Did John B. Watson Really “Found” Behaviorism?

Developments culminating in the nineteenth century, along with the predictable collapse of introspective psychology, meant that the rise of behavioral psychology was inevitable. In 1913, John B. Watson was an established scientist with impeccable credentials who acted as a strong and combative promoter of a natural science approach to psychology when just such an advocate was needed. He never claimed to have founded “behavior psychology” and, despite the acclaim and criticism attending his portrayal as the original behaviorist, he was more an exemplar of a movement than a founder. Many influential writers had already characterized psychology, including so-called mental activity, as behavior, offered many applications, and rejected metaphysical dualism. Among others, William Carpenter, Alexander Bain, and (early) Sigmund Freud held views compatible with twentieth-century behaviorism. Thus, though Watson was the first to argue specifically for psychology as a natural science, behaviorism in both theory and practice had clear roots long before 1913. If behaviorism really needs a “founder,” Edward Thorndike might seem more deserving, because of his great influence and promotion of an objective psychology, but he was not a true behaviorist for several important reasons. Watson deserves the fame he has received, since he first made a strong case for a natural science (behaviorist) approach and, importantly, he made people pay attention to it.     

Psychology in the Czech lands: Bohemia,Czechoslovakia, and the Czech Republic

The article provides a comprehensive review of Czech psychology—its history and its current state. It enumerates significant psychologists who were Czech, born in Bohemia or who were instrumental for the development of psychology in the region. The article also enumerates Czech psychological associations along with their main representatives, journals, and academic facilities involved in education and research in psychology. It is pointed out that the origins of psychology as a science are in the Central Europe—the first laboratory of W. Wundt was in Leipzig, Germany; S. Freud was born in Bohemia, in the Moravian city of Příbor and he practiced in Vienna, Austria. The Czech capital Prague will also become the capital of the psychological science in 2020 when it will be hosting the 32nd International Congress of Psychology (ICP 2020).     

Karl Popper,Psychology and Philosophy

This paper intends to re-emphasize the relationship among Psychology, Popper and his Philosophy. Popper, who is often considered as one of the most important philosophers of science, had associations with the discipline of psychology in his early years. Popper was associated with Würzburg school of psychology, especially the psychologies of Külpe, Selz and Bühler. However, there was a change in Popper’s interest from the psychology of discovery to an objectivist epistemology—that is, to the logic of discovery, which he himself acknowledged (1976, p. 55). Popper, not only turned away from psychology, as early as 1930 or thereabouts, he later became one of the most outspoken opponents of a psychological approach to science. This antipathy has worked both ways! Very few psychologists study and discuss Popper. His place in the history of psychology, certainly remains inadequate. But why should psychologists ignore Popper? Instead of turning away from Popper, Psychologists’ efforts should be directed towards bringing into focus Popper, his works and association with psychology. This paper argues and tries to discuss the relationships among Popper, his training in psychology and his philosophy.     

Norman Garmezy (1918-2009)

Norman Garmezy, a pioneer in research on risk and resilience, died in Nashville, Tennessee, on November 21, 2009, at the age of 91. He was a legendary mentor as well as an eminent scientist in clinical psychology. Norm was born on June 18, 1918, in New York City and grew up in the Bronx in a Jewish neighborhood where educational attainment was highly valued. The scientific study of resilience as conceived by Norman Garmezy, his peers, and students has transformed the science and practice of multiple disciplines, from the molecular level to the global ecosystem, infusing a strength-based and recovery-oriented approach into psychology, education, social work, and psychiatry. Current research on resilience ranges from studies of plasticity in brain development to effective planning for resilience in the context of disaster. Norm's influential ideas and research earned him international acclaim and many honors for lifetime achievements in science. Throughout his career, Norm held many leadership roles. Throughout his life, Norm spoke with great love about his wife of 63 years, Edie Garmezy (who died just months before him in 2009), and their children. In addition to his work and his family, Norm had three abiding passions-theater, movies, and politics. During the last two decades of his life, Norm and those who loved him endured his long decline from Alzheimer's, which slowly stole his brilliant mind and hilarious sense of humor. Nonetheless, the incredible spirit and humanity of this giant scholar continued to shine through this terrible disease. To the end of his life, Norm's face would light up with a smile as he greeted the people he loved, and he would often exclaim, "Wonderful!" Norman Garmezy was a remarkable person and scholar who left an extraordinary legacy of love and work to inspire future generations in their efforts to understand and promote the human capacity for competence and resilience.     

