Gestalt psychology: the forgotten paradigm in abnormal psychology

Gestalt views of psychopathology are almost completely ignored in mainstream psychology and psychiatry. However, a review of available evidence indicates a remarkable consistency between these views and current data from experimental psychopathology and cognitive neuroscience. This consistency is especially pronounced in the area of schizophrenia. In addition, there is a convergence of cognitive and neurobiological evidence regarding the validity of early Gestalt views of both normal brain-behavior relationships and disordered ones, as in schizophrenia. This article reviews some contributions of Gestalt psychology regarding schizophrenia and examines these views in light of more recent findings from cognitive psychology, cognitive neuroscience, and experimental psychopathology. We conclude that Gestalt theory is a viable theoretical framework from which to understand schizophrenia. Specifically, it appears that a breakdown of Gestalt organizational processes may characterize both the cognitive and the brain processes in schizophrenia.     

In search of a new paradigm for cultural psychology

It is my privilege to be invited to write a response to K.S. Yang's reply to my critique of the methodology he used in his empirical research on individual modernity in Taiwan (Hwang, 2003). Yang's reply consists of three parts: The first part provides a quick overview of the methodology used in his individual traditionality and modernity (T/M) research in Taiwan. The second part presents his reply to my methodological criticisms. The third part is a plea for more and better individual T/M research in Asia. My response consists of three corresponding sections, although I will concentrate on the second part of Yang's text.     

Tree thinking: a new paradigm for integrating comparative data in psychology

Over the past 15 years, several important theoretical and methodological developments have emerged from evolutionary biology. These developments--collectively dubbed tree thinking--are now well known in evolutionary biology but have yet to be incorporated into mainstream psychology. Tree thinking has revolutionized evolutionary biology and has the potential to do the same for how comparative data are integrated into psychology. Tree thinking holds that explanations (or narratives) for adaptations must be based on an understanding of the adaptations' history (or chronicle) over evolutionary time. This tenet of tree thinking requires researchers to consider hitherto neglected patterns of data. The authors present the ideas and methods behind tree thinking, examining their implications for psychology.     

Evolutionary social psychology: Prospects and pitfalls

The principles of evolutionary psychology and the traditional assumptions of social psychology are highly compatible. Both disciplines trace observed behavioral variability to situational variability. Both assume that psychological mechanisms sensitive to social information are central to causal accounts of social behavior. Questions about the origins and functions of these psychological mechanisms are indispensable for understanding social behavior. Evolutionary psychology provides conceptual tools for addressing these questions. Several pitfalls must be avoided by practitioners of evolutionary social psychology. Specifically, we must jettison notions of genetic determinism and behavioral unmodifiability, eliminate false dichotomies between “genetic” and “learned,” and place cross-cultural variability in a sensible theoretical context. Attending to the reliable phenomena discovered by traditional social psychology and the conceptual frameworks provided by modern evolutionary psychology will produce the most informed evolutionary social psychology.     

Semantics and the computational paradigm in cognitive psychology

There is a prevalent notion among cognitive scientists and philosophers of mind that computers are merely formal symbol manipulators, performing the actions they do solely on the basis of the syntactic properties of the symbols they manipulate. This view of computers has allowed some philosophers to divorce semantics from computational explanations. Semantic content, then, becomes something one adds to computational explanations to get psychological explanations. Other philosophers, such as Stephen Stich, have taken a stronger view, advocating doing away with semantics entirely. This paper argues that a correct account of computation requires us to attribute content to computational processes in order to explain which functions are being computed. This entails that computational psychology must countenance mental representations. Since anti-semantic positions are incompatible with computational psychology thus construed, they ought to be rejected. Lastly, I argue that in an important sense, computers are not formal symbol manipulators.     

Evolutionary psychology and consumer behavior: A constructive critique

We examine the theoretical basis for the evolutionary narrative common to the target papers by Saad (this issue) and by Griskevicius and Kenrick (this issue) and identify areas of controversy that have sparked debate about evolutionary psychology [EP] among biologists and behavioral ecologists. The two main areas of disagreement are over (1) the role of genetic adaptations resulting from natural selection in ancient times compared to other forces leading to current behavior; and (2) the likelihood that evolution resulted in a set of highly specialized mental modules or information-processing circuits thought to be instrumental in determining present-day behavior. We review the EP research discussed by the authors of the target papers as a means of evaluating the evidence in support of the theory and of suggesting future directions of research.     

Evolutionary developmental psychology: Current status and future directions

The field of developmental psychology is part of a continuum of disciplines, from cell biology to cultural anthropology, that are focused on understanding developing and potentially evolving phenotypes; the reciprocal interactions between genetics and experiences produce variation in developing phenotypes and this variation is the grist for evolutionary selection. The articles in this issue provide cutting edge and multidisciplinary analyses of developing and potentially evolving phenotypes in areas that are of central interest to developmental scientists, including mother–infant attachments, stress responses in children, social cognition, and life span development. The articles and other recent works signal the reemergence of developmental psychology as an evolutionarily informed, multidisciplinary field. In this view, it is not about nature versus nurture or biology versus psychology, it is about tackling difficult problems at multiple levels of analysis, each of which has something to contribute and none of which is sufficient in and of itself.     

