CID 2112166.
  272. ^ Simmons, Joseph P.; Nelson, Leif D.; Simonsohn, Uri (2011). «False-Positive Psychology». Psychological Science. 22 (11): 1359–1366. doi:10.1177/0956797611417632. PMID 22006061.
  273. ^ Stroebe, Wolfgang; Strack, Fritz (2014). «The Alleged Crisis and the Illusion of Exact Replication» (PDF). Perspectives on Psychological Science. 9 (1): 59–71. doi:10.1177/1745691613514450. PMID 26173241. S2CID 31938129. Archived (PDF) from the original on 15 June 2020. Retrieved 21 July 2019.
  274. ^ Aschwanden, Christie (6 December 2018). «Psychology’s Replication Crisis Has Made The Field Better». FiveThirtyEight. Archived from the original on 20 December 2018. Retrieved 19 December 2018.
  275. ^ «Registered Reports». Center for Open Science. Archived from the original on 21 May 2021. Retrieved 20 May 2021.
  276. ^ Chartier, Chris; Kline, Melissa; McCarthy, Randy; Nuijten, Michele; Dunleavy, Daniel J.; Ledgerwood, Alison (December 2018), «The Cooperative Revolution Is Making Psychological Science Better», Observer, 31 (10), archived from the original on 20 December 2018, retrieved 19 December 2018
  277. ^ Allen, Christopher; Mehler, David M. A. (1 May 2019). «Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond». PLOS Biology. Public Library of Science (PLoS). 17 (5): e3000246. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000246. ISSN 1545-7885. PMC 6513108. PMID 31042704. S2CID 240061030. (Erratum: doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000587,  [9])
  278. ^ Cohen, Jacob (1994). «The earth is round (p < .05)». American Psychologist. 49 (12): 997–1003. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.49.12.997. S2CID 380942. Archived from the original on 30 July 2022. Retrieved 7 January 2020.
  279. ^ McLeod, S. A. (2019). «McLeod, S. (2019). What does effect size tell you?». Archived from the original on 10 June 2021. Retrieved 10 June 2021.
  280. ^ a b Arnett, J. J. (2008). «The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs to become less American». American Psychologist. 63 (7): 602–614. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.7.602. PMID 18855491.
  281. ^ Henrich, Joseph; Heine, Steven J.; Norenzayan, Ara (2010). «The weirdest people in the world?» (PDF). Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 33 (2–3): 61–83. doi:10.1017/S0140525X0999152X. hdl:11858/00-001M-0000-0013-26A1-6. PMID 20550733. S2CID 220918842. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 April 2022. Retrieved 6 January 2022.
  282. ^ Collins, L. H.; Machizawa, S.; Rice, J. K. (2019). Transnational Psychology of Women: Expanding International and Intersectional Approaches. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association. ISBN 978-1-4338-3069-3.
  283. ^ Altmaier, E. M.; Hall, J. E. (2008). Global promise: Quality assurance and accountability in professional psychology. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-530608-8.
  284. ^ Morgan-Consoli, M. L.; Inman, A. G.; Bullock, M.; Nolan, S. A. (2018). «Framework for competencies for U.S. psychologists engaging internationally». International Perspectives in Psychology: Research, Practice, Consultation. 7 (3): 174–188. doi:10.1037/ipp0000090. S2CID 159028411.
  285. ^ Rad, Mostafa Salari; Martingano, Alison Jane; Ginges, Jeremy (2018). «Toward a psychology of Homo sapiens: Making psychological science more representative of the human population». Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 115 (45): 11401–11405. Bibcode:2018PNAS..11511401R. doi:10.1073/pnas.1721165115. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 6233089. PMID 30397114.
  286. ^ Preston, Elizabeth (19 March 2023). «A Cognitive Revolution in Animal Research». The Atlantic. Retrieved 22 March 2023.
  287. ^ Dawes, Robyn (1994). House of Cards – Psychology and Psychotherapy Built on Myth. Free Press. ISBN 978-0-02-907205-9.
  288. ^ Beyerstein, Barry L. (Spring 2001). «Fringe Psychotherapies: The Public at Risk». The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine. 5 (2): 70–9. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.462.3147.
  289. ^ «SRMHP: Our Raison d’Être». Archived from the original on 11 July 2007. Retrieved 1 July 2008.
  290. ^ American Psychological Association. (2016). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct.[10] Archived 6 February 2018 at the Wayback Machine
  291. ^ The American Psychological Society: Responsible Conduct of Research Archived 24 November 2018 at the Wayback Machine
  292. ^ a b c Stanley E. Jones, «Ethical Issues in Clinical Psychology», in Weiner (ed.), Handbook of Psychology (2003), Volume 8: Clinical Psychology.
  293. ^ Sherwin, C.M.; Christionsen, S.B.; Duncan, I.J.; Erhard, H.W.; Lay Jr., D.C.; Mench, J.A.; O’Connor, C.E.; Petherick, J.C. (2003). «Guidelines for the Ethical use of animals in the applied ethology studies». Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 81 (3): 291–305. doi:10.1016/s0168-1591(02)00288-5.
  294. ^ Blum 1994, p. 95, Blum 2002, pp. 218–219. Blum 1994, p. 95: «… the most controversial experiment to come out of the Wisconsin laboratory, a device that Harlow insisted on calling the ‘pit of despair.«
  295. ^ Blum, Deborah (2002). Love at Goon Park: Harry Harlow and the science of affection. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Pub. ISBN 0-7382-0278-9. OCLC 50763066.
  296. ^ Booth, Wayne C. Modern Dogma and the Rhetoric of Assent, Volume 5, of University of Notre Dame, Ward-Phillips lectures in English language and literature, University of Chicago Press, 1974, p. 114. Booth is explicitly discussing this experiment. His next sentence is, «His most recent outrage consists of placing monkeys in ‘solitary’ for twenty days—what he calls a ‘vertical chamber apparatus …. designed on an intuitive basis’ to produce ‘a state of helplessness and hopelessness, sunken in a well of despair.«

Sources

  • Baker, David B. (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of the History of Psychology. Oxford University Press (Oxford Library of Psychology), 2012. ISBN 978-0-19-536655-6
  • Brock, Adrian C. (ed.). Internationalizing the History of Psychology. New York University Press, 2006. ISBN 978-0-8147-9944-4
  • Cina, Carol. «Social Science for Whom? A Structural History of Social Psychology.» Doctoral dissertation, accepted by the State University of New York at Stony Brook, 1981.
  • Cocks, Geoffrey. Psychotherapy in the Third Reich: The Göring Institute, second edition. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1997. ISBN 1-56000-904-7
  • Forgas, Joseph P., Kipling D. Williams, & Simon M. Laham. Social Motivation: Conscious and Unconscious Processes. Cambridge University Press, 2005. ISBN 0-521-83254-3
  • Guthrie, Robert. Even the Rat was White: A Historical View of Psychology. Second edition. Boston, Allyn and Bacon (Viacon), 1998. ISBN 0-205-14993-6
  • Herman, Ellen. «Psychology as Politics: How Psychological Experts Transformed Public Life in the United States 1940–1970.» Doctoral dissertation accepted by Brandeis University, 1993.
  • Hock, Roger R. Forty Studies That Changed Psychology: Explorations Into the History of Psychological Research. Fourth edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2002. ISBN 978-0-13-032263-0
  • Morgan, Robert D., Tara L. Kuther, & Corey J. Habben. Life After Graduate School in Psychology: Insider’s Advice from New Psychologists. New York: Psychology Press (Taylor & Francis Group), 2005. ISBN 1-84169-410-X
  • Severin, Frank T. (ed.). Humanistic Viewpoints in Psychology: A Book of Readings. New York: McGraw Hill, 1965. ISBN
  • Shah, James Y., and Wendi L. Gardner. Handbook of Motivation Science. New York: The Guilford Press, 2008. ISBN 978-1-59385-568-0
  • Wallace, Edwin R., IV, & John Gach (eds.), History of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology; New York: Springer, 2008; ISBN 978-0-387-34708-0
  • Weiner, Bernard. Human Motivation. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis, 2013. ISBN 978-0-8058-0711-0
  • Weiner, Irving B. Handbook of Psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2003. ISBN 0-471-17669-9
    • Volume 1: History of Psychology. Donald K. Freedheim, ed. ISBN 0-471-38320-1
    • Volume 2: Research Methods in Psychology. John A. Schinka & Wayne F. Velicer, eds. ISBN 0-471-38513-1
    • Volume 3: Biological Psychology. Michela Gallagher & Randy J. Nelson, eds. ISBN 0-471-38403-8
    • Volume 4: Experimental Psychology. Alice F. Healy & Robert W. Proctor, eds. ISBN 0-471-39262-6
    • Volume 8: Clinical Psychology. George Stricker, Thomas A. Widiger, eds. ISBN 0-471-39263-4

Further reading

  • Badcock, Christopher R. (2015). «Nature-Nurture Controversy, History of». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 340–344. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.03136-6. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Cascio, Wayne F. (2015). «Industrial–Organizational Psychology: Science and Practice». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 879–884. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.22007-2. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Chryssochoou, Xenia (2015). «Social Psychology». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 532–537. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.24095-6. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Deakin, Nicholas (2015). «Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 31–36. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.27049-9. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Demetriou, Andreas (2015). «Intelligence in Cultural, Social and Educational Context». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 313–322. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.92147-0. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Gelso, Charles J. (2015). «Counseling Psychology». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 69–72. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.21073-8. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Henley, Tracy B. (2015). «Psychology, History of (Early Period)». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 406–411. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.03235-9. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Knowland, Victoria C.P.; Purser, Harry; Thomas, Michael S.C. (2015). «Cross-Sectional Methodologies in Developmental Psychology». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 354–360. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.23235-2. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Louw, Dap (2015). «Forensic Psychology». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 351–356. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.21074-X. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • McWilliams, Spencer A. (2015). «Psychology, History of (Twentieth Century)». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 412–417. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.03046-4. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Pe-Pua, Rogelia (2015). «Indigenous Psychology». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 788–794. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.24067-1. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Peterson, Roger L.; Peterson, Donald R.; Abrams, Jules C.; Stricker, George; Ducheny, Kelly (2015). «Training in Clinical Psychology in the United States: Practitioner Model». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 517–523. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.21086-6. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Poortinga, Ype H. (2015). «Cross-Cultural Psychology». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 311–317. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.24011-7. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Spinath, Frank M.; Spinath, Birgit; Borkenau, Peter (2015). «Developmental Behavioral Genetics and Education». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 320–325. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.92009-9. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Smith, Edward E. (2015). «Cognitive Psychology: History». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 103–109. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.03028-2. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.
  • Staerklé, Christian (2015). «Political Psychology». International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. pp. 427–433. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.24079-8. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5.

External links

  • Psychology at Curlie
  • American Psychological Association
  • Association for Psychological Science


Asked by: Brock Fay

Score: 4.2/5
(66 votes)

The word ‘psychology’ is derived from two Greek words, ‘psyche’, meaning the mind, soul or spirit and ‘logos’, meaning discourse or to. study. These words combined produce the ‘Study of the mind’.

What does etymological mean?

Something etymological relates to the way a word originated. You can look up a word’s roots and the history of how it came to get its meaning in an etymological dictionary. … The etymological origin of etymological, in fact, is Greek: the root word etymologia means «study of the true sense of a word.»

What is the real meaning of psychology?

Psychology is the scientific study of the mind and behavior, according to the American Psychological Association. Psychology is a multifaceted discipline and includes many sub-fields of study such areas as human development, sports, health, clinical, social behavior and cognitive processes.

What is the main meaning of psychology?

Psychology is the study of mind and behavior. It encompasses the biological influences, social pressures, and environmental factors that affect how people think, act, and feel.

What are the 7 types of psychology?

What are the 7 types of psychology?

  • Learning/ (Behavioral) psychology. …
  • Child psychology.
  • Psychodynamic psychology.
  • Humanistic psychology.
  • Evolutionary psychology.
  • Biological psychology.
  • Abnormal Psychology.