Psychology as a Science of Subject and Comportment,beyond the Mind and Behavior

The turn of qualitative inquiry suggests a more open, plural conception of psychology than just the science of the mind and behavior as it is most commonly defined. Historical, ontological and epistemological binding of this conception of psychology to the positivist method of natural science may have exhausted its possibilities, and after having contributed to its prestige as a science, has now become an obstacle. It is proposed that psychology be reconceived as a science of subject and comportment in the framework of a contextual hermeneutic, social, human behavioral science. Thus, without rejecting quantitative inquiry, psychology recovers territory left aside like introspection and pre-reflective self-awareness, and reconnects with traditions marginalized from the main stream. From this perspective psychology might also recover its credibility as a human science in view of current skepticism.     

INSTRUCTIONAL MANUALS OF BOUNDARY‐WORK: PSYCHOLOGY TEXTBOOKS,STUDENT SUBJECTIVITIES,AND DISCIPLINARY HISTORIOGRAPHIES

This article aims to provide an overview of the historiography of psychology textbooks. In the overview, I identify and describe in detail two strands of writing histories of introductory textbooks of psychology and juxtapose them to provide an integrated historiography of textbooks in psychology. One strand is developed by teachers of psychology—first as a general approach for investigating textbooks in a pedagogical setting, and then later upgraded into a full history of psychology textbooks in America. The other strand follows a more familiar perspective of historians of science and historians of psychology who build on various post‐Kuhnian and post‐Foucauldian perspectives on textbooks. I make an argument for integrating these two views for a more comprehensive historiography of textbooks in psychology, recasting textbooks as objects of research and sources that are interesting sui generis for historians of psychology in their investigations.     

心理学中实验法的方法论地位重估

认知心理学以实验法为其方法论基础,着力对人类的认识过程进行模型建构。然而,早在20世纪70年代初,其创立者奈塞尔就对心理学的实验范式感到不满,转而寻求心理学的生态学效度。心理学中对实验法的推崇源于自然科学特别是物理学的成功。而实际上,物理学在20世纪初遭遇了实验法所带来的困境。受制于实验法的种种局限,当代认知科学逐渐放弃了方法论的沙文主义立场,接纳了来自语言学、哲学、神经科学等多领域、多视角的研究策略。心理学在一定程度上具有人文科学的性质,因此同样需要采用多重研究手段和方法,而不是一味地笃信实验法的权威性。     

试析现代西方心理学的文化转向

西方心理学正在展现出对文化影响日渐增加的关注。这种文化转向既有科学哲学和历史的原因,也受到世界范围内心理学本土化运动的影响。文化转向的主要表现是：(1)对心理学自然科学模式的反思与诘难;(2)多元文化心理学的兴起;(3)跨文化心理学面临的批评及其转变;(4)认知心理学、发展心理学和健康心理学等分支领域对文化影响的关注。作者认为,文化的转向对于西方心理学的发展具有积极的意义。     

"Memories" of Anomalous and Traumatic Autobiographical Experiences: Validation and Consolidation of Fantasy Through Hypnosis

What is diversity science and who needs it? This response addresses these and other themes and challenges raised by 11 excellent commentaries. Others include: What are the assumptions of diversity science regarding difference? Is diversity science constrained to the study of multiculturalism and colorblindness? Are race and ethnicity the only dimensions of difference worth studying? At which level of analysis should diversity scientists work and with which types of variables? Should diversity science address the experiences of both majority and minority groups? Should diversity science reside solely on U.S. soil? Is diversity science already in motion (i.e., has the train already left the station)? and Is social psychology a particularly useful site for diversity science?     

