Depressingly, the same is true for Psych Abstracts. A search 
on "Freud" yeilded 19759 hits while "Piaget" produced only 5713. Of 
course, having an "influence" on psychology doesn't mean that the 
influence was a positive one.

-Don.

Don Allen
Dept. of Psychology
Langara College
100 W. 49th Ave.
Vancouver, B.C.
Canada V5Y 2Z6
Phone: 604-323-5871


----- Original Message -----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 7:30 am
Subject: [tips] Re:  top ten psych studies?
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
<[email protected]>

> On 19 Mar 2007 at 16:07, Joan Warmbold wrote:
> 
> > I'm still baffled that Piaget still carries such influence <snip>
> 
> >  When younger children are provided problems with only one 
> segment, they
> > reveal amazingly advanced thought processes.  Think of the 
> studies that
> > revealed that toddlers show astonishment when they first see two 
> mickey> mouse dolls which are then hidden from view by a shield. 
> 
> Despite Peter Harzem's admirable call for data on the question of 
> Piaget's influence on scientific psychology I'm afraid we're not 
> going to 
> get any, so we're stuck with opinion. And a good part of that 
> opinion 
> depends on what we mean by "influence" (as well as on what we mean 
> by 
> "scientific"). 
> 
> Unlike Joan, I don't think that successful attempts to prove 
> Piaget wrong 
> indicate a lack of influence. On the contrary, such studies as the 
> Mickey 
> Mouse ones of the cognitive and perceptual abilities of children 
> are 
> often classified as "neo-Piagetian" to indicate that they were 
> inspired 
> by Piaget.  Even if Piaget was wrong (and on the details at least, 
> he 
> seems to have been), I count all of this, even including the 
> recent 
> interest in Vgotsky as an alternative,  as Piaget's legacy.
> 
> My conclusion, BTW, about where Piaget went wrong is that he 
> tended to 
> underestimate the abilities of the young child and overestimate 
> the 
> abilities of the adolescent. Heck, he even seems to think that 
> adults are 
> smarter than they are. How many of us have really mastered formal 
> operations (speak for yourself, eh?)?
> 
> For what it's worth, Google gives less than half a million hits 
> for 
> "Piaget", but 19 million for "Freud". But all that proves is that 
> Freud 
> would win on American Idol. Perhaps science citation counts would 
> be more 
> revealing.
> 
> Stephen
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Stephen L. Black, Ph.D.          
> Department of Psychology     
> Bishop's University                e-mail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 2600 College St.
> Sherbrooke QC  J1M 0C8
> Canada
> 
> Dept web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy
> TIPS discussion list for psychology teachers at
> http://faculty.frostburg.edu/psyc/southerly/tips/index.htm
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> 
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription go to:
> http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-
> bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
> 

---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english

Reply via email to