15 related questions found

What are the 4 types of psychology?

There are different types of psychology, such as cognitive, forensic, social, and developmental psychology. A person with a condition that affects their mental health may benefit from assessment and treatment with a psychologist.

Is psychology a good career?

If you want to take up psychology as a career, check out how you can study it, various specialisations, and the job opportunities and scope in this field. Psychology is a vital field now because of the increasing focus on mental health and wellbeing. … Needless to say, the scopes of psychology, as a career, are huge.

What is the aim of psychology?

Psychology aims to change, influence, or control behavior to make positive, constructive, meaningful, and lasting changes in people’s lives and to influence their behavior for the better. This is the final and most important goal of psychology.

Can I learn psychology by myself?

Learning psychology on your own won’t be easy, but it’s possible. First, you’ll want to be able to define psychology, as well as the different subtopics of psychology. After that, you can begin consuming any information you can on the matter, from free online courses to textbooks.

What is the old meaning of disaster?

«Disaster» has its roots in the belief that the positions of stars influence the fate of humans, often in destructive ways; its original meaning in English was «an unfavorable aspect of a planet or star.» The word comes to us through Middle French and the Old Italian word «disastro,» from the Latin prefix «dis-» and …

What is the definition of most common?

: belonging to or shared by two or more people or groups. : done by many people. : occurring or appearing frequently : not rare.

What is the etymological root?

From Hull AWE. In etymology, a root (sometimes named an etymon) is the original form from which a word, or a group of words, has been derived.

How can I start psychology?

To start a psychology career, you’ll need to get at least a master’s degree (for school psychology) or a doctorate to practice in other specialties. To get licensed to practice psychology, you’ll need to earn the required degree, pass a state and/or national exam, and fulfill other licensing requirements.

How can I learn human psychology?

Learn academic approaches to psychology by listening to lectures. You can also listen to lectures recorded by psychology professors. Lectures are usually more methodical and academic than podcasts. Some universities record a wide variety of lectures and make them available to the public.

How can I be good at psychology?

Tips for Succeeding in Psychology 101

  1. Start With the Basics. Before you begin studying any topic in great depth, it is important to make sure that you have a strong grasp of the basics. …
  2. Focus on Developing Effective Study Habits. …
  3. Sharpen Your Writing Skills. …
  4. Participate in Psychology Research. …
  5. Delve Deeper Into the Subject.

Who is called the father of psychology?

The Father of Modern Psychology

Wilhelm Wundt is the man most commonly identified as the father of psychology. … By establishing a lab that utilized scientific methods to study the human mind and behavior, Wundt took psychology from a mixture of philosophy and biology and made it a unique field of study.

Why is psychology so important?

Essentially, psychology helps people in large part because it can explain why people act the way they do. With this kind of professional insight, a psychologist can help people improve their decision making, stress management and behavior based on understanding past behavior to better predict future behavior.

What are the five goals of psychology?

Terms in this set (6)

  • Five Goals. Describe, improve, predict, control.
  • Describe. Observe behavior and describe, often in minute detail, what was observed as objectively as possible.
  • Explain. Psychologists must go beyond what is obvious and explain their observations. …
  • Predict. …
  • Control. …
  • Improve.

Can psychologists be rich?

However, if you go into private practice and have some business sense about you, you can do quite well. Even a psychologist working heavily with insurance and managed care can net 125K annually if they work full time and at least 48 weeks a year. If you do cash and carry, your net income can easily be >200k.

Does psychology have math?

What Math Classes Would I Take as a Psychology Undergraduate? Most psychology undergraduate programs have a math requirement — but don’t let this deter you from pursuing an online psychology degree. … This is why statistics is a common requirement in accredited psychology undergraduate programs.

What are the most useless degrees?

20 Most Useless College Degrees

  • Featured Colleges With Useful Degrees. Advertisement. …
  • Advertising. If you’re an advertising major, you may hope to get into digital marketing, e-commerce, or sports marketing. …
  • Anthropology And Archeology. …
  • Art history. …
  • Communications. …
  • Computer Science. …
  • Creative Writing. …
  • Criminal Justice.

Which psychology course is best?

10 Psychology Courses Psych Majors Should Take

  • Statistics. …
  • Experimental Psychology. …
  • Physiological Psychology. …
  • Cognitive Psychology. …
  • Abnormal Psychology. …
  • Developmental Psychology. …
  • Social Psychology. …
  • Personality Psychology.

Which branch of psychology is the best?

Psychiatrists are physicians who specialize in mental health. Like any medical doctor, they diagnose and treat illness through different strategies. Psychiatrists prescribe medications for patients with a mental illness. Psychiatry is by far the best-paying psychology career.

Which branch of psychology is most directly?

Which branch of psychology is most directly concerned with the study of how people think about, influence, and relate to one another? Social psychology.

University of Minnesota; OpenStax; Marilyn D. Lovett; William J. Jenkins; Rose M. Spielman; Arlene Lacombe; Kathryn Dumper; and Marion Perlmutter

Learning Objectives

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

  • Understand the etymology of the word “psychology”
  • Define psychology
  • Understand the merits of an education in psychology

Psychology is the scientific study of mind and behavior. The word “psychology” comes from the Greek words “psyche,” meaning life, and “logos,” meaning explanation. Psychology is a popular major for students, a popular topic in the public media, and a part of our everyday lives. Television shows such as Dr. Phil feature psychologists who provide personal advice to those with personal or family difficulties. Crime dramas such as CSI, Lie to Me, and others feature the work of forensic psychologists who use psychological principles to help solve crimes. And many people have direct knowledge about psychology because they have visited psychologists, for instance, school counselors, family therapists, and religious, marriage, or bereavement counselors.

Because we are frequently exposed to the work of psychologists in our everyday lives, we all have an idea about what psychology is and what psychologists do. In many ways I am sure that your conceptions are correct. Psychologists do work in forensic fields, and they do provide counseling and therapy for people in distress. But there are hundreds of thousands of psychologists in the world, and most of them work in other places, doing work that you are probably not aware of.

Most psychologists work in research laboratories, hospitals, and other field settings where they study the behavior of humans and animals. For instance, my colleagues in the Psychology Department at the University of Maryland study such diverse topics as anxiety in children, the interpretation of dreams, the effects of caffeine on thinking, how birds recognize each other, how praying mantises hear, how people from different cultures react differently in negotiation, and the factors that lead people to engage in terrorism. Other psychologists study such topics as alcohol and drug addiction, memory, emotion, hypnosis, love, what makes people aggressive or helpful, and the psychologies of politics, prejudice, culture, and religion. Psychologists also work in schools and businesses, and they use a variety of methods, including observation, questionnaires, interviews, and laboratory studies, to help them understand behavior.

This chapter provides an introduction to the broad field of psychology and the many approaches that psychologists take to understanding human behavior. We will consider how psychologists conduct scientific research, with an overview of some of the most important approaches used and topics studied by psychologists, and also consider the variety of fields in which psychologists work and the careers that are available to people with psychology degrees. I expect that you may find that at least some of your preconceptions about psychology will be challenged and changed, and you will learn that psychology is a field that will provide you with new ways of thinking about your own thoughts, feelings, and actions.

Figure 1.1

This collage contains pictures of a man doing a handstand on a beach, a man playing guitar with two friends, two men having a conversation, two women smoking at a table, and two old men and a woman sitting on the side of a building.

Psychology is in part the study of behavior. Why do you think these people are behaving the way they are?

1.1 Psychology as a Science

Learning Objectives

  1. Explain why using our intuition about everyday behavior is insufficient for a complete understanding of the causes of behavior.
  2. Describe the difference between values and facts and explain how the scientific method is used to differentiate between the two.

Despite the differences in their interests, areas of study, and approaches, all psychologists have one thing in common: They rely on scientific methods. Research psychologists use scientific methods to create new knowledge about the causes of behavior, whereas psychologist-practitioners, such as clinical, counseling, industrial-organizational, and school psychologists, use existing research to enhance the everyday life of others. The science of psychology is important for both researchers and practitioners.

In a sense all humans are scientists. We all have an interest in asking and answering questions about our world. We want to know why things happen, when and if they are likely to happen again, and how to reproduce or change them. Such knowledge enables us to predict our own behavior and that of others. We may even collect data (i.e., any information collected through formal observation or measurement) to aid us in this undertaking. It has been argued that people are “everyday scientists” who conduct research projects to answer questions about behavior (Nisbett & Ross, 1980). When we perform poorly on an important test, we try to understand what caused our failure to remember or understand the material and what might help us do better the next time. When our good friends Monisha and Charlie break up, despite the fact that they appeared to have a relationship made in heaven, we try to determine what happened. When we contemplate the rise of terrorist acts around the world, we try to investigate the causes of this problem by looking at the terrorists themselves, the situation around them, and others’ responses to them.

The Problem of Intuition

The results of these “everyday” research projects can teach us many principles of human behavior. We learn through experience that if we give someone bad news, he or she may blame us even though the news was not our fault. We learn that people may become depressed after they fail at an important task. We see that aggressive behavior occurs frequently in our society, and we develop theories to explain why this is so. These insights are part of everyday social life. In fact, much research in psychology involves the scientific study of everyday behavior (Heider, 1958; Kelley, 1967).

The problem, however, with the way people collect and interpret data in their everyday lives is that they are not always particularly thorough. Often, when one explanation for an event seems “right,” we adopt that explanation as the truth even when other explanations are possible and potentially more accurate. For example, eyewitnesses to violent crimes are often extremely confident in their identifications of the perpetrators of these crimes. But research finds that eyewitnesses are no less confident in their identifications when they are incorrect than when they are correct (Cutler & Wells, 2009; Wells & Hasel, 2008). People may also become convinced of the existence of extrasensory perception (ESP), or the predictive value of astrology, when there is no evidence for either (Gilovich, 1993). Furthermore, psychologists have also found that there are a variety of cognitive and motivational biases that frequently influence our perceptions and lead us to draw erroneous conclusions (Fiske & Taylor, 2007; Hsee & Hastie, 2006). In summary, accepting explanations for events without testing them thoroughly may lead us to think that we know the causes of things when we really do not.

Research Focus: Unconscious Preferences for the Letters of Our Own Name

A study reported in the Journal of Consumer Research (Brendl, Chattopadhyay, Pelham, & Carvallo, 2005) demonstrates the extent to which people can be unaware of the causes of their own behavior. The research demonstrated that, at least under certain conditions (and although they do not know it), people frequently prefer brand names that contain the letters of their own name to brand names that do not contain the letters of their own name.

The research participants were recruited in pairs and were told that the research was a taste test of different types of tea. For each pair of participants, the experimenter created two teas and named them by adding the word stem “oki” to the first three letters of each participant’s first name. For example, for Jonathan and Elisabeth, the names of the teas would have been Jonoki and Elioki.

The participants were then shown 20 packets of tea that were supposedly being tested. Eighteen packets were labeled with made-up Japanese names (e.g., “Mataku” or “Somuta”), and two were labeled with the brand names constructed from the participants’ names. The experimenter explained that each participant would taste only two teas and would be allowed to choose one packet of these two to take home.

One of the two participants was asked to draw slips of paper to select the two brands that would be tasted at this session. However, the drawing was rigged so that the two brands containing the participants’ name stems were always chosen for tasting. Then, while the teas were being brewed, the participants completed a task designed to heighten their needs for self-esteem, and that was expected to increase their desire to choose a brand that had the letters of their own name. Specifically, the participants all wrote about an aspect of themselves that they would like to change.

After the teas were ready, the participants tasted them and then chose to take a packet of one of the teas home with them. After they made their choice, the participants were asked why they chose the tea they had chosen, and then the true purpose of the study was explained to them.

The results of this study found that participants chose the tea that included the first three letters of their own name significantly more frequently (64% of the time) than they chose the tea that included the first three letters of their partner’s name (only 36% of the time). Furthermore, the decisions were made unconsciously; the participants did not know why they chose the tea they chose. When they were asked, more than 90% of the participants thought that they had chosen on the basis of taste, whereas only 5% of them mentioned the real cause—that the brand name contained the letters of their name.

