Perspectives of Tolman, Watson and Skinner

Perspectives of Tolman, Watson and Skinner

     Behaviorism is the study of human behavior (Psychology History, 1999). This psychological perspective suggests that the focus of study and research should be the observable and measurable behavior. The issues in this form of psychology are the environment, the conscious, observable behavior, determinism (behavior is produced by factors outside of one’s control), and individual differences/universal principles (McGraw - Hill, 2011). Edward Tolman, John B. Watson, and B.F. Skinner were three of the earliest to study behaviorism. While Watson and Skinner focused broadly on behaviorism, Tolman studied cognitive behaviorism. This paper will explain the perspectives of each psychologist as well as how they are similar and different.

Perspective of Edward Tolman

     Edward Tolman identified himself as a behaviorist; today he is considered a cognitive behaviorist (Psychology History, 1998). He played a major role in cognitive psychology during a time that behaviorism was dominant. His earlier influences were James, Watson, Freud, Holt and the Gestalt theorists; although he later rejected Watsonian behaviorism. Tolman developed purposive behaviorism. Through his system of psychology, he attempted to study the entire action of the entire organism (Britannica Encyclopedias, 2012). Tolman was original in his methods. This was proven in the way he designed his experiments (Wendt, 1960). Tolman is credited with the Cognitive Theory of Learning. He believed learning was developed from knowledge and cognitions about the environment and how the subject reacted to it. He also believed that learning was not conditioned. Tolman also developed theories concerning behavior and motivation. He believed that a motive was the driving force behind behavior and the behavior continued until the internal motive was satisfied (Psychology History, 1998).

Perspective of John B. Watson

    John B. Watson was the first American psychologist to publicize the behavioral approach in psychology. He believed that first one must observe behavior, make predictions and finally determine casual relationships. He viewed psychology as objective and experimental. In Watson’s behaviorism, behavior was the relationship between the stimuli and the subject’s response to it. Watson believed that psychology was not a true natural science (Watson, 1994). The main focus of Watsonian behaviorism, which was dominant in the 1920’s and 1930’s, was the study and modification of the subject’s environment. He believed it was possible to obtain any desired behavior by controlling one’s environment. Watson was a leading researcher in classical conditioning, the type of learning where a neutral stimulus comes to elicit a response after being paired with a stimulus that naturally brought that response (McGraw - Hill, 2011). One of his popular experiments was “Little Albert” where he paired a white rat (neutral stimulus) with a loud noise (unconditioned stimulus) to elicit a frightened response (unconditioned and conditioned response).    

Perspective of B.F. Skinner

     B.F. Skinner was a behaviorist, although his early interest was philosophy. He was interested in defining how behavior varied when the environment was altered. He used operant conditioning, using punishments and reinforcements, to conduct his research. Skinner also believed that one’s personality was a collection of learned behaviors (McGraw - Hill, 2011). He was not interested in psychological theories, rational equations, or other verbal systems that are required to be proven (Psychology History, 1999). Although many behaviorists do not see themselves the same as their subjects, this was not the case for Skinner.

Comparison and Contrast

     While Tolman, Watson and Skinner had different ideology, their theories were similar in some ways. All three were considered behaviorists although Tolman later became known as a cognitive behaviorist. All three’s research focused on the environment’s influence on behavior. However, the similarities on behaviorism ended there. Tolman believed that behavior could not be conditioned whereas Watson and Skinner believed it could. Their belief was shown by their work with classical conditioning and operant conditioning. Tolman’s main belief was that a person’s motivation was the reason for his or her behavior. Both Tolman and Watson had the outlook that psychology was not an exact science. Tolman believed that psychology was ever - changing (Psychology History, 1998). Watson believed that psychology was not an undisputed natural science and was experimental (Watson, 1994).  These three psychologists are evidence that while one may subscribe to the same psychological perspective; his or her individual perspective may differ.

Conclusion

     Tolman, Watson and Skinner were three leading psychologists in behaviorism. Though each was considered a behaviorist, their views on behavior differed. All three focused on how the environment influenced behavior; however they each arrived at their theory differently. While two believed behavior could be conditioned, one did not. Tolman, Watson, and Skinner each pioneered in behaviorism, creating theories that could be used and tested in modern psychology.
References

Britannica Encyclopedias. (2012). Tolman, Edward C.. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/598668/Edward-C-Tolman

McGraw - Hill (2011). Psychsmart. New York, NY: Author.