Evolutionary psychology and rational-emotive theory: Time to open the floodgates

Main tenets, issues, and controversies for evolutionary psychology (EP), particularly its cognitive aspects, are introduced, clarified, and applied to the theory and philosophy of rational-emotive therapy (RET). Specifically, key concepts in EP are applied to Ellis' genetic postulate for cognitive demandingness and grandiosity, and are incorporated into Ruth's (1992) RET evolutionary proposal. The following issues are examined for demanding and grandiose thinking: nature (genetic) vs. nurture (learned), plasticity vs. unmodifiability, acquisition ease and modification-elimination difficulty, natural inseparability of cognition and emotion, natural inseparability of cognitive content and process, social selection pressures and the human psyche, competitive individualism vs. natural self-interest, evolutionary counter-balancing and false mutually exclusive dichotomies, epigenetic rules and Darwinian algorithms, current adaptions vs. ancestral remnants, child and adult adaption, Darwinism vs. Lamarckism, and ethical considerations.William J. Ruth, Ph.D., Staff Psychologist and Practicum Supervisor. School PsychologistPrivate Practice and Independent Research, Hartsdale, NY.     

Developmental psychology in the real world: A paradigm of parent education

Twenty years ago, William Kessen, Greta Fein and I developed and tested a model of parent education, a model which involved variation in curricular content, didactic approaches, and child outcomes–experimentally contrasted. Our experience yielded some valuable lessons about the extent to which researchers can influence parents' behaviour, and parents their children's development. In the present article I suggest that these lessons might be useful for researchers now as they were for us then. I present some observations about the research that developmental psychologists have done in the intervening two decades and suggest that we could learn much by using such a model of parent education to answer questions about the effets of parents' behaviour on children's development. Carefully done, parent education studies can yield valuable information about many of the questions raised in recent correlational research. Parent training research can suggest hypotheses that can be tested with data collected non-interventively and analysed in causal model analyses–and vice versa. What is more, because one reason for studying parent effects is so that we can offer guidance to parents about rearing their children, this design has a particular advantage; it is both the medium and the message.     

The role of the feedforward paradigm in cognitive psychology

Feedforward control is a process adjusting behaviour in a continuative way. Feedforward takes place when an equilibrium state is disrupted and the system has to automatically retrieve the homeostatic stable state. It also occurs when a perturbation is previewed and must be eliminated in order to achieve a desired goal. According to the most general definition, a feedforward process operates by fixing the future representation of the desired state, the achieving of which stops the process. Then, feedforward works by means of the refinement determined by successive comparisons between the actual and target products. In its applications, a feedforward process is thought to be modulated by the subject’s purpose and the environmental state. Over the years, the feedforward process has assumed different connotations in several contests of cognitive psychology. An overview of the research fields in psychology that significantly progressed with the introduction of a feedforward paradigm is provided by: (a) reviewing models in which the feedforward concept plays a fundamental role in the system control; (b) examining critical experiments related to the interaction of feedforward and feedback processes; (c) evidencing practical applications for some of the presented feedforward-based architectures.     

Cybernetico-epistobabble,the emperor's new clothes and other sacred cows*

In this paper, I make no pretence at offering a learned argument or scholarly debate. There will be little logic and less reason. There will be no deep philosophical theorizing and certainly no sound solutions. Rather, I challenge some established wisdoms or perhaps duel with windmills.     

Evolutionary psychology: its programs, prospects, and pitfalls

The emerging specialty of evolutionary psychology presents a challenge to mainstream psychology. It proposes that cognitive, notjust more fundamental, traits in humans are grounded in dedicated evolutionary programs. Specifically, it maintains that the common assumption in psychology-that the complexities of our psyches have been largely freed from evolutionary constraints and are instead based in a general learning capacity-is mistaken. The major premises of evolutionary psychology are examined in light of arguments and evidence presented by both supporters and detractors. Although some of these premises are well grounded, others are questionable and limit the development of the specialty and its integration into mainstream psychology.     

Evolutionary biology and personality psychology: Implications of genetic variability

Biological considerations raise an important set of issues for psychology: what behavioral attributes of the species are genetically based, what are the mechanisms by which genetic influences affect behavior, what are the evolutionary antecedents of genetically-based attributes, and what are their consequences? This article examines a subset of these issues by exploring some potential consequences of extant genetic variability for personality functioning, social interaction and the current genetic evolution of our species. Behavior genetics provides a methodology for discovering genetically-influenced behavioral variation. Five disparate areas (socialization, personality development, personality assessment, interactionism and assortative mating) are examined in which findings from behavior genetics can guide research and theory in personality psychology. Relationships between organismic and social parameters are emphasized. The final section combines these five areas by placing them within the broader context of theory-building in psychology.