Once we learn about the outcome of a given event (e.g., when we read about the results of a research project), we frequently believe that we would have been able to predict the outcome ahead of time. For instance, if half of a class of students is told that research concerning attraction between people has demonstrated that “opposites attract” and the other half is told that research has demonstrated that “birds of a feather flock together,” most of the students will report believing that the outcome that they just read about is true, and that they would have predicted the outcome before they had read about it. Of course, both of these contradictory outcomes cannot be true. (In fact, psychological research finds that “birds of a feather flock together” is generally the case.) The problem is that just reading a description of research findings leads us to think of the many cases we know that support the findings, and thus makes them seem believable. The tendency to think that we could have predicted something that has already occurred that we probably would not have been able to predict is called the hindsight bias, or the tendency to think that we could have predicted something that has already occurred that we probably would not have been able to predict.

Why Psychologists Rely on Empirical Methods

All scientists, whether they are physicists, chemists, biologists, sociologists, or psychologists, use empirical methods to study the topics that interest them. Empirical methods include the processes of collecting and organizing data and drawing conclusions about those data. The empirical methods used by scientists have developed over many years and provide a basis for collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data within a common framework in which information can be shared. We can label the scientific method as the set of assumptions, rules, and procedures that scientists use to conduct empirical research.

Figure 1.2

Left: Woman wearing an EEG cap, Right: psychologists talking.

Psychologists use a variety of techniques to measure and understand human behavior.

Although scientific research is an important method of studying human behavior, not all questions can be answered using scientific approaches. Statements that cannot be objectively measured or objectively determined to be true or false are not within the domain of scientific inquiry. Scientists therefore draw a distinction between values and facts. Values are personal statements such as “Abortion should not be permitted in this country,” “I will go to heaven when I die,” or “It is important to study psychology.” Facts are objective statements determined to be accurate through empirical study. Examples are “There were more than 21,000 homicides in the United States in 2009,” or “Research demonstrates that individuals who are exposed to highly stressful situations over long periods of time develop more health problems than those who are not.”

Because values cannot be considered to be either true or false, science cannot prove or disprove them. Nevertheless, as shown in Table 1.1 “Examples of Values and Facts in Scientific Research”, research can sometimes provide facts that can help people develop their values. For instance, science may be able to objectively measure the impact of unwanted children on a society or the psychological trauma suffered by women who have abortions. The effect of capital punishment on the crime rate in the United States may also be determinable. This factual information can and should be made available to help people formulate their values about abortion and capital punishment, as well as to enable governments to articulate appropriate policies. Values also frequently come into play in determining what research is appropriate or important to conduct. For instance, the U.S. government has recently supported and provided funding for research on HIV, AIDS, and terrorism, while denying funding for research using human stem cells.

Table 1.1 Examples of Values and Facts in Scientific Research

Personal value Scientific fact
Welfare payments should be reduced for unmarried parents. The U.S. government paid more than $21 billion in unemployment insurance in 2010.
Handguns should be outlawed. There were more than 30,000 deaths caused by handguns in the United States in 2009.
Blue is my favorite color. More than 35% of college students indicate that blue is their favorite color.
It is important to quit smoking. Smoking increases the incidence of cancer and heart disease.

Stangor, C. (2011). Research methods for the behavioral sciences (4th ed.). Mountain View, CA: Cengage.

Although scientists use research to help establish facts, the distinction between values and facts is not always clear-cut. Sometimes statements that scientists consider to be factual later, on the basis of further research, turn out to be partially or even entirely incorrect. Although scientific procedures do not necessarily guarantee that the answers to questions will be objective and unbiased, science is still the best method for drawing objective conclusions about the world around us. When old facts are discarded, they are replaced with new facts based on newer and more correct data. Although science is not perfect, the requirements of empiricism and objectivity result in a much greater chance of producing an accurate understanding of human behavior than is available through other approaches.

Levels of Explanation in Psychology

The study of psychology spans many different topics at many different levels of explanation which are the perspectives that are used to understand behavior. Lower levels of explanation are more closely tied to biological influences, such as genes, neurons, neurotransmitters, and hormones, whereas the middle levels of explanation refer to the abilities and characteristics of individual people, and the highest levels of explanation relate to social groups, organizations, and cultures (Cacioppo, Berntson, Sheridan, & McClintock, 2000).

The same topic can be studied within psychology at different levels of explanation, as shown in Figure 1.3 “Levels of Explanation”. For instance, the psychological disorder known as depression affects millions of people worldwide and is known to be caused by biological, social, and cultural factors. Studying and helping alleviate depression can be accomplished at low levels of explanation by investigating how chemicals in the brain influence the experience of depression. This approach has allowed psychologists to develop and prescribe drugs, such as Prozac, which may decrease depression in many individuals (Williams, Simpson, Simpson, & Nahas, 2009). At the middle levels of explanation, psychological therapy is directed at helping individuals cope with negative life experiences that may cause depression. And at the highest level, psychologists study differences in the prevalence of depression between men and women and across cultures. The occurrence of psychological disorders, including depression, is substantially higher for women than for men, and it is also higher in Western cultures, such as in the United States, Canada, and Europe, than in Eastern cultures, such as in India, China, and Japan (Chen, Wang, Poland, & Lin, 2009; Seedat et al., 2009). These sex and cultural differences provide insight into the factors that cause depression. The study of depression in psychology helps remind us that no one level of explanation can explain everything. All levels of explanation, from biological to personal to cultural, are essential for a better understanding of human behavior.

Table showing the levels of Explanation

Figure 1.3 Levels of Explanation

The Challenges of Studying Psychology

Understanding and attempting to alleviate the costs of psychological disorders such as depression is not easy, because psychological experiences are extremely complex. The questions psychologists pose are as difficult as those posed by doctors, biologists, chemists, physicists, and other scientists, if not more so (Wilson, 1998).

A major goal of psychology is to predict behavior by understanding its causes. Making predictions is difficult in part because people vary and respond differently in different situations. Individual differences are the variations among people on physical or psychological dimensions. For instance, although many people experience at least some symptoms of depression at some times in their lives, the experience varies dramatically among people. Some people experience major negative events, such as severe physical injuries or the loss of significant others, without experiencing much depression, whereas other people experience severe depression for no apparent reason. Other important individual differences that we will discuss in the chapters to come include differences in extraversion, intelligence, self-esteem, anxiety, aggression, and conformity.

Because of the many individual difference variables that influence behavior, we cannot always predict who will become aggressive or who will perform best in graduate school or on the job. The predictions made by psychologists (and most other scientists) are only probabilistic. We can say, for instance, that people who score higher on an intelligence test will, on average, do better than people who score lower on the same test, but we cannot make very accurate predictions about exactly how any one person will perform.

Another reason that it is difficult to predict behavior is that almost all behavior is multiply determined, or produced by many factors. And these factors occur at different levels of explanation. We have seen, for instance, that depression is caused by lower-level genetic factors, by medium-level personal factors, and by higher-level social and cultural factors. You should always be skeptical about people who attempt to explain important human behaviors, such as violence, child abuse, poverty, anxiety, or depression, in terms of a single cause.

Furthermore, these multiple causes are not independent of one another; they are associated such that when one cause is present other causes tend to be present as well. This overlap makes it difficult to pinpoint which cause or causes are operating. For instance, some people may be depressed because of biological imbalances in neurotransmitters in their brain. The resulting depression may lead them to act more negatively toward other people around them, which then leads those other people to respond more negatively to them, which then increases their depression. As a result, the biological determinants of depression become intertwined with the social responses of other people, making it difficult to disentangle the effects of each cause.

Another difficulty in studying psychology is that much human behavior is caused by factors that are outside our conscious awareness, making it impossible for us, as individuals, to really understand them. The role of unconscious processes was emphasized in the theorizing of the Austrian neurologist Sigmund Freud (1856–1939), who argued that many psychological disorders were caused by memories that we have repressed and thus remain outside our consciousness. Unconscious processes will be an important part of our study of psychology, and we will see that current research has supported many of Freud’s ideas about the importance of the unconscious in guiding behavior.

Key Takeaways

  • Psychology is the scientific study of mind and behavior.
  • Though it is easy to think that everyday situations have commonsense answers, scientific studies have found that people are not always as good at predicting outcomes as they think they are.
  • The hindsight bias leads us to think that we could have predicted events that we actually could not have predicted.
  • People are frequently unaware of the causes of their own behaviors.
  • Psychologists use the scientific method to collect, analyze, and interpret evidence.
  • Employing the scientific method allows the scientist to collect empirical data objectively, which adds to the accumulation of scientific knowledge.
  • Psychological phenomena are complex, and making predictions about them is difficult because of individual differences and because they are multiply determined at different levels of explanation.

Exercises and Critical Thinking

  1. Can you think of a time when you used your intuition to analyze an outcome, only to be surprised later to find that your explanation was completely incorrect? Did this surprise help you understand how intuition may sometimes lead us astray?
  2. Describe the scientific method in a way that someone who knows nothing about science could understand it.
  3. Consider a behavior that you find to be important and think about its potential causes at different levels of explanation. How do you think psychologists would study this behavior?

1.2 The Evolution of Psychology: History, Approaches, and Questions

Learning Objectives

  1. Explain how psychology changed from a philosophical to a scientific discipline.
  2. List some of the most important questions that concern psychologists.
  3. Outline the basic schools of psychology and how each school has contributed to psychology.

In this section we will review the history of psychology with a focus on the important questions that psychologists ask and the major approaches (or schools) of psychological inquiry. The schools of psychology that we will review are summarized in Table 1.2 “The Most Important Approaches (Schools) of Psychology”, and Figure 1.5 “Timeline Showing Some of the Most Important Psychologists” presents a timeline of some of the most important psychologists, beginning with the early Greek philosophers and extending to the present day. Table 1.2 “The Most Important Approaches (Schools) of Psychology” and Figure 1.5 “Timeline Showing Some of the Most Important Psychologists” both represent a selection of the most important schools and people; to mention all the approaches and all the psychologists who have contributed to the field is not possible in one chapter.

The approaches that psychologists have used to assess the issues that interest them have changed dramatically over the history of psychology. Perhaps most importantly, the field has moved steadily from speculation about behavior toward a more objective and scientific approach as the technology available to study human behavior has improved (Benjamin & Baker, 2004). There has also been an increasing influx of women into the field. Although most early psychologists were men, now most psychologists, including the presidents of the most important psychological organizations, are women.

Table 1.2 The Most Important Approaches (Schools) of Psychology

School of psychology Description Important contributors
Structuralism Uses the method of introspection to identify the basic elements or “structures” of psychological experience Wilhelm Wundt, Edward B. Titchener
Functionalism Attempts to understand why animals and humans have developed the particular psychological aspects that they currently possess William James
Psychodynamic Focuses on the role of our unconscious thoughts, feelings, and memories and our early childhood experiences in determining behavior Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Alfred Adler, Erik Erickson
Behaviorism Based on the premise that it is not possible to objectively study the mind, and therefore that psychologists should limit their attention to the study of behavior itself John B. Watson, B. F. Skinner
Cognitive The study of mental processes, including perception, thinking, memory, and judgments Hermann Ebbinghaus, Sir Frederic Bartlett, Jean Piaget
Social-cultural The study of how the social situations and the cultures in which people find themselves influence thinking and behavior Fritz Heider, Leon Festinger, Stanley Schachter

Figure 1.4 Female Psychologists

Left: Mahzarin Banaji, Right: Linda Bartoshuk.

Although most of the earliest psychologists were men, women are increasingly contributing to psychology. The first female president of the American Psychological Association was Mary Whiton Calkins (1861–1930). Calkins made significant contributions to the study of memory and the self-concept. Mahzarin Banaji (left), Marilynn Brewer (not pictured), and Linda Bartoshuk (right) are all recent presidents of the American Psychological Society.

Figure 1.5 Timeline Showing Some of the Most Important PsychologistsAlthough it cannot capture every important psychologist, this timeline shows some of the most important contributors to the history of psychology.

