Field Theory

F 730 Field Theory References Keywords Gerrig, R. J. (1993). Experiencing narrative worlds: On Field; psychical field; psychological field; the psychological activities of reading . New Haven, life space; topology; topological and vector CT: Yale University Press. Kalderon, M. E. (Ed.). (2005). Fictionalism in metaphys- psychology; ecology; environment ics. Oxford, UK: Clarendon. Moghaddam, F. M. (2004). From ‘psychology in literature to ‘psychology is literature’: An exploration of Traditional Debates boundaries and relationships. Theory & Psychology, 14, 505–525. doi:10.1177/0959354304044922. Palmer, A. (2004). Fictional minds. Lincoln, NB: Univer- Field theory can hardly be understood outside sity of Nebraska Press. holistic movement in German psychology of the Ryan, M. (1997). Postmodernism and the doctrine of first half of the twentieth century, more specifi- panfictionality. Narrative, 5, 165–187. Smythe, W. E. (2005). On the psychology of ‘as if’. cally, Gestalt psychology that proliferated mainly Theory & Psychology, 15, 283–303. doi:10.1177/ in the universities of Frankfurt, Berlin, and 0959354305053215. Giessen. Originally it was created as an alterna- Mimesis as make-believe Walton, K. L. (1990). tive to atomistic, associationist psychology that Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Zunshine, L. (2006). Why we read fiction: Theory of mind advocated for the study of elements and elemen- and the novel. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University tary functions of psyche and behavior. This view Press. is generally supported by the mainstream psychology of our days. In contrast, Gestalt psychologists proposed research that would focus on the study of the wholes, rather than atoms and elements, and considered human being as an Field Theory organism, as indivisible biosocial unity, rather than a mechanism that can be reduced to a sum Anton Yasnitsky of its components, functions, and processes. At Independent Researcher, Toronto, ON, Canada the same time, the Gestaltist holists opposed the holism of scholars who postulated the prime principles of life (the vitalists) or the spirit (the Introduction spiritualists) that ultimately limit our abilities of empirical investigation of human psychology. Field theory in psychology belongs to a wide Yet another opposition was between Gestaltism range of holistic theories that were created and and North American behaviorism that shared proliferated in the early twentieth century and many views and equally opposed atomism, vital- interwar continental psychology and were trans- ism, and spiritualism in psychology, but radically ferred from Europe to mostly North America diverged in their attitude toward consciousness after the Nazi ascent to power in the 1930s. as an object of psychological research. Unlike behaviorists, who generally rejected the idea of investigating consciousness, the Gestaltists considered consciousness as one of the most Definition essential objects of study in psychology. Thus, in certain sense the revolutionary contribu- “Field theory” in its contemporary use in tion of Gestalt psychologists can be regarded as psychology is an umbrella term for a number of one of the first manifestations of critical psychol- psychological theories that generally acknowl- ogy – before critical psychology. edge their origin in Kurt Lewin’s (1890–1947) Initially, at the earliest stage of its develop- scientific legacy. ment, this school of thought was solidly grounded Field Theory 731 F in research on perception of structured wholes as scientific discipline, Lewin employed various (Gestalten), but pretty soon outgrew the narrow idiosyncratic formalisms and extensively used confines of psychology of visual perception and conceptual apparatus and the means of analysis expanded to such diverse domains as problem- that he borrowed from mathematics, more specif- solving and thinking, animal, comparative, and ically, geometrical topology. In order to discuss child psychology, and the methodological issues human behavior as inseparable from the persons’ of psychological research. The notion of “field” “psychological field,” Lewin operated such first occurs as early as in the earliest publications notions as “space,” “topology,” “barriers,” of the research on visual perception conducted by “forces,” “vectors,” and “valence” (positive or the proponents and the leaders of Gestalt theory negative). In order to illustrate and, even more in the sense of “perceptual” or “visual field” (see, importantly, analyze human behavior in context, e.g., Wertheimer & Spillmann, 2012) and was Lewin extensively used characteristic means of F quite likely borrowed from contemporary fash- visualization in the form of funny-looking ovals ionable theories in physics via personal contacts, reminding “eggs” (for psychological life space of collaboration, and even friendship between an individual) with objects inside or outside of German psychologists-Gestaltists and prominent them, divided into subsections and marked with physicists (e.g., Wolfgang Kohler€ and Max signs of plus or minus and arrows of varying Planck, and, on the other hand, Max Wertheimer lengths (for denoting the objects’ attractiveness and Albert Einstein). However, it was Kurt Lewin and the force of this attraction). These visualiza- who extended the use of the word “field” to the tions of “psychological fields” in certain sense entire “psychical,” or “psychological field,” constitute a “trade mark” of Lewinian psychol- made it the object of his studies on will, emotions, ogy. All these theoretical notions and graphical and actions that his students in Berlin Institute of models were intended for explaining human Psychology conducted under his supervision in behavior, desires, and the laws of attraction 1920s–early 1930s (De Rivera, 1976) and raised (or repulsion), available opportunities it to the status of one of the central notions of his (“affordances”) and tensions between these theoretical framework (Lewin, 1935, 1936). sometimes conflicting opportunities and resulting Lewin never invested all his intellectual effort psychological states of joy, satisfaction, anxiety, into promoting just one single brand in science, anger, frustration, and the like that individuals and “field theory” is not an exception to this rule. experience in the course of acting in their psy- In addition, the fact is that no single book of chological environments, or “fields.” Lewin came out with the phrase “field theory” After Lewin’s emigration to the United States on its cover during his lifetime: the first mention in 1933, this line of research was continued, and of “field theory” as Lewin book’s title appeared formal theoretical generalizations were formu- only in 1951 when a posthumous collection of lated in several books (Lewin, 1935, 1936, Lewin’s works was published under the editor- 1938). At the same time, however, in accordance ship of his former postdoctoral student Dorwin with the “affordances” of his own psychological Cartwright (Lewin, 1951). However, more or less field, Lewin’s activities in North America nota- same or similar notions occur in Lewin’s texts bly shifted toward applied research on autocracy under various names such as “psychological and democracy, psychology of groups, field,” “psychological environment,” “psycho- and “group dynamics,” minority issues (most logical world,” “life space,” “psychological ecol- notably, social issues of Jewish life and ogy,” and “total situation.” On the other hand, the survival in Europe and America), practice rich repertoire of field-related terminology can be of training, and, more generally, social psychol- found in the works of other Gestalt theorists (see, ogy. This tread of theoretical and applied e.g., Koffka, 1935). Sharing his colleagues’ fas- research is now known as “action research,” the cination with physics as a model for psychology term that Lewin coined and introduced in the first F 732 Field Theory half of 1940s. A number of Lewin’s published North American period of Lewin’s work that articles of his American period of late 1930s and often, on the other hand, is mostly understood in 1940s came out in two posthumous collections of terms of Kurt Lewin’s research on actions, his works under the editorship of his students and affects, and will in the Berlin group of his stu- collaborators (Lewin, 1948, 1951). dents and associates (see De Rivera, 1976). Second, it is often ignored that Lewin’s theory is not only a strictly social science but also Critical Debates a personality theory and its applications in clini- cal and pathological psychology are of consider- All in all, it can be said that Lewin’s field theory able promise as is evidenced in the career paths in all its richness and promise to psychological and scientific contributions of a number of theory was either forgotten or dramatically sim- Lewin’s former students such as Tamara plified and fell victim to the neglect of the general Dembo, Maria Rickers-Ovsiankina, Bluma psychological theory in positivistic North Amer- Zeigarnik, or Gita Birenbaum. ican psychology, “scientific Taylorism,” that is, Third, what is largely missed in a wide range overspecialization and utter fragmentation of of interpretations of Gestalt psychology and, by knowledge in contemporary psychological sci- extension, Lewin’s “field theory” is the Gestalt ence, and, partially, to the tensions between theory’s original emphasis on meaning and con- some of the leaders of the Gestalt movement sciousness as most fundamental ideas of this who started diverging in their views on psychol- intellectual

Load more