Psychology and “The Babe”

Psychologists and baseball players were among those Americans who formed professional associations in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. Psychologists used laboratory tasks to quantify mental and behavioral processes while sportswriters and baseball organizers measured individual and team performance. The most popular baseball player of the 1920s, George Herman “Babe” Ruth, possessed superior batting skills that were evident in the statistical indices of baseball performance. In 1921, he was brought to the psychological laboratory at Columbia University to perform standard laboratory tasks in an effort to discover the basis for his success in hitting home runs and to suggest the potential of tests for identifying future baseball stars. Baseball's addiction to quantitative indices of performance was thus brought together with a new science devoted to quantitative assessment and a desire to make such assessments useful. The attempt to analyze the basis of Ruth's batting skills is part of the history of applied psychology, sport psychology, and popular interest in the science of psychology. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

应用心理学的学科性质——基于钱学森学科结构模型的分析

纯粹应用观和独立观是解释应用心理学学科性质的两个代表性理论。前者认为应用心理学仅是基础心理学知识和方法的直接应用;后者则认为应用心理学有独立的本质特征。钱学森学科结构模型赞同独立观,认为应用心理学有三个本质特征：1）研究旨趣面向心理工程技术中的重大问题,生产应用性理论;2）内容体系由社会需求决定,随着需求的变化而变化;3）研究方法的个人经验成分多于基础心理学,少于心理工程技术。在应用心理学建设中,1）要敏于实际需求;2）要大力发展、创立我国需要的应用心理学分支;3）要统一人才培养规制。     

Last of the mohicans? James McCosh and psychology "old" and "new"

This paper addresses the history of a rhetorical tradition in psychology that made a distinct division between old and new psychology and denigrated the old. The views of James McCosh, a transitional old psychologist and Princeton's president from 1868 to 1888, are analyzed to evaluate the stereotypical view of old psychology as antiscience and dogmatic. The evidence of James McCosh's writings and his actions while president of Princeton suggest the need for a more nuanced interpretation of the relationship between the old and the new. While McCosh did not share the new psychologists' valuation of experimental psychology, this was because of a disagreement over the correct methods of science, not a rejection of science itself. Therefore, the negative view of old psychology is better understood as a rhetorical strategy on the part of new psychologists who had professional reasons to distance themselves from their old psychology heritage.     

From deception trials to control reagents. The introduction of the control group about a century ago

This is the story of the remarkable psychologist John E. Coover, who, in the early 1900s, was the first to advocate the comparison of experimental and control groups as a methodological necessity. Moreover, the author raises the issue of why control groups were launched about a century ago, and why psychology was comparatively early in codifying group comparison as a methodological routine. In dealing with these questions, the author discusses the relations between turn-of-the-century science and society as well as between psychophysical research and educational experimentation. Furthermore, the mystery is solved of how Coover's rightful place in the received history of experimental controls could be taken by precisely the authors whom he criticized for the lack of controls.     

Some Facts from the Biography of A. R. Luria

The biographical sketches from Luria's life reveal the capricious political changes and their effect on the development of Soviet neuropsychology. The picture that emerges is of an individual who survived several ideological reprisals. He introduced Vygotsky into the mainstream of psychology, and continued to advance the study of cognitive functions within the context of neuroanatomy of the brain. And yet, he had an open mind judged by his interest in Freud, and welcoming to his clinic pioneers of psychology such as Piaget, Bruner and Pribram. Also included are intimate impressions of a daughter of her father, who like his young mentor, Vygotsky was a near-genius. He was unvanquished by adversities, doggedly working away to extend the frontiers of the science of human mind.     