Although it cannot capture every important psychologist, this timeline shows some of the most important contributors to the history of psychology.

Although psychology has changed dramatically over its history, the most important questions that psychologists address have remained constant. Some of these questions follow, and we will discuss them both in this chapter and in the chapters to come:

  • Nature versus nurture. Are genes or environment most influential in determining the behavior of individuals and in accounting for differences among people? Most scientists now agree that both genes and environment play crucial roles in most human behaviors, and yet we still have much to learn about how nature (our biological makeup) and nurture (the experiences that we have during our lives) work together (Harris, 1998; Pinker, 2002). The proportion of the observed differences on characteristics among people (e.g., in terms of their height, intelligence, or optimism) that is due to genetics is known as the heritability of the characteristic, and we will make much use of this term in the chapters to come. We will see, for example, that the heritability of intelligence is very high (about .85 out of 1.0) and that the heritability of extraversion is about .50. But we will also see that nature and nurture interact in complex ways, making the question of “Is it nature or is it nurture?” very difficult to answer.
  • Free will versus determinism. This question concerns the extent to which people have control over their own actions. Are we the products of our environment, guided by forces out of our control, or are we able to choose the behaviors we engage in? Most of us like to believe in free will, that we are able to do what we want—for instance, that we could get up right now and go fishing. And our legal system is premised on the concept of free will; we punish criminals because we believe that they have choice over their behaviors and freely choose to disobey the law. But as we will discuss later in the research focus in this section, recent research has suggested that we may have less control over our own behavior than we think we do (Wegner, 2002).
  • Accuracy versus inaccuracy. To what extent are humans good information processors? Although it appears that people are “good enough” to make sense of the world around them and to make decent decisions (Fiske, 2003), they are far from perfect. Human judgment is sometimes compromised by inaccuracies in our thinking styles and by our motivations and emotions. For instance, our judgment may be affected by our desires to gain material wealth and to see ourselves positively and by emotional responses to the events that happen to us.

Figure 1.6

President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden (left photo) meet with BP executives to discuss the disastrous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico (right photo). Psychologists study the causes of poor judgments such as those made by these executives.

President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden (left photo) meet with BP executives to discuss the disastrous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico (right photo). Psychologists study the causes of poor judgments such as those made by these executives.

  • Conscious versus unconscious processing. To what extent are we conscious of our own actions and the causes of them, and to what extent are our behaviors caused by influences that we are not aware of? Many of the major theories of psychology, ranging from the Freudian psychodynamic theories to contemporary work in cognitive psychology, argue that much of our behavior is determined by variables that we are not aware of.
  • Differences versus similarities. To what extent are we all similar, and to what extent are we different? For instance, are there basic psychological and personality differences between men and women, or are men and women by and large similar? And what about people from different ethnicities and cultures? Are people around the world generally the same, or are they influenced by their backgrounds and environments in different ways? Personality, social, and cross-cultural psychologists attempt to answer these classic questions.

Early Psychologists

The earliest psychologists that we know about are the Greek philosophers Plato (428–347 BC) and Aristotle (384–322 BC). These philosophers asked many of the same questions that today’s psychologists ask; for instance, they questioned the distinction between nature and nurture and the existence of free will. In terms of the former, Plato argued on the nature side, believing that certain kinds of knowledge are innate or inborn, whereas Aristotle was more on the nurture side, believing that each child is born as an “empty slate” (in Latin a tabula rasa) and that knowledge is primarily acquired through learning and experience.

Figure 1.7

The earliest psychologists were the Greek philosophers Plato (left) and Aristotle. Plato believed that much knowledge was innate, whereas Aristotle thought that each child was born as an “empty slate” and that knowledge was primarily acquired through learning and experience.

The earliest psychologists were the Greek philosophers Plato (left) and Aristotle. Plato believed that much knowledge was innate, whereas Aristotle thought that each child was born as an “empty slate” and that knowledge was primarily acquired through learning and experience.

European philosophers continued to ask these fundamental questions during the Renaissance. For instance, the French philosopher René Descartes (1596–1650) also considered the issue of free will, arguing in its favor and believing that the mind controls the body through the pineal gland in the brain (an idea that made some sense at the time but was later proved incorrect). Descartes also believed in the existence of innate natural abilities. A scientist as well as a philosopher, Descartes dissected animals and was among the first to understand that the nerves controlled the muscles. He also addressed the relationship between mind (the mental aspects of life) and body (the physical aspects of life). Descartes believed in the principle of dualism: that the mind is fundamentally different from the mechanical body. Other European philosophers, including Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), John Locke (1632–1704), and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778), also weighed in on these issues.

The fundamental problem that these philosophers faced was that they had few methods for settling their claims. Most philosophers didn’t conduct any research on these questions, in part because they didn’t yet know how to do it, and in part because they weren’t sure it was even possible to objectively study human experience. But dramatic changes came during the 1800s with the help of the first two research psychologists: the German psychologist Wilhelm Wundt (1832–1920), who developed a psychology laboratory in Leipzig, Germany, and the American psychologist William James (1842–1910), who founded a psychology laboratory at Harvard University.

Structuralism: Introspection and the Awareness of Subjective Experience

Wundt’s research in his laboratory in Liepzig focused on the nature of consciousness itself. Wundt and his students believed that it was possible to analyze the basic elements of the mind and to classify our conscious experiences scientifically. Wundt began the field known as structuralism, a school of psychology whose goal was to identify the basic elements or “structures” of psychological experience. Its goal was to create a “periodic table” of the “elements of sensations,” similar to the periodic table of elements that had recently been created in chemistry.

Structuralists used the method of introspection to attempt to create a map of the elements of consciousness. Introspection involves asking research participants to describe exactly what they experience as they work on mental tasks, such as viewing colors, reading a page in a book, or performing a math problem. A participant who is reading a book might report, for instance, that he saw some black and colored straight and curved marks on a white background. In other studies the structuralists used newly invented reaction time instruments to systematically assess not only what the participants were thinking but how long it took them to do so. Wundt discovered that it took people longer to report what sound they had just heard than to simply respond that they had heard the sound. These studies marked the first time researchers realized that there is a difference between the sensation of a stimulus and the perception of that stimulus, and the idea of using reaction times to study mental events has now become a mainstay of cognitive psychology.

Figure 1.8

Wilhelm Wundt (seated at left) and Edward Titchener (right) helped create the structuralist school of psychology. Their goal was to classify the elements of sensation through introspection.

Wilhelm Wundt (seated at left) and Edward Titchener (right) helped create the structuralist school of psychology. Their goal was to classify the elements of sensation through introspection.

Perhaps the best known of the structuralists was Edward Bradford Titchener (1867–1927). Titchener was a student of Wundt who came to the United States in the late 1800s and founded a laboratory at Cornell University. In his research using introspection, Titchener and his students claimed to have identified more than 40,000 sensations, including those relating to vision, hearing, and taste.

An important aspect of the structuralist approach was that it was rigorous and scientific. The research marked the beginning of psychology as a science, because it demonstrated that mental events could be quantified. But the structuralists also discovered the limitations of introspection. Even highly trained research participants were often unable to report on their subjective experiences. When the participants were asked to do simple math problems, they could easily do them, but they could not easily answer how they did them. Thus the structuralists were the first to realize the importance of unconscious processes—that many important aspects of human psychology occur outside our conscious awareness, and that psychologists cannot expect research participants to be able to accurately report on all of their experiences.

Functionalism and Evolutionary Psychology

In contrast to Wundt, who attempted to understand the nature of consciousness, the goal of William James and the other members of the school of functionalism was to understand why animals and humans have developed the particular psychological aspects that they currently possess (Hunt, 1993). For James, one’s thinking was relevant only to one’s behavior. As he put it in his psychology textbook, “My thinking is first and last and always for the sake of my doing” (James, 1890).

James and the other members of the functionalist school were influenced by Charles Darwin’s (1809–1882) theory of natural selection, which proposed that the physical characteristics of animals and humans evolved because they were useful, or functional. The functionalists believed that Darwin’s theory applied to psychological characteristics too. Just as some animals have developed strong muscles to allow them to run fast, the human brain, so functionalists thought, must have adapted to serve a particular function in human experience.

Figure 1.9

The functionalist school of psychology, founded by the American psychologist William James (left), was influenced by the work of Charles Darwin (right).

The functionalist school of psychology, founded by the American psychologist William James (left), was influenced by the work of Charles Darwin.

Although functionalism no longer exists as a school of psychology, its basic principles have been absorbed into psychology and continue to influence it in many ways. The work of the functionalists has developed into the field of evolutionary psychology, a branch of psychology that applies the Darwinian theory of natural selection to human and animal behavior (Dennett, 1995; Tooby & Cosmides, 1992). Evolutionary psychology accepts the functionalists’ basic assumption, namely that many human psychological systems, including memory, emotion, and personality, serve key adaptive functions. As we will see in the chapters to come, evolutionary psychologists use evolutionary theory to understand many different behaviors including romantic attraction, stereotypes and prejudice, and even the causes of many psychological disorders.

A key component of the ideas of evolutionary psychology is fitness. Fitness refers to the extent to which having a given characteristic helps the individual organism survive and reproduce at a higher rate than do other members of the species who do not have the characteristic. Fitter organisms pass on their genes more successfully to later generations, making the characteristics that produce fitness more likely to become part of the organism’s nature than characteristics that do not produce fitness. For example, it has been argued that the emotion of jealousy has survived over time in men because men who experience jealousy are more fit than men who do not. According to this idea, the experience of jealously leads men to be more likely to protect their mates and guard against rivals, which increases their reproductive success (Buss, 2000).

Despite its importance in psychological theorizing, evolutionary psychology also has some limitations. One problem is that many of its predictions are extremely difficult to test. Unlike the fossils that are used to learn about the physical evolution of species, we cannot know which psychological characteristics our ancestors possessed or did not possess; we can only make guesses about this. Because it is difficult to directly test evolutionary theories, it is always possible that the explanations we apply are made up after the fact to account for observed data (Gould & Lewontin, 1979). Nevertheless, the evolutionary approach is important to psychology because it provides logical explanations for why we have many psychological characteristics.

Psychodynamic Psychology

Perhaps the school of psychology that is most familiar to the general public is the psychodynamic approach to understanding behavior, which was championed by Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) and his followers. Psychodynamic psychology is an approach to understanding human behavior that focuses on the role of unconscious thoughts, feelings, and memories. Freud developed his theories about behavior through extensive analysis of the patients that he treated in his private clinical practice. Freud believed that many of the problems that his patients experienced, including anxiety, depression, and sexual dysfunction, were the result of the effects of painful childhood experiences that the person could no longer remember.

Figure 1.10

Sigmund Freud.

Sigmund Freud and the other psychodynamic psychologists believed that many of our thoughts and emotions are unconscious. Psychotherapy was designed to help patients recover and confront their “lost” memories.

Freud’s ideas were extended by other psychologists whom he influenced, including Carl Jung (1875–1961), Alfred Adler (1870–1937), Karen Horney (1855–1952), and Erik Erikson (1902–1994). These and others who follow the psychodynamic approach believe that it is possible to help the patient if the unconscious drives can be remembered, particularly through a deep and thorough exploration of the person’s early sexual experiences and current sexual desires. These explorations are revealed through talk therapy and dream analysis, in a process called psychoanalysis.

The founders of the school of psychodynamics were primarily practitioners who worked with individuals to help them understand and confront their psychological symptoms. Although they did not conduct much research on their ideas, and although later, more sophisticated tests of their theories have not always supported their proposals, psychodynamics has nevertheless had substantial impact on the field of psychology, and indeed on thinking about human behavior more generally (Moore & Fine, 1995). The importance of the unconscious in human behavior, the idea that early childhood experiences are critical, and the concept of therapy as a way of improving human lives are all ideas that are derived from the psychodynamic approach and that remain central to psychology.