Psychology History. (1998). Edward C. Tolman. Retrieved from http://www.muskingum.edu/~psych/psychweb/history/tolman.htm

Psychology History. (1999). Burrhus Frederick Skinner. Retrieved from http://www.muskingum.edu/~psych/psychweb/history/skinner.htm

Psychology History. (1999). John B. Watson. Retrieved from http://www.muskingum.edu/~psych/psychweb/history/watson.htm

Watson, J. B. (1994). Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It. Psychological Review, 101(2), 248-253. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.101.2.248

Wendt, R. A. (1960). Edward Chace Tolman: 1886 - 1959. The Canadian Psychologist, 1(1), 21. doi:10.1037/h0083317

Plagiarism:

Using someone else's work without giving proper credit, is plagiarism. If you use my work, please reference it. 

Women in Psychology: Karen Horney

Women in Psychology: Karen Horney

     The work of Karen Horney is relevant to the twenty-first century problems of the psychoanalyst (Smith, 2007). Karen Horney contributed several notable advancements to the field of psychology, particularly psychoanalysis. Karen Horney was instrumental in the field of feminine psychology and is considered the first feminist psychologist by some. Karen Horney was passionate about her beliefs in psychoanalysis and was considered to be outspoken on her beliefs. According to O’Connell (1980), she also holds “the distinction of being the only woman whose theory is detailed in personality textbooks” (p 81). Karen Horney was a woman who filled many roles throughout her life: daughter, wife, mother, student, doctor, psychoanalyst, teacher, editor, and writer, among others.

Family, Education and Early Career

     Karen was the second – born child to a Norwegian Sea captain and a Dutch – German intellectual woman. According to O’Connell (1980), Karen based her personality theory on her childhood experiences. Karen was a very intelligent child. Her father did not support her education; however her mother encouraged her (O'Connell, 1980). At an early age, Karen decided to study medicine. Karen began her study of medicine at the University of Freiburg. In 1908, Karen was the only woman to pass the preclinical examination; six men also passed.

    Karen married while at Freiburg. However, her education was important to her so she continued studying while balancing a family (O'Connell, 1980). After the birth of her first child, Karen took her state medical examination. Karen studied at three universities – Freiburg, Gottingen, and Berlin – graduating from the latter. Karen continued to achieve her dreams of higher education despite her husband’s lack of support. She obtained her medical degree in 1915, the same year her third child was born.

Karen gained experience in several clinics and with several professionals. She worked at the Berlin – Lankwitz Sanitarium, in a neurological institute, and in a military neuropsychiatric hospital. She worked in the Berlin Psychoanalytic Society under Karl Abraham. 

Interest in Psychoanalysis

            While many students become conflicted with which theoretical perspective he or she will subscribe to, this was not the case with Karen. According to her daughter, Karen knew early in her studies that she would study psychoanalysis (Smith, 2007). When Sigmund Freud developed his psychoanalytical theory, it was his belief that one’s behavior was a result of the unconscious. Karen, on the other hand, rejected this belief. Instead, she suggested that one’s social relationships, particularly the parent/child relationship, was the driving force behind behavior (McGraw Hill, 2011). Karen believed very strongly that one’s culture and relationships determined behavior and personality. She believed that family was the most important component in one’s environment, followed by peers and society. Freud also introduced the idea that women experienced penis envy, or the unconscious desire to be a man. Karen also rejected this idea. Instead, she suggested that men experienced womb envy, or the envy of a woman’s primary role in creating and sustaining life including pregnancy, nursing and motherhood (Horney, 2011). Karen became known as a neo – Freudian psychoanalyst. She was trained in traditional Freudian theory by Karl Abraham. She agreed with the Freudian theory that the past is always found within the present. She rejected Freud’s concept of oedipal complex. Many of her ideas led to a new approach to psychoanalytic theory.

 Contributions of Karen Horney

Karen Horney as a Psychoanalyst

            Karen’s work as a psychoanalyst is usually divided into two phases. The first phase was her early career in Germany as discussed earlier. The second phase begins when she begins working in America. Karen came to the Chicago Institute of Psychoanalysis to be the associate director (Horney, 2011). After two years, she left Chicago to work in New York City. In New York City, she opened a private practice as well as taught at the new School for Social Research. She also worked at the New York Psychoanalytic Institute. Karen did not adhere to the normal Freudian theories and her refusal to caused problems in the psychoanalysis world. Her outspoken neo – Freudian beliefs caused her to lose her position at the New York Psychoanalytic Institute (Horney, 2011). However, she did not let this stop her. Later during the same year she helped to found the Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis as well as the teaching center, the American Institute for Psychoanalysis. She served as Dean of the institute until her death. Karen was also a founder and the editor of the American Journal of Psychoanalysis.

Karen Horney developed a Theory of Neurosis. Within this theory, Karen believed that each person had a central driving force. This driving force was common to all people, yet it was also unique to each person (Smith, 2007). She called this the “real self”. Horney believed that there were three versions of the self: real, ideal and actual. The real self represents the possibilities existing within a person. The ideal self represents the response to anxiety within a problematic environment. The actual self represents the strengths and weaknesses of each person. This is the Conception of Self.