科学心理学的观念及其范畴含义解析

关于心理学作为科学的观念或理想普遍兴起于19世纪下半叶,正是对这个观念或理想的百余年历史的追求和实践,塑造了现代意义上的科学心理学及其历史作为整体的基本面貌,并决定了科学心理学观念的两种范畴含义及其差异,具体表现为在心理学作为科学的整体背景中它的现象学传统或道路与它的科学主义传统或道路之间的对峙关系。历史分析表明,对科学心理学观念的范畴含义的理解和实现,与关于科学观念的范畴含义的探索和理解是密切关联、相互制约的。以人类思维的理论形态的历史转换为背景,我们发现,关于心理学作为科学的观念,只有实现为现象学意义上的科学,才能真正实现它自身;但主流的科学主义传统则要把心理学实现为自然科学,由此实现的科学心理学,只能是对心理学作为科学的观念的异化。     

Political goals versus scientific truths: a response to Jackson (2003)

Three fundamental issues separate Jackson's (2003) methodological views from mine. One, whereas he believes an absolute moral view can prevail in a democracy, I assume moral pluralism is an inevitable byproduct of an open society. Two, Jackson feels that psychology can identify a correct moral position, whereas I postulate natural science psychology is only capable of revealing the empirical consequences of competing social policies and their moral implications. Three, Jackson espouses a politically active psychology that from my perspective is antithetical to a democratic and scientific ethic. In sum, Jackson's coupling of science with political advocacy will lead to a mistrust of psychology that will deny a democracy the opportunity to base its social policies on reliable psychological information.     

Psychology in the human sciences in France, 1920-1940: Ignace Meyerson's historical psychology

Between World War I and World War II, psychology adopted a direction open to human sciences; I. Meyerson was the main organizer of this choice. Leading the Societe de Psychologie and the Journal de Psychologie Normale et Pathologique, he tried to construct an individual and collective psychology that reflected not only the scientific preoccupations of his masters and friends but also their political choices: They had been the founders of the Human Rights League at the end of the 19th century. Behind Durkheim and Seignobos, with Mauss, Levy-Bruhl, and Blondel, Meyerson answered the new historians' call for a unified science of "mentalities," a historical psychology of collective representations. Meyerson offered to sociologists, anthropologists, linguists, and historians several forums to debate in which psychology was the unifying science. But at the end of the World War II, his psychology was marginalized, and a postivistic and behavioristic way was preferred. Meyerson's historical psychology disappeared from academic psychology, but historians have preserved its legacy.     

Physiology as the antechamber to metaphysics: the young William James's hope for a philosophical psychology

In the 5 years before 1878, when his career in psychology was becoming established, William James wrote a series of notes and reviews assessing the work of many of the pioneers in the new field. Adopting a public and confident voice, even while he was privately still uncertain and searching, James criticized the dogmatism of positivist and idealist claims to the study of the human brain and mind. In his short writings of 1873-1877, James started to formulate his own middle path. His first steps on that path show that he did not reject either scientific or philosophic inquiry; instead, he viewed scientific knowledge as a way to understand philosophical questions more deeply. Saving his sharpest critiques for positivism, James endorsed scientific investigation without materialist assmptions. While his career in psychology was still only a hope, James treated science as a means toward humanist insight.     

The muscular sense in Russia: I. M. Sechenov and materialist realism

Contemporary Russian sensory physiology and psychology uses the notion of a “dark sense,” referring to the background of bodily sensation, especially of the position and movement of the body. The physiologist Ivan Sechenov introduced this language in the 1860s in the context of arguing for a physiological basis for scientific psychology. The muscular sense (the term preceding modern notions of kinaesthesia and proprioception) thereafter featured in the many talks and journal articles he presented to spread scientific enlightenment. The paper describes the history and significance of this. It does so in the light of Soviet representations of Sechenov as a scientist who substantially contributed to the Leninist materialist–realist theory of knowledge. These representations assessed Sechenov’s discussions as a breakthrough in world science to the understanding of the human organism as a self‐regulating material system. It is necessary to understand the purposes and pressures driving Soviet historiography. The paper confirms the historical importance the sense of movement has had in realist theories of knowledge of the world; and it contributes a previously unknown chapter to the history of psychology.