Behaviorism and the Question of Free Will

Although they differed in approach, both structuralism and functionalism were essentially studies of the mind. The psychologists associated with the school of behaviorism, on the other hand, were reacting in part to the difficulties psychologists encountered when they tried to use introspection to understand behavior. Behaviorism is a school of psychology that is based on the premise that it is not possible to objectively study the mind, and therefore that psychologists should limit their attention to the study of behavior itself. Behaviorists believe that the human mind is a “black box” into which stimuli are sent and from which responses are received. They argue that there is no point in trying to determine what happens in the box because we can successfully predict behavior without knowing what happens inside the mind. Furthermore, behaviorists believe that it is possible to develop laws of learning that can explain all behaviors.

The first behaviorist was the American psychologist John B. Watson (1878–1958). Watson was influenced in large part by the work of the Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov (1849–1936), who had discovered that dogs would salivate at the sound of a tone that had previously been associated with the presentation of food. Watson and the other behaviorists began to use these ideas to explain how events that people and other organisms experienced in their environment (stimuli) could produce specific behaviors (responses). For instance, in Pavlov’s research the stimulus (either the food or, after learning, the tone) would produce the response of salivation in the dogs.

In his research Watson found that systematically exposing a child to fearful stimuli in the presence of objects that did not themselves elicit fear could lead the child to respond with a fearful behavior to the presence of the stimulus (Watson & Rayner, 1920; Beck, Levinson, & Irons, 2009). In the best known of his studies, an 8-month-old boy named Little Albert was used as the subject. Here is a summary of the findings:

The boy was placed in the middle of a room; a white laboratory rat was placed near him and he was allowed to play with it. The child showed no fear of the rat. In later trials, the researchers made a loud sound behind Albert’s back by striking a steel bar with a hammer whenever the baby touched the rat. The child cried when he heard the noise. After several such pairings of the two stimuli, the child was again shown the rat. Now, however, he cried and tried to move away from the rat.

In line with the behaviorist approach, the boy had learned to associate the white rat with the loud noise, resulting in crying.

Figure 1.11

B.F. Skinner

B. F. Skinner was a member of the behaviorist school of psychology. He argued that free will is an illusion and that all behavior is determined by environmental factors.

The most famous behaviorist was Burrhus Frederick (B. F.) Skinner (1904–1990), who expanded the principles of behaviorism and also brought them to the attention of the public at large. Skinner used the ideas of stimulus and response, along with the application of rewards or reinforcements, to train pigeons and other animals. And he used the general principles of behaviorism to develop theories about how best to teach children and how to create societies that were peaceful and productive. Skinner even developed a method for studying thoughts and feelings using the behaviorist approach (Skinner, 1957, 1968, 1972).

Research Focus: Do We Have Free Will?

The behaviorist research program had important implications for the fundamental questions about nature and nurture and about free will. In terms of the nature-nurture debate, the behaviorists agreed with the nurture approach, believing that we are shaped exclusively by our environments. They also argued that there is no free will, but rather that our behaviors are determined by the events that we have experienced in our past. In short, this approach argues that organisms, including humans, are a lot like puppets in a show who don’t realize that other people are controlling them. Furthermore, although we do not cause our own actions, we nevertheless believe that we do because we don’t realize all the influences acting on our behavior.

Recent research in psychology has suggested that Skinner and the behaviorists might well have been right, at least in the sense that we overestimate our own free will in responding to the events around us (Libet, 1985; Matsuhashi & Hallett, 2008; Wegner, 2002). In one demonstration of the misperception of our own free will, neuroscientists Soon, Brass, Heinze, and Haynes (2008) placed their research participants in a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain scanner while they presented them with a series of letters on a computer screen. The letter on the screen changed every one-half second. The participants were asked, whenever they decided to, to press either of two buttons. Then they were asked to indicate which letter was showing on the screen when they decided to press the button. The researchers analyzed the brain images to see if they could predict which of the two buttons the participant was going to press, even before the letter at which he or she had indicated the decision to press a button. Suggesting that the intention to act occurred in the brain before the research participants became aware of it, the researchers found that the prefrontal cortex region of the brain showed activation that could be used to predict the button press as long as 10 seconds before the participants said that they decided which button to press.

Research has found that we are more likely to think that we control our behavior when the desire to act occurs immediately prior to the outcome, when the thought is consistent with the outcome, and when there are no other apparent causes for the behavior. Aarts, Custers, and Wegner (2005) asked their research participants to control a rapidly moving square along with a computer that was also controlling the square independently. The participants pressed a button to stop the movement. When participants were exposed to words related to the location of the square just before they stopped its movement, they became more likely to think that they controlled the motion, even when it was actually the computer that stopped it. And Dijksterhuis, Preston, Wegner, and Aarts (2008) found that participants who had just been exposed to first-person singular pronouns, such as “I” and “me,” were more likely to believe that they controlled their actions than were people who had seen the words “computer” or “God.”

The idea that we are more likely to take ownership for our actions in some cases than in others is also seen in our attributions for success and failure. Because we normally expect that our behaviors will be met with success, when we are successful we easily believe that the success is the result of our own free will. When an action is met with failure, on the other hand, we are less likely to perceive this outcome as the result of our free will, and we are more likely to blame the outcome on luck or our teacher (Wegner, 2003).

The behaviorists made substantial contributions to psychology by identifying the principles of learning. Although the behaviorists were incorrect in their beliefs that it was not possible to measure thoughts and feelings, their ideas provided new ideas that helped further our understanding regarding the nature-nurture debate as well as the question of free will. The ideas of behaviorism are fundamental to psychology and have been developed to help us better understand the role of prior experiences in a variety of areas of psychology.

The Cognitive Approach and Cognitive Neuroscience

Science is always influenced by the technology that surrounds it, and psychology is no exception. Thus it is no surprise that beginning in the 1960s, growing numbers of psychologists began to think about the brain and about human behavior in terms of the computer, which was being developed and becoming publicly available at that time. The analogy between the brain and the computer, although by no means perfect, provided part of the impetus for a new school of psychology called cognitive psychology. Cognitive psychology is a field of psychology that studies mental processes, including perception, thinking, memory, and judgment. These actions correspond well to the processes that computers perform.

Although cognitive psychology began in earnest in the 1960s, earlier psychologists had also taken a cognitive orientation. Some of the important contributors to cognitive psychology include the German psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850–1909), who studied the ability of people to remember lists of words under different conditions, and the English psychologist Sir Frederic Bartlett (1886–1969), who studied the cognitive and social processes of remembering. Bartlett created short stories that were in some ways logical but also contained some very unusual and unexpected events. Bartlett discovered that people found it very difficult to recall the stories exactly, even after being allowed to study them repeatedly, and he hypothesized that the stories were difficult to remember because they did not fit the participants’ expectations about how stories should go. The idea that our memory is influenced by what we already know was also a major idea behind the cognitive-developmental stage model of Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget (1896–1980). Other important cognitive psychologists include Donald E. Broadbent (1926–1993), Daniel Kahneman (1934–), George Miller (1920–), Eleanor Rosch (1938–), and Amos Tversky (1937–1996).

The War of the Ghosts

The War of the Ghosts was a story used by Sir Frederic Bartlett to test the influence of prior expectations on memory. Bartlett found that even when his British research participants were allowed to read the story many times they still could not remember it well, and he believed this was because it did not fit with their prior knowledge.

One night two young men from Egulac went down to the river to hunt seals and while they were there it became foggy and calm. Then they heard war-cries, and they thought: “Maybe this is a war-party.” They escaped to the shore, and hid behind a log. Now canoes came up, and they heard the noise of paddles, and saw one canoe coming up to them. There were five men in the canoe, and they said:
“What do you think? We wish to take you along. We are going up the river to make war on the people.”
One of the young men said, “I have no arrows.”
“Arrows are in the canoe,” they said.
“I will not go along. I might be killed. My relatives do not know where I have gone. But you,” he said, turning to the other, “may go with them.”
So one of the young men went, but the other returned home.
And the warriors went on up the river to a town on the other side of Kalama. The people came down to the water and they began to fight, and many were killed. But presently the young man heard one of the warriors say, “Quick, let us go home: that Indian has been hit.” Now he thought: “Oh, they are ghosts.” He did not feel sick, but they said he had been shot.
So the canoes went back to Egulac and the young man went ashore to his house and made a fire. And he told everybody and said: “Behold I accompanied the ghosts, and we went to fight. Many of our fellows were killed, and many of those who attacked us were killed. They said I was hit, and I did not feel sick.”
He told it all, and then he became quiet. When the sun rose he fell down. Something black came out of his mouth. His face became contorted. The people jumped up and cried.
He was dead. (Bartlett, 1932)

In its argument that our thinking has a powerful influence on behavior, the cognitive approach provided a distinct alternative to behaviorism. According to cognitive psychologists, ignoring the mind itself will never be sufficient because people interpret the stimuli that they experience. For instance, when a boy turns to a girl on a date and says, “You are so beautiful,” a behaviorist would probably see that as a reinforcing (positive) stimulus. And yet the girl might not be so easily fooled. She might try to understand why the boy is making this particular statement at this particular time and wonder if he might be attempting to influence her through the comment. Cognitive psychologists maintain that when we take into consideration how stimuli are evaluated and interpreted, we understand behavior more deeply.

Cognitive psychology remains enormously influential today, and it has guided research in such varied fields as language, problem solving, memory, intelligence, education, human development, social psychology, and psychotherapy. The cognitive revolution has been given even more life over the past decade as the result of recent advances in our ability to see the brain in action using neuroimaging techniques. Neuroimaging is the use of various techniques to provide pictures of the structure and function of the living brain (Ilardi & Feldman, 2001). These images are used to diagnose brain disease and injury, but they also allow researchers to view information processing as it occurs in the brain, because the processing causes the involved area of the brain to increase metabolism and show up on the scan. We have already discussed the use of one neuroimaging technique, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), in the research focus earlier in this section, and we will discuss the use of neuroimaging techniques in many areas of psychology in the chapters to follow.

Social-Cultural Psychology

A final school, which takes a higher level of analysis and which has had substantial impact on psychology, can be broadly referred to as the social-cultural approach. The field of social-cultural psychology is the study of how the social situations and the cultures in which people find themselves influence thinking and behavior. Social-cultural psychologists are particularly concerned with how people perceive themselves and others, and how people influence each other’s behavior. For instance, social psychologists have found that we are attracted to others who are similar to us in terms of attitudes and interests (Byrne, 1969), that we develop our own beliefs and attitudes by comparing our opinions to those of others (Festinger, 1954), and that we frequently change our beliefs and behaviors to be similar to those of the people we care about—a process known as conformity.

An important aspect of social-cultural psychology are social normsthe ways of thinking, feeling, or behaving that are shared by group members and perceived by them as appropriate (Asch, 1952; Cialdini, 1993). Norms include customs, traditions, standards, and rules, as well as the general values of the group. Many of the most important social norms are determined by the culture in which we live, and these cultures are studied by cross-cultural psychologists. A culture represents the common set of social norms, including religious and family values and other moral beliefs, shared by the people who live in a geographical region (Fiske, Kitayama, Markus, & Nisbett, 1998; Markus, Kitayama, & Heiman, 1996; Matsumoto, 2001). Cultures influence every aspect of our lives, and it is not inappropriate to say that our culture defines our lives just as much as does our evolutionary experience (Mesoudi, 2009).

Psychologists have found that there is a fundamental difference in social norms between Western cultures (including those in the United States, Canada, Western Europe, Australia, and New Zealand) and East Asian cultures (including those in China, Japan, Taiwan, Korea, India, and Southeast Asia). Norms in Western cultures are primarily oriented toward individualism, which is about valuing the self and one’s independence from others. Children in Western cultures are taught to develop and to value a sense of their personal self, and to see themselves in large part as separate from the other people around them. Children in Western cultures feel special about themselves; they enjoy getting gold stars on their projects and the best grade in the class. Adults in Western cultures are oriented toward promoting their own individual success, frequently in comparison to (or even at the expense of) others.