Karen Horney and Psychotherapy

     As a psychotherapist, Karen put emphasis on self – growth and realization (Smith, 2007). While psychotherapists before Karen had developed a system that was successful, Karen wanted to improve upon it. Whereas psychotherapists before her emphasized human relationships, she wanted to add the improvement of relations with one’s self to psychotherapy. In her system of psychotherapy, the patient’s motivation is a crucial variable. Karen sought to help the patients identify the source of his or her anxiety. She also described the therapist’s role as observation, understanding, interpretation and help with resistances (Smith, 2007). Karen based her psychotherapy on her understanding of the cultural and interpersonal affect on the neurosis.  

Karen Horney and Feminine Psychology

            While working as a psychoanalyst, Karen’s interest grew in female psychology. Karen said, “Like all sciences and valuations, the psychology of women has hitherto been considered only from the point of view of men” (Horney, 1967, p 56). Karen objected to the development of female psychology based upon a male’s psychology. Karen believed that society’s view of the ideals a woman should have contributed to many females with problems. Up until this point, psychology had been developed by men. It was men who tried to understand the female psyche and basing their conclusions the same as they had for men. Karen desired to change this perception. She desired to have women seen as different yet equal to men. She concluded that the “penis envy” women felt was nothing more than being envious of men’s success and status in society (McGraw Hill, 2011). Much of Karen’s research and writing in the subject of feminine psychology is still prevalent today.  

Karen Horney as a Writer

            Karen Horney was a “prolific” writer and wrote about many of her theories (O'Connell, 1980). Some saw her books as controversial, but only because they went against present – day Freudian theory. In 1937, she wrote The Neurotic Personality of our Time and in 1939, New Ways in Psychoanalysis. Both of these writings stated her beliefs about environmental and social conditions determining individual personality. In 1945, she wrote Our Inner Conflicts and in 1950, she wrote Neurosis and Human Growth. These writings stated that one’s neuroses were caused by disturbances in his or her interpersonal relationships. In 1967, fifteen years after her death, Feminine Psychology was published. This writing was her papers written over a fourteen year period about the psychosexual development of the female. Karen used her own personal conflicts as a focus for her work (O'Connell, 1980). After her marriage ended, she published six papers on marital problems in a five year span. When her children were adolescents, she wrote papers on conflicts of raising teenagers. 

Conclusion

     Karen Horney was a pioneer in feminist psychology as well as in new psychoanalytic theory. She is “unique and unparalleled in personality theory” (O'Connell, 1980, p 91). Karen made an impact on those she helped. In 1952, her friends and former patients suggested opening a clinic in her honor. The Karen Horney Clinic in New York City was opened in 1955, almost two years after her death. This clinic currently serves as a low – cost clinic as well as a research and training center. Karen Horney received no support from the men in her life to accomplish her education. However, despite the lack of support, she worked hard to become a doctor and a psychoanalyst. She broke from common Freudian theory and formed theories and ideas that led to the advancement of psychoanalysis. Karen Horney is a true mother of psychology and leaves behind a legacy.

References

Horney, K. (1967). Feminine Psychology. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc..

Horney, K. (2011). Britannica Biographies. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/272054/Karen-Horney

McGraw Hill (2011). Psychsmart. New York, NY: Author.

O'Connell, A. N. (1980). Karen Horney: Theorist in Psychoanalysis and Feminine Psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5(1), 81-93.

Smith, W. B. (2007). Karen Horney and Psychotherapy in the 21st Century. Clinical Social Work Journal, 35(1), 57-66. doi:10.1007/s10615-006-0060-6

Plagiarism:

Using someone else's work without giving proper credit, is plagiarism. If you use my work, please reference it. 

History of Psychology

History of Psychology

     Hermann Ebbinghaus once said, “Psychology has a long past, yet its real history is short” (Goodwin, 2008, p 28). Ebbinghaus was referring to the fact that the questions in psychology have been around as long as humans. Philosophers have been studying these questions just as long. Rene Descartes, John Locke, George Berkley, David Hume, David Hartley, and John Stuart Mill were early philosophers that attempted to study these questions of basic human nature. Philosophers were the earliest scientists that formed the discipline of psychology. Later in the nineteenth century, scientists such as Francois Magendie, Hermann von Helmholtz, Franz Josef Gall and Pierre Flourens furthered psychology as science with their research on the brain and its functions. 

