DOCSLIB.ORG

From the Standard Theory of Stages to Piaget's New Theory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From the Standard Theory of Stages to Piaget's New Theory CONSTRUCTIVE HISTORY From the standard theory of stages to Piaget’s new theory JEREMY TREVELYAN BURMAN, HON.B.SC, MA A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY GRADUATE PROGRAM IN PSYCHOLOGY YORK UNIVERSITY TORONTO, ONTARIO AUGUST 2016 © Jeremy T. Burman, 2016 ii Abstract This project demonstrates how Historians of Psychology can contribute to the future of Psychology from within the Department of Psychology (rather than from departments of History, the History and Philosophy of Science, or Science and Technology Studies). To do this, I focus on the claim that Jean Piaget’s last works constitute a “new theory,” while also showing how this labelling was appropriate. This is discussed briefly in the introduction. The first chapter is also quite simple: it follows the turn toward “locality,” and uses autobiography to show why a psychologist might want to pursue advanced training in history. This approach is then reflected in the second chapter, where Piaget’s autobiography is used to situate what followed in his own studies. The third chapter reflects this at an again-higher level, comparing an American history of Piaget’s biography with a Genevan history (but augmented with new archival research). In addition to revealing new details about his life, this also highlights a difference in historiographical sensibilities at work in shaping the discipline. The fourth chapter then shows that this generalizes. It reviews the most famous case of an instance where a series of texts were “indigenized” during their importation into American Psychology (viz. Titchener’s importation of Wundt). To confirm that the same thing occurred with Piaget, I introduce a new technique inspired by the Digital Humanities. In short: I show in quantitative terms acceptable to Psychologists what Historians would be more inclined accept from a study of primary sources. Two examples of this more-traditional kind of history are then presented. In chapter five, I consider a change in Piaget’s appeals to a formalism associated with Kurt Gödel. In chapter six, I look at how this change informed iii Piaget’s return to biology (and his subsequent updating of the Baldwin Effect). And the conclusion re-examines the original claim in light of everything else discussed. The ultimate result, though, is not only a new way to consider Piaget’s standard theory of stages. I also present a new way to understand his broader view of the development of knowledge. This also in turn informs a new way of doing history, presented in the Appendix. iv Dedicated to my wife LAURA to my sister JACQUIE to my nephew GREGORY and to my parents MARGOT & TONY who have each, in their own way, helped me more than they know v Acknowledgements A reflection. That’s what this is; of all those who have helped or influenced me. And I don’t just mean this section. The entire project reflects different interactions with different people on different topics, in different places, and at different times. Indeed, they have shaped the results that you now hold. Granted, the beginnings of the project are discussed in more detail in Chapter I. But that’s just because it was necessary there to walk readers through my own journey from Psychology to History—in case they hadn’t yet taken that journey themselves. Here, though, I can be more personal. The work that informed this dissertation was conducted with a cohort of graduate students at York University in Toronto. First inspired by interactions with Cathy Faye, Jason Goertzen, Kate Harper, and Paula Miceli. Then in collaboration with Laura Ball, Ryan Barnhart, Marissa Barnes, Jenn Bazar, Elissa Rodkey, Kelli Vaughn, and Jacy Young. And then later with Arlie Belliveau and Eric Oosenbrug, along with my teaching assistants Ben Zabinski and Dan Lahham. They all played a role in the development of these ideas (or related thinking upon which subsequent work was based). Sometimes they also served as foils, but all were always supportive. And I am grateful to each of them, separately and together. (Our Historiography Breakfast meetings were especially valuable.) Of course, it was the professors who often set the agenda that we explored. I will talk in some depth about two earliest influences—Jordan Peterson and Jan Sapp—in Chapter I. But the explorations that informed this project, after they had made their mark, were guided primarily by my doctoral advisor: Christopher Green. vi Chris makes fun of me sometimes for “wooing” him when I was still a master’s student in another department. But I’m very glad I did it. The resulting apprenticeship was extremely gratifying: we created a blog that attracted hundreds of thousands of readers (Advances in the History of Psychology), we explored—and helped to construct— a new field of inquiry (the digital history of psychology), and we created a laboratory that has now published more than a dozen articles (the PsyBorgs Lab). Chris deserves a big thank you for supporting my journeys to all of the places I thought looked interesting or relevant, both intellectual and geographical. And so too do my other committee members: Thomas Teo and Fred Weizmann, who himself also provides some continuity from my MA in Interdisciplinary Studies. I am grateful for that continuity too, especially since this project both extends and transcends that earlier work. The other full-time faculty in the History and Theory Area in the Department of Psychology, along with Chris and Thomas, are also due both credit and thanks: Mike Pettit and Alex Rutherford. Together, they provided the context in which I developed. (Mike also served as Dean’s Rep for my MA, and then chaired my dissertation defence.) Of course, several other faculty from friendly areas and departments contributed to my formation outside of the regular coursework: David Jopling, Martin Fichman, Bernie Lightman, Juan Pascual-Leone, and David Reid, as well as Anton Yasnitsky and Marga Vicedo from the University of Toronto. But two in particular must be marked out for special thanks. I served as Stuart Shanker’s teaching assistant for five years, and he taught me a great many things. Key among them is