Norms in the East Asian culture, on the other hand, are oriented toward interdependence or collectivism. In these cultures children are taught to focus on developing harmonious social relationships with others. The predominant norms relate to group togetherness and connectedness, and duty and responsibility to one’s family and other groups. When asked to describe themselves, the members of East Asian cultures are more likely than those from Western cultures to indicate that they are particularly concerned about the interests of others, including their close friends and their colleagues.

Left: woman standing alone at a tree (individualism), Right: Eastern family get together (collectivisim).David Amsler – Walking Alone – CC BY 2.0; Amanda – Family – CC BY-NC 2.0.

In Western cultures social norms promote a focus on the self (individualism), whereas in Eastern cultures the focus is more on families and social groups (collectivism).

Another important cultural difference is the extent to which people in different cultures are bound by social norms and customs, rather than being free to express their own individuality without considering social norms (Chan, Gelfand, Triandis, & Tzeng, 1996). Cultures also differ in terms of personal space, such as how closely individuals stand to each other when talking, as well as the communication styles they employ.

It is important to be aware of cultures and cultural differences because people with different cultural backgrounds increasingly come into contact with each other as a result of increased travel and immigration and the development of the Internet and other forms of communication. In the United States, for instance, there are many different ethnic groups, and the proportion of the population that comes from minority (non-White) groups is increasing from year to year. The social-cultural approach to understanding behavior reminds us again of the difficulty of making broad generalizations about human nature. Different people experience things differently, and they experience them differently in different cultures.

The Many Disciplines of Psychology

Psychology is not one discipline but rather a collection of many subdisciplines that all share at least some common approaches and that work together and exchange knowledge to form a coherent discipline (Yang & Chiu, 2009). Because the field of psychology is so broad, students may wonder which areas are most suitable for their interests and which types of careers might be available to them. Table 1.3 “Some Career Paths in Psychology” will help you consider the answers to these questions. You can learn more about these different fields of psychology and the careers associated with them at http://www.apa.org/careers/psyccareers/.

Table 1.3 Some Career Paths in Psychology

Psychology field Description Career opportunities
Biopsychology and neuroscience This field examines the physiological bases of behavior in animals and humans by studying the functioning of different brain areas and the effects of hormones and neurotransmitters on behavior. Most biopsychologists work in research settings—for instance, at universities, for the federal government, and in private research labs.
Clinical and counseling psychology These are the largest fields of psychology. The focus is on the assessment, diagnosis, causes, and treatment of mental disorders. Clinical and counseling psychologists provide therapy to patients with the goal of improving their life experiences. They work in hospitals, schools, social agencies, and in private practice. Because the demand for this career is high, entry to academic programs is highly competitive.
Cognitive psychology This field uses sophisticated research methods, including reaction time and brain imaging to study memory, language, and thinking of humans. Cognitive psychologists work primarily in research settings, although some (such as those who specialize in human-computer interactions) consult for businesses.
Developmental psychology These psychologists conduct research on the cognitive, emotional, and social changes that occur across the lifespan. Many work in research settings, although others work in schools and community agencies to help improve and evaluate the effectiveness of intervention programs such as Head Start.
Forensic psychology Forensic psychologists apply psychological principles to understand the behavior of judges, attorneys, courtroom juries, and others in the criminal justice system. Forensic psychologists work in the criminal justice system. They may testify in court and may provide information about the reliability of eyewitness testimony and jury selection.
Health psychology Health psychologists are concerned with understanding how biology, behavior, and the social situation influence health and illness. Health psychologists work with medical professionals in clinical settings to promote better health, conduct research, and teach at universities.
Industrial-organizational and environmental psychology Industrial-organizational psychology applies psychology to the workplace with the goal of improving the performance and well-being of employees. There are a wide variety of career opportunities in these fields, generally working in businesses. These psychologists help select employees, evaluate employee performance, and examine the effects of different working conditions on behavior. They may also work to design equipment and environments that improve employee performance and reduce accidents.
Personality psychology These psychologists study people and the differences among them. The goal is to develop theories that explain the psychological processes of individuals, and to focus on individual differences. Most work in academic settings, but the skills of personality psychologists are also in demand in business—for instance, in advertising and marketing. PhD programs in personality psychology are often connected with programs in social psychology.
School and educational psychology This field studies how people learn in school, the effectiveness of school programs, and the psychology of teaching. School psychologists work in elementary and secondary schools or school district offices with students, teachers, parents, and administrators. They may assess children’s psychological and learning problems and develop programs to minimize the impact of these problems.
Social and cross-cultural psychology This field examines people’s interactions with other people. Topics of study include conformity, group behavior, leadership, attitudes, and person perception. Many social psychologists work in marketing, advertising, organizational, systems design, and other applied psychology fields.
Sports psychology This field studies the psychological aspects of sports behavior. The goal is to understand the psychological factors that influence performance in sports, including the role of exercise and team interactions. Sports psychologists work in gyms, schools, professional sports teams, and other areas where sports are practiced.

Psychology in Everyday Life: How to Effectively Learn and Remember

One way that the findings of psychological research may be particularly helpful to you is in terms of improving your learning and study skills. Psychological research has provided a substantial amount of knowledge about the principles of learning and memory. This information can help you do better in this and other courses, and can also help you better learn new concepts and techniques in other areas of your life.

The most important thing you can learn in college is how to better study, learn, and remember. These skills will help you throughout your life, as you learn new jobs and take on other responsibilities. There are substantial individual differences in learning and memory, such that some people learn faster than others. But even if it takes you longer to learn than you think it should, the extra time you put into studying is well worth the effort. And you can learn to learn—learning to effectively study and to remember information is just like learning any other skill, such as playing a sport or a video game.

To learn well, you need to be ready to learn. You cannot learn well when you are tired, when you are under stress, or if you are abusing alcohol or drugs. Try to keep a consistent routine of sleeping and eating. Eat moderately and nutritiously, and avoid drugs that can impair memory, particularly alcohol. There is no evidence that stimulants such as caffeine, amphetamines, or any of the many “memory enhancing drugs” on the market will help you learn (Gold, Cahill, & Wenk, 2002; McDaniel, Maier, & Einstein, 2002). Memory supplements are usually no more effective than drinking a can of sugared soda, which also releases glucose and thus improves memory slightly.

Psychologists have studied the ways that best allow people to acquire new information, to retain it over time, and to retrieve information that has been stored in our memories. One important finding is that learning is an active process. To acquire information most effectively, we must actively manipulate it. One active approach is rehearsal—repeating the information that is to be learned over and over again. Although simple repetition does help us learn, psychological research has found that we acquire information most effectively when we actively think about or elaborate on its meaning and relate the material to something else.

When you study, try to elaborate by connecting the information to other things that you already know. If you want to remember the different schools of psychology, for instance, try to think about how each of the approaches is different from the others. As you make the comparisons among the approaches, determine what is most important about each one and then relate it to the features of the other approaches. In an important study showing the effectiveness of elaborative encoding, Rogers, Kuiper, and Kirker (1977) found that students learned information best when they related it to aspects of themselves (a phenomenon known as the self-reference effect). This research suggests that imagining how the material relates to your own interests and goals will help you learn it.

An approach known as the method of loci involves linking each of the pieces of information that you need to remember to places that you are familiar with. You might think about the house that you grew up in and the rooms in it. Then you could put the behaviorists in the bedroom, the structuralists in the living room, and the functionalists in the kitchen. Then when you need to remember the information, you retrieve the mental image of your house and should be able to “see” each of the people in each of the areas.

One of the most fundamental principles of learning is known as the spacing effect. Both humans and animals more easily remember or learn material when they study the material in several shorter study periods over a longer period of time, rather than studying it just once for a long period of time. Cramming for an exam is a particularly ineffective way to learn.

Psychologists have also found that performance is improved when people set difficult yet realistic goals for themselves (Locke & Latham, 2006). You can use this knowledge to help you learn. Set realistic goals for the time you are going to spend studying and what you are going to learn, and try to stick to those goals. Do a small amount every day, and by the end of the week you will have accomplished a lot.

Our ability to adequately assess our own knowledge is known as metacognition. Research suggests that our metacognition may make us overconfident, leading us to believe that we have learned material even when we have not. To counteract this problem, don’t just go over your notes again and again. Instead, make a list of questions and then see if you can answer them. Study the information again and then test yourself again after a few minutes. If you made any mistakes, study again. Then wait for a half hour and test yourself again. Then test again after 1 day and after 2 days. Testing yourself by attempting to retrieve information in an active manner is better than simply studying the material because it will help you determine if you really know it.

In summary, everyone can learn to learn better. Learning is an important skill, and following the previously mentioned guidelines will likely help you learn better.

Key Takeaways

  • The first psychologists were philosophers, but the field became more empirical and objective as more sophisticated scientific approaches were developed and employed.
  • Some basic questions asked by psychologists include those about nature versus nurture, free will versus determinism, accuracy versus inaccuracy, and conscious versus unconscious processing.
  • The structuralists attempted to analyze the nature of consciousness using introspection.
  • The functionalists based their ideas on the work of Darwin, and their approaches led to the field of evolutionary psychology.
  • The behaviorists explained behavior in terms of stimulus, response, and reinforcement, while denying the presence of free will.
  • Cognitive psychologists study how people perceive, process, and remember information.
  • Psychodynamic psychology focuses on unconscious drives and the potential to improve lives through psychoanalysis and psychotherapy.
  • The social-cultural approach focuses on the social situation, including how cultures and social norms influence our behavior.

Exercises and Critical Thinking

  1. What type of questions can psychologists answer that philosophers might not be able to answer as completely or as accurately? Explain why you think psychologists can answer these questions better than philosophers can.
  2. Choose one of the major questions of psychology and provide some evidence from your own experience that supports one side or the other.
  3. Choose two of the fields of psychology discussed in this section and explain how they differ in their approaches to understanding behavior and the level of explanation at which they are focused.

Psychology is the scientific study of mind and behavior. Most psychologists work in research laboratories, hospitals, and other field settings where they study the behavior of humans and animals. Some psychologists are researchers and others are practitioners, but all psychologists use scientific methods to inform their work.

Although it is easy to think that everyday situations have commonsense answers, scientific studies have found that people are not always as good at predicting outcomes as they often think they are. The hindsight bias leads us to think that we could have predicted events that we could not actually have predicted.

Employing the scientific method allows psychologists to objectively and systematically understand human behavior.

Psychologists study behavior at different levels of explanation, ranging from lower biological levels to higher social and cultural levels. The same behaviors can be studied and explained within psychology at different levels of explanation.

The first psychologists were philosophers, but the field became more objective as more sophisticated scientific approaches were developed and employed. Some of the most important historical schools of psychology include structuralism, functionalism, behaviorism, and psychodynamic psychology. Cognitive psychology, evolutionary psychology, and social-cultural psychology are some important contemporary approaches.

Some of the basic questions asked by psychologists, both historically and currently, include those about the relative roles of nature versus nurture in behavior, free will versus determinism, accuracy versus inaccuracy, and conscious versus unconscious processing.

Psychological phenomena are complex, and making predictions about them is difficult because they are multiply determined at different levels of explanation. Research has found that people are frequently unaware of the causes of their own behaviors.

There are a variety of available career choices within psychology that provide employment in many different areas of interest.

References

Aarts, H., Custers, R., & Wegner, D. M. (2005). On the inference of personal authorship: Enhancing experienced agency by priming effect information. Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal, 14(3), 439–458.

Asch, S. E. (1952). Social psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; Cialdini, R. B. (1993). Influence: Science and practice (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Harper Collins College.

Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Benjamin, L. T., Jr., & Baker, D. B. (2004). From seance to science: A history of the profession of psychology in America. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson.

Buss, D. M. (2000). The dangerous passion: Why jealousy is as necessary as love and sex. New York, NY: Free Press.

Byrne, D. (1969). Attitudes and attraction. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 35–89). New York, NY: Academic Press.

Chan, D. K. S., Gelfand, M. J., Triandis, H. C., & Tzeng, O. (1996). Tightness-looseness revisited: Some preliminary analyses in Japan and the United States. International Journal of Psychology, 31, 1–12.

