Undoubtedly, such lists do reflect a number of personal and social
perspectives (to use a term less charged than "biases"). It is
particularly interesting that you selected Henry Garrett in discussing
this topic because Garrett's personal perspectives are now quite well
known (though they were not as well known at the time of his ascendancy
in the APA). He was closely involved with various eugenicist,
neo-fascist, racialist, and other right-wing political groups during his
life. This has been documented in:
Winston, A. S. (1998). Science in the service of the far right: Henry E.
Garrett, the IAAEE, and the Liberty Lobby. /Journal of Social Issues,/
54, no. 1, 179-209.
which is summarized at a number of places in the internet.
Garrett's celebration of the work of Galton and the early American
"intelligence men" is reflective of his eugenicist views. His ignoring
of Freud may have been primarily due to his view of what constituted
"science," but the fact that Freud was Jewish cannot be dismissed
without further examination. It is interesting that he focused on the
(non-Jewish) Köhler in his discussion of Gestalt psych., rather than on
the founder of the movement, Max Wertheimer (who was Jewish). (I believe
that Koffka was Jewish as well, but I am not certain). Again, more
investigation would be required. I am somewhat surprised that Garrett
did not bring more attention to the personality theory of his "fellow
traveler" in extreme right-wing politics, R. B. Cattell, but it may be
that Cattell's work was not well enough known by the time Garrett was
writing his book to merit inclusion.
People interested in such matters might want to have a listen to my
interviews with Michael Wertheimer about the career of his father, and
with Bill Tucker on the career of R. B. Cattell. They can be found on my
podcast series at http://www.yorku.ca/christo/podcasts/
Regards,
--
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
Canada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/
phone: 416-736-5115 ext. 66164
fax: 416-736-5814
==============================
Gerald Peterson wrote:
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
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
