Tipsters:
Discussing the top ten psych studies got me thinking about
historical changes in such views. I wondered how such views of
influential studies may reflect the Zeitgeist. I also wondered why
students should care about anyone*s *top ten* list fraught, as all are,
with the narrow and colored lenses of today*s biases. I happened to
look over on my bookshelf and spy an older book titled *Great
Experiments in Psychology* by Henry E. Garrett published first in 1930
and revised in 1941 as part of the Appleton-Century company*s Century
Psychology Series. It was aimed to be a supplementary text in the
General and Experimental classes...*stressing experimental methods,
giving the student some idea how psychological facts have been
discovered, who the men (sic) are who have contributed to the upbuilding
of psychology, and what problems await immediate solution* (vii). I
found it exciting to leaf thru and share the author*s interest in
problems and ideas that were thought to be advances or at least
important for the future.
The chapter headings are revealing. The first two chapters deal
with Binet*s work and the Army alpha tests of intelligence. The third
focuses on Galton*s study of individual differences with his use of
correlation and studies of twins, gender, and racial differences. The
fourth examines the experimental approach to personality; contrasting
less scientific, impressionistic approaches with more objective
measurement efforts, and ending with discussion of traits and mention of
Hartshorne and May, Allport and Vernon, the Rorschach, Terman*s work,
and Murray*s approach. No mention is made of Freud here (or anywhere in
this text). Chapter five is devoted to the work of Pavlov, but also
references Skinner's work. Six to Franz and Lashley*s studies of the
brain in learning, Chapter seven to Thorndike*s study of problem-solving
and his laws of learning, Eight to Kohler*s studies of perception,
learning, and their relation to Gestalt Psychology. Chapter nine is
centered around Thorndike*s and Woodworth*s studies of transfer of
training. Chapter ten to Ebbinghaus*s studies of memory and forgetting.
Chapter eleven is devoted to Watson*s work exploring the motor and
sensory development of children, with headings on handedness, acquiring
fears and *emotional attitudes,* and the breaking of undesirable habits.
This latter involved discussion of repression*but it was suppression
due to social disapproval that was actually described. One can clearly
see the limited vision, and inadequate study of developmental issues.
Chapter twelve dealt with the work of Canon and others on emotion, and
ways of studying emotion and deception. Here is another chapter where we
can appreciate the advances we take for granted today. Chapter
thirteen focused on visual and auditory perception with the work of
Helmholtz stressed. Chapter 14 explored Cattell*s studies of reaction
time and associative reactions. The final chapter examines the work of
Weber and Fechner and psychophysics.
I found skimming these chapters interesting for a number of
reasons. There are some important contributions that others have built
on, but that should be re-visited now and then. There are, of course,
issues and topics that have been resolved or re-directed. Also, one can
see topics reflecting past interests, along with the personal and
professional biases of the day. It might be interesting to have our
students review a number of articles or books like this to see what was
considered to constitute progress or advancement. Measurement issues
and methodological innovation were often more central than students
today might suppose. The brain imaging fancies of today may parallel
the earlier excitement over instruments and scaling techniques. Most
importantly, such explorations may expose students to the methods and
ideas that stimulated particular research programs. We could have
students in a History and Systems class compile their own list of top
ten psychology studies and promote further discussion of such issues
raised on TIPS such as what constitutes a research study, what about
writings that just stimulated thought and controversy? Is it
popularity, textbook citations, or the ideological and historical
Zeitgeist that shape how psychologists view such things? What
constitutes advancement in science? A justification for exploring such
historical topics and ideas was best stated by the editor (Richard
Elliot) writing the intro to the first edition: *In its pages psychology
appears to the student as a live, growing enterprise with a personal
history and with a future to which it is not at all impossible to
contribute.* This seems a worthy aim for our classes today. Gary
Gerald L. (Gary) Peterson, Ph.D.
Professor, Psychology
Saginaw Valley State University
University Center, MI 48710
989-964-4491
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