Dennett, D. (1995). Darwin’s dangerous idea: Evolution and the meanings of life. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster; Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In J. H. Barkow & L. Cosmides (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (p. 666). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Dijksterhuis, A., Preston, J., Wegner, D. M., & Aarts, H. (2008). Effects of subliminal priming of self and God on self-attribution of authorship for events. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(1), 2–9.

Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.

Fiske, S. T. (2003). Social beings. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Fiske, A., Kitayama, S., Markus, H., & Nisbett, R. (1998). The cultural matrix of social psychology. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 915–981). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Gold, P. E., Cahill, L., & Wenk, G. L. (2002). Ginkgo biloba: A cognitive enhancer? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 3(1), 2–11.

Gould, S. J., & Lewontin, R. C. (1979). The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme. In Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (Series B, Vol. 205, pp. 581–598).

Harris, J. (1998). The nurture assumption: Why children turn out the way they do. New York, NY: Touchstone Books; Pinker, S. (2002). The blank slate: The modern denial of human nature. New York, NY: Penguin Putnam.

Hunt, M. (1993). The story of psychology. New York, NY: Anchor Books.

Ilardi, S. S., & Feldman, D. (2001). The cognitive neuroscience paradigm: A unifying metatheoretical framework for the science and practice of clinical psychology. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 57(9), 1067–1088.

James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York, NY: Dover.

Libet, B. (1985). Unconscious cerebral initiative and the role of conscious will in voluntary action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8(4), 529–566; Matsuhashi, M., & Hallett, M. (2008). The timing of the conscious intention to move. European Journal of Neuroscience, 28(11), 2344–2351.

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal-setting theory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(5), 265–268.

Markus, H. R., Kitayama, S., & Heiman, R. J. (1996). Culture and “basic” psychological principles. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 857–913). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Matsumoto, D. (Ed.). (2001). The handbook of culture and psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

McDaniel, M. A., Maier, S. F., & Einstein, G. O. (2002). “Brain-specific” nutrients: A memory cure? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 3(1), 12–38.

Mesoudi, A. (2009). How cultural evolutionary theory can inform social psychology and vice versa. Psychological Review, 116(4), 929–952.

Moore, B. E., & Fine, B. D. (1995). Psychoanalysis: The major concepts. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Rogers, T. B., Kuiper, N. A., & Kirker, W. S. (1977). Self-reference and the encoding of personal information. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 35(9), 677–688.

Soon, C. S., Brass, M., Heinze, H.-J., & Haynes, J.-D. (2008). Unconscious determinants of free decisions in the human brain. Nature Neuroscience, 11(5), 543–545.

Skinner, B. (1957). Verbal behavior. Acton, MA: Copley; Skinner, B. (1968). The technology of teaching. New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts; Skinner, B. (1972). Beyond freedom and dignity. New York, NY: Vintage Books.

Watson, J. B., Rayner, R. (1920). Conditioned emotional reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 3(1), 1–14; Beck, H. P., Levinson, S., & Irons, G. (2009). Finding Little Albert: A journey to John B. Watson’s infant laboratory. American Psychologist, 64(7), 605–614.

Wegner, D. M. (2002). The illusion of conscious will. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Wegner, D. M. (2003). The mind’s best trick: How we experience conscious will. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(2), 65–69.

Yang, Y.-J., & Chiu, C.-Y. (2009). Mapping the structure and dynamics of psychological knowledge: Forty years of APA journal citations (1970–2009). Review of General Psychology, 13(4), 349–356.

References

Brendl, C. M., Chattopadhyay, A., Pelham, B. W., & Carvallo, M. (2005). Name letter branding: Valence transfers when product specific needs are active. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(3), 405–415.

Cacioppo, J. T., Berntson, G. G., Sheridan, J. F., & McClintock, M. K. (2000). Multilevel integrative analyses of human behavior: Social neuroscience and the complementing nature of social and biological approaches. Psychological Bulletin, 126(6), 829–843.

Chen, P.-Y., Wang, S.-C., Poland, R. E., & Lin, K.-M. (2009). Biological variations in depression and anxiety between East and West. CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics, 15(3), 283–294.

Cutler, B. L., & Wells, G. L. (2009). Expert testimony regarding eyewitness identification. In J. L. Skeem, S. O. Lilienfeld, & K. S. Douglas (Eds.), Psychological science in the courtroom: Consensus and controversy (pp. 100–123). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2007). Social cognition: From brains to culture. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Gilovich, T. (1993). How we know what isn’t so: The fallibility of human reason in everyday life. New York, NY: Free Press.

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Hsee, C. K., & Hastie, R. (2006). Decision and experience: Why don’t we choose what makes us happy? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(1), 31–37.

Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (Vol. 15, pp. 192–240). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Seedat, S., Scott, K. M., Angermeyer, M. C., Berglund, P., Bromet, E. J., Brugha, T. S.,…Kessler, R. C. (2009). Cross-national associations between gender and mental disorders in the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys. Archives of General Psychiatry, 66(7), 785–795.

Wells, G. L., & Hasel, L. E. (2008). Eyewitness identification: Issues in common knowledge and generalization. In E. Borgida & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), Beyond common sense: Psychological science in the courtroom (pp. 159–176). Malden, NJ: Blackwell.

Williams, N., Simpson, A. N., Simpson, K., & Nahas, Z. (2009). Relapse rates with long-term antidepressant drug therapy: A meta-analysis. Human Psychopharmacology: Clinical and Experimental, 24(5), 401–408.

Wilson, E. O. (1998). Consilience: The unity of knowledge. New York, NY: Vintage Books


Psychology was not always its own discipline. When it comes to the origin of psychology, it helps to dig deeper to see how it has evolved and become the modern scientific discipline it is today. Psychology has gone through multiple stages and notable developments both in its approaches and measuring techniques to establish itself as an esteemed scientific discipline. Let’s explore the origin of psychology.

  • We are going to explore the origin of psychology by examining its history.
  • First, we will establish the history of psychology, working our way through the ages to see how it developed as a discipline.
  • Then, we will highlight the father of modern psychology before exploring the various views in the early days of psychology, including structuralism and functionalism.
  • We will also discuss psychoanalysis and humanism in an attempt to understand the origin and development of psychology.
  • We will, throughout our discussion, establish the founders of psychology and explore what we need to know for the origins of psychology at A Level.

History and Origin of Psychology

The word ‘psychology’ comes from two Greek words, psyche (meaning breath, soul, life, or spirit) and logos (meaning the study of). Wilhelm Wundt was the first to establish himself as a psychologist and opened a laboratory dedicated to the scientific study of psychology. Previously, psychology was more a subdivision of philosophy.

Fig. 1 - Depiction of psykheFig. 1 — Depiction of the psyche.

The word psychology appeared in literature as early as the 16th and 17th centuries. In the sixteenth century, a theologian named Philip Melanchthon, whom many believe, was the first to mention psychology through Latinised forms of the original Greek words.

Later psychology began to take on a new meaning, as popularised by Christian Wolff in his Psychologia Empirica. His work acknowledged that psychology is the science that examines mental phenomena, which is psychology’s early attempt to disconnect from philosophy and religion. However, many scholars still attach philosophy to their study of the mind during this time. But what does the origin of psychology have to do with philosophy?

Psychology originated in the ancient study of philosophy, the discipline of great historical minds such as Hippocrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Early philosophers spent their time theorising about how the world works, why we are here, and why people behave as they do.

Renowned French philosopher René Descartes (1596-1650) laid the foundation for studying the mind with his proposed dualism.

The idea of dualism is that the mind and body are separate entities that can explain how we experience human life.

Descartes suggested that the mind was non-physical, a state of consciousness and self-awareness that is not purely biological. In contrast, the body is a mechanical system that requires research and investigation. Separating the concepts of mind and body clarified that a study of the mind was needed.

Another important antecedent to psychology is Franz Joseph Gall (1758-1828), who introduced phrenology, the study of bumps and indentations in the skull. He believed that feeling the skull can reveal certain traits associated with a specific function and region in the brain.

It wasn’t until around the 19th century that psychology became more widely embraced, which developed into its modern meaning it is now as the study of mind and behaviour. In the next section, we will see psychology’s development and how it became a scientific discipline.

Father of Modern Psychology

Many consider Sigmund Freud to be the father of modern psychology. Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920) was the first to establish a psychology laboratory in 1879 in Leipzig, Germany, later earning him the title “father of psychology” alongside his work entitled, Principles of Physiological Psychology, published in 1873.

Wundt attempted to study the mind objectively through a process that he called introspection.

Introspection is a technique in psychology involving observing one’s thoughts and feelings objectively.

Fig. 2 - Wilhelm WundtFig. 2 — Wilhelm Wundt

Although many credit Wundt for founding psychology in 1879, some researchers believe that Gustav Fechner was as qualified for the title given the important connection he made in 1850 between the mind and the body, later creating Fechner’s law.

Fechner’s law states that stimulus perception is related to stimulus intensity. His techniques opened doors for measuring behaviours in psychology.

Wundt’s attempts at the objective study of the mind involved training individuals in introspection and repeating tests to produce similar results. In this way, Wundt believed that he could identify the components that make up our mind and how these lead to a conscious experience, later forming one of psychology’s early approaches, structuralism.

Origin and Development of Psychology: Structuralism

With the need to study the mind came new ideas, methods, and practices that helped shape psychology into what it is today.

The very first psychological approach was called structuralism. Structuralism created a foundation on which early psychologists based their work. Edward Titchener (a student of Wundt) was a structuralist psychologist who assumed that human consciousness could be broken down into smaller parts and used Wundt’s process of introspection to understand these parts.

Aside from Wundt and Titchener, Granville Stanley Hall also contributed to the growth of psychology through their expansion of structuralism. G. Stanley Hall also set up a psychology laboratory at Johns Hopkins University, applying introspection, and was elected the American Psychological Association’s first president.

Origin and Development of Psychology: Functionalism

With the rise of structuralism in psychology came an opposing view: Functionalism.

Functionalism emphasises the function of thoughts and presents the mind as an entity to be examined holistically rather than broken into smaller components.

William James (1842-1910) looked at how humans are actively involved in their behaviour by studying the relationship between body processes (e.g., sensations) and psychology (e.g., behaviour).

James Cattell and John Dewey were functionalists who focused on mental tests and assessments of human abilities. Functionalism emphasises practical applications of psychology and how the mind adapts to the environment.

The approach laid the groundwork for more modern approaches such as behaviourism and impacted how we approach education and applied psychology today.

Origin and Development of Psychology: Behaviourism

While structuralism and functionalism focused on mental processes, behaviourism rejected studying the mind because of the belief that consciousness is unobservable. Instead, behaviourism emphasises observable behaviour in which the environment determines one’s actions. A person learns certain behaviours in response to a stimulus in the environment.

Important figures in Behaviourism included Edward Thorndike, Ivan Pavlov, Burrhus Frederic Skinner and John Watson. Edward Thorndike’s experiment on cats using puzzle boxes showed that one could learn behaviour in response to a stimulus if a reward follows it. Ivan Pavlov further expanded this idea by teaching dogs to salivate with the sound of a bell using his technique, classical conditioning.

Later, Skinner introduced his version of conditioning using rewards and punishment called operant conditioning. He experimented on mice and pigeons using the Skinner box. The experiment demonstrated that behaviour can be modified using positive and negative reinforcements.

John Watson, the father of behaviourism, mentioned that behaviour should be the subject of psychology. To Watson, psychology is about understanding how the environment shapes behaviour.

Origin and Development of Psychology: Psychoanalysis

Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) rejected behaviourism and developed psychoanalysis to understand and treat mental disorders. Freud’s approach assumes that we all have an unconscious ‘layer’ to our minds that controls most of our thoughts and behaviours. He also emphasised the role of early childhood experiences in shaping personality.

To Freud, allowing his clients to speak freely about their lives and feelings could help uncover unconscious ‘repressed’ memories from early childhood trauma causing behavioural symptoms.