Early Philosophers and the Beginnings of Psychology

     Rene Descartes was a scientist and philosopher and considered the father of modern psychology. Descartes was a realist and believed that the way to truth was through human reasoning (Goodwin, 2008). In 1637, Descartes wrote Discourse on Method, which explained his four basic rules to learn the truth of some things. Descartes was the best known dualist. In being a dualist, he believed that the mind and body were completely separate. He believed that the body was a “machine” and was combined with a mind that could reason. Descartes was also regarded as a machinist, meaning that he believed the body does operate as a complex machine (Goodwin, 2008). Descartes was considered an interactionist. Descartes believed that the mind can has an influence on the body and the body can have an influence on the mind.  Descartes created a model of nervous system activity in an effort to explain the interaction between mind and body (Goodwin, 2008). Descartes was also the first person to explain the reflex as a mind – body interaction. Descartes contributed many views to the early formation of psychology.

    John Locke was important to psychology because of concepts he expressed in two books. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding explained how humans learn and understand. Some Thoughts Concerning Education explains how this thinking can be applied to teaching a child. Locke was a pioneer for epistemology, or the study of human knowledge and how it’s acquired. Locke rejected the belief of innate ideas and instead believed that our knowledge came from our experiences in the world. Locke was a major pioneer in the field of education by using the concepts he learned about thinking and knowledge.

George Berkley rejected Locke’s ideas. Instead, Berkley believed in subjective idealism. Subjective idealism contends that minds and mental contents exist. Subjective idealism rejects the theories of both dualism and materialism. Where materialism states that physical things exist, subjective idealism states that physical things do not exist; only mental.  Berkley was a pioneer of the analysis of visual perception.

Major Philosophers' Contributions to Psychology

      David Hume believed that we can never be certain what causes an event, only that certain events occur together on a regular basis (Goodwin, 2008). Hume did not deny the existence of reality; he just believed one could not be certain of them. Hume tried to discover the mind’s basic elements. He concluded there were two basic elements: impressions and ideas. Impressions are the basic sensations one has. These sensations are raw data from experience (Goodwin, 2008). Ideas are not as vivid as sensations and are just faint copies of our impressions. Hume believed that one’s understanding is based upon his or her experiences. Hume also developed the rules of association: resemblance, contiguity and cause/effect.

David Hartley was a contemporary of Hume; however, was not influenced by Hume (Goodwin, 2008). Hartley proclaimed himself as a dualist, even by including “Man consists of two parts, body and mind” (Hartley, 1749, p. i) in the opening of his book. Hartley took the psychophysical parallelism approach to the mind – body issue. This meant that he believed that psychological and physical events were separate but often were in parallel to one another. Hartley was considered the founder of associationism. He theorized that association was contiguity and repetition (Goodwin, 2008). Hartley also developed a model of nervous system action. His model was based upon the Newtonian concept of vibrations.

John Stuart Mill strayed away from the previous view of the mechanical mind. Instead he saw the mind as more holistic. Mill viewed complex ideas as greater than their individual simple ideas (Goodwin, 2008). Mill was on the nurture side of the long standing nature – nurture debate. In 1842, Mill argued for psychology to be named as one of the known sciences (Cahan & White, 1992). Because of Mill’s argument, the final list included psychology.

 Nineteenth Century Developments in the Science of Psychology

      In the nineteenth century, scientific psychology evolved. Included in this evolvement were the philosophical questions of earlier researchers and research on the nervous system. Francois Magendie was famous for his research on the roots of the spinal cord. Through experiments, he concluded that the posterior roots controlled a being’s sensation and the anterior roots controlled the motor responses. This revelation furthered the study of the reflex. Hermann von Helmholtz was eulogized as being the builder of the “bridge between physiology and psychology…” (Goodwin, 2008, p 69). Helmholtz was the authority on visual and auditory systems during the nineteenth century. Franz Josef Gall was credited with developing the contralateral function. This function means that each side of the brain controls the opposite side of the body. Gall was also the founder of phrenology, which was rejected by the scientific community and labeled as a pseudoscience until the middle of the nineteenth century. Gall was the first to argue that the brain contained both the intellectual and emotional components of a person’s mind. Pierre Flourens set out to disprove phrenology. He used a procedure called ablation to conduct his experiments. Flourens discovered the relationship between the cerebral cortex and bodily function.

Conclusion

     Psychology can trace its roots back to early philosophy. Through research and experiments, philosophers and scientists advanced what many believed to be an act of paranormal to an official science. These philosophers related how a person comes to think by using their brains. The scientists showed how the brain works and functions to produce these thoughts. Together, these early pioneers of science created what is known as modern day psychology.

 
References

Cahan, E. D., & White, S. H. (1992). Proposals for a Second Psychology. American Psychologist, 47(2), 224-335. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.47.2.224

Goodwin, C. J. (2008). A History of Modern Psychology (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Hartley, D. (1749). Observations on man, his frame, his duty, and his expectations (Vol. I). New York, NY: Garland.

Plagiarism:

Using someone else's work without giving proper credit, is plagiarism. If you use my work, please reference it.