Other researchers questioned its scientific validity, as it is hard to prove or disprove the existence of an unconscious part of the brain.

Origin and Development of Psychology: Humanism

Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers disagreed with Behaviourism and psychoanalysis. To them, actions and thoughts are governed by the individual’s free will and capacity for development.

Humanists value emotion and think people are basically good. The premise of this approach is that humans have an innate desire to reach self-actualisation, the best version of themself. According to humanists reaching this level is quite difficult, and there are several other factors that the individual must achieve before reaching self-actualisation, such as physiological needs.

Indeed, the origin of psychology and its development showed how the need to study the mind led to an objective study from the early to late approaches of psychology, making it truly a scientific discipline.

Origin of Social Psychology

Being the social beings that we are, psychology also began investigating individual behaviour in the presence of others.

Social psychology is the scientific discipline that looks at how people interact with and are influenced by those in their social environments.

In 1924, Floyd Allport proposed in his text that social groups are one of the many stimuli an individual responds to in their environment. He also highlighted experimental research in this new psychology subfield.

Following the Great Depression in the 1930s and the impact of the First and Second World Wars, social psychologists aimed at social issues, which brought about ethics and values into social research. This opened doors for expanding social psychology and included areas such as intergroup relations, propaganda, voting, and organisational behaviour.

The 1940s to 1960s showed a rapid expansion of social psychology as evidenced by new research on authoritarian personality, obedience, persuasion, cognitive dissonance, aggression, prejudice and interpersonal attraction. By the 1970s and 1980s, social psychology faced a crisis, such as accusations of racial and gender biases, that made psychologists in this field reassess their methods.

Additionally, during this time, the cognitive revolution renewed interest in understanding the self among social psychologists. New ideas also arose from multicultural research, where there was an exchange of ideas among researchers.

With the dominance of social cognitive influences in the 1990s, some social psychologists considered emotions and motives to balance out both social and cognitive perspectives in social psychology. Until now, social psychology continues expanding as social psychologists innovate ways of measuring social behaviours.

Origin of Cognitive Psychology

With some psychologists rejecting behaviourism came another subfield of psychology, cognitive psychology, which aims to study higher mental processes.

Cognitive psychology investigates how the mind processes and influences behaviour.

In 1925, a German psychologist, Wolfgang Kohler, published his findings on The Mentality of Apes, showing that chimpanzees can learn insights and solve problems. In this experiment, the chimpanzee reached for the banana using a bamboo stick. Come 1948, Norbert Weiner, a mathematician, introduced the terms input, output, and feedback in his work Cybernetics: or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine.

Around the same time, Edward Tolman proposed the term cognitive maps, which are mental representations formed from environmental cues. He demonstrated cognitive maps by training rats to navigate a maze. Between the 1950s and 1960s, George Miller and Jerome Bruner established the Center for Cognitive Studies at Harvard University. Additionally, Miller popularised the concept that the mind can store up to seven objects in its short-term memory.

At this time, Ulric Neisser, the father of cognitive psychology, published Cognitive Psychology, signifying the beginning of the cognitive approach.

These concepts have shaped the popular cognitive psychology we know today.

Origin of Psychology — Key takeaways

  • Psychology is the scientific discipline of understanding the mind, its functions and behaviour.
  • The field originated in philosophy, with roots going back to the sixteenth century, beginning with René Descartes’ dualism, which created the need to study the mind and body separately.
  • Wilhelm Wundt is considered the father of psychology and established the first psychology laboratory in 1879.
  • Early psychological approaches focused on breaking down consciousness into smaller parts and understanding its relation to each other (structuralism) and holistic view of the mind and understanding of its functions (functionalism).
  • Later psychological approaches highlighted stimulus-response in behaviourism, the unconscious mind in psychoanalysis, personal development in humanism, and social behaviour and higher mental processes in social and cognitive approaches, respectively.

References

  1. Fig. 2 – Wilhelm Wundt (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wilhelm_Wundt._Photogravure_by_Synnberg_Photo-gravure_Co.,_1_Wellcome_L0023076.jpg) by Wellcome Library (https://wellcomecollection.org/works/a3eqvhj9?wellcomeImagesUrl=/indexplus/image/L0023076.html) is licensed by CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en)

The word psychology comes from two Greek words: «Psyche» mean­ing «mind» or «soul» and «Logos» meaning «study of. Therefore, psy­chology means «study of the mind». There are many modern definitions of the term. One of them belongs to Atkinson, who defined psychology as «the scientific study of behaviour and mental processes». However, psychologists always disagreed not only about the definition of psychol­ogy, but also about what they should study and how they should do it.

The year 1879 is considered to be the start of psychology as a sepa­rate discipline. It was the date when Wilhelm Wundt created the first psychology laboratory in Leipzig, Germany. Americans disagree and think that William James was the «founding father of psychology» be­cause in 1875 he started teaching a course on the relationship between physiology and psychology at Harvard University. In 1890 he wrote a book «Principles of psychology» which was a very important step in the history of psychology.

Structuralism was the first approach in psychology. It was described by Wundt who thought that the object of psychological investigation should be the conscious mind. According to Wundt, the mind should be studied by introspection (looking at one’s own mental experience) in order to break down into its components such as images, sensations and feelings.

Functionalism was developed by William James who thought that the workings of the mind are functional. The mind works to survive and adapt. So we should investigate what behaviour and thoughts are for.

At the turn of the 19th century two powerful approaches appeared. One of them is psychoanalysis developed by Sigmund Freud in Austria. Freud wrote that the proper object of psychological investigation should be the unconscious mind and that our behaviour is determined by processes that we are not aware of.

Behaviourism, introduced by John Watson, was the most important of all approaches that investigated «minds» and proposed that psychol­ogy should investigate only observable behaviour if it wanted to be an objective science. This approach dominated experimental psychology until 1950’s when a strong interest in the ‘mind’ developed in the form of the cognitive and humanistic approaches. Representatives of these approaches argued that behaviourism ignored all the most important and interesting things that go on in our heads.

Cognitive psychology investigates the mind by using computer in­formation processing ideas to arrive at models of how our brain works and then apply scientific methods to confirm these models. The cogni­tive approach was successful and is a very dominant one in psychology today.

The Humanistic approach has had less of an impact on psychology because it adapted less scientific view of the human mind. Humanistic psychologists argued that psychology should focus on each individual’s conscious experience and aims in life.

The biological approach has advanced evolutionary, physiological and genetic explanation for human behaviour throughout the history of psychology.

0/5000

Результаты (русский) 1: [копия]

Скопировано!

Психология слово происходит от двух греческих слов: «Psyche» означает «Разум» или «душа» и «Логос» означает «изучение. Таким образом психология означает «изучение разума». Есть много современных определений термина. Одна из них принадлежит Аткинсон, который определил психологии как «научное изучение психических процессов и поведения». Однако психологи всегда не согласились не только об определении психологии, но и о то, что они должны изучать и как они должны это делать. 1879 год считается началом психологии как отдельной дисциплины. Это была дата, когда Вильгельм Вундт создана первая Лаборатория психологии в Лейпциге, Германия. Американцы не согласны и думаю, что Уильям Джеймс был «отец-основатель психологии», потому что в 1875 году он начал преподавать курс по взаимосвязи между физиологии и психологии в Гарвардском университете. В 1890 году он написал книгу «Принципы психологии», который был очень важным шагом в истории психологии. Структурализм был первый подход в психологии. Он был описан Вундт, который считал, что объект психологического исследования должно быть сознательный разум. По словам Вундт ум должен быть изучен самоанализа (глядя на психическое опыт) для того, чтобы сломать в свои компоненты, такие как изображения, ощущения и чувства. Функционализм был разработан Уильям Джеймс, который считал, что работы разума являются функциональными. Ум работает, чтобы выжить и адаптироваться. Поэтому мы должны исследовать, что поведение и мысли являются для. На рубеже 19-го века появились два мощных подхода. Одним из них является психоанализом, разработанный Зигмунд Фрейд в Австрии. Фрейд писал, что надлежащий объект психологического исследования должно быть бессознательного ума и что наше поведение определяется процессами, которые мы не осведомлены о. Бихевиоризм, представленный Джоном Ватсоном, был самым важным из всех подходов, которые расследовались «умы» и предложил, что психология должна расследовать только наблюдаемого поведения, если он хочет быть объективной науки. Этот подход доминирует экспериментальной психологии до 1950-х годов, когда сильный интерес в «разум» разработан в виде когнитивных и гуманистического подходов. Представители этих подходов утверждали, что бихевиоризм игнорируются все наиболее важные и интересные вещи, которые проходят в наших головах. Когнитивная психология исследует ум с помощью компьютерной обработки информации идеи прийти модели как наш мозг работает и затем применяют научные методы для подтверждения этих моделей. Познавательный подход был успешным и сегодня является очень доминирующим в психологии. Гуманистический подход имеет меньше влияния на психологии, поскольку она менее научного взгляда человеческого разума. Гуманистические психологи утверждают, что психология должна сосредоточиться на сознание каждого человека и цели в жизни. Биологический подход способствовал эволюции, физиологических и генетических объяснение поведения человека на протяжении всей истории психологии.

переводится, пожалуйста, подождите..

Результаты (русский) 3:[копия]

Скопировано!

слово «происходит от двух греческих слов:» психея «означает — ING» против «или» душа «и» логос «означает» исследование.поэтому — — chology означает «изучение разума».многие современные определения этого термина.одна из них принадлежит аткинсон, который определяется психологии «научные исследования поведения и психических процессов».однако психологи всегда не согласились не только по поводу определения psychol — ogy, но также и о том, что они должны учиться, и как они должны это сделать.в 1879 года считается началом психологии как SEPA — уровень дисциплины.это был день, когда вильгельм вундт создал первый психологии лаборатории в лейпциге (германия).американцы не согласен и считает, что уильям джеймс был «основатель психологии» — потому что в 1875 году он начал преподавать курс по взаимосвязи между физиологии и психологии в гарвардском университете.в 1890 году он написал книгу «принципы психологии», которая является очень важным шагом в истории психологии.структурализм был первый подход в психологии.он описал вундт, кто думал, что объектом психологического исследования должны быть сознание.по словам вундт, разум должен быть изучен самоанализа (глядя на собственного психического опыта), с тем чтобы сломать в ее компонентов, таких как изображения, ощущения и чувства.функционализм был разработан уильям джеймс, который считал, что работы не функционируют.мозг работает, чтобы выжить и приспособиться.так что мы должны изучить, какие действия и мысли.на рубеже XIX века два мощных подходов представляется.один из них — это психоанализ, разработанные зигмунда фрейда в австрии.фрейд написал, что надлежащее объект психологического исследования должны быть сознание и что наше поведение определяется процессы, мы не знаем.behaviourism, представленный джон уотсон, является наиболее важным из всех подходов, что расследование «разум», и предложил psychol — ogy следует расследовать только видимая поведения, если она хочет быть объективным науки.этот подход преобладает экспериментальной психологии до 1950 года, когда большой интерес к «мнение» разработана в виде когнитивных и гуманистических подходов.представители этих подходов, утверждал, что behaviourism проигнорировал все самые важные и интересные вещи, которые пошли в наши головы.когнитивная психология расследует ум, используя компьютер — формирование обработки идеи приехать на модели, как наш мозг работает и затем применять научные методы подтверждения этих моделей.в cogni — tive подход был успешным и очень доминировал в психологии сегодня.гуманистический подход имеет меньшее влияние на психологию, потому что он адаптировал менее научный взгляд человеческого разума.психологи утверждают, что психология гуманистического следует сосредоточить внимание на каждого человека в сознательном опыте и цели в жизни.биологические подхода продвинулась эволюционный, физиологические и генетическое объяснение поведения человека на протяжении всей истории психологии.

переводится, пожалуйста, подождите..

Понравилась статья? Поделить с друзьями:
  • Psyche is a greek word meaning
  • Psy excel скачать бесплатно
  • Psd в word онлайн
  • Proxima nova шрифт для word
  • Provided that use in a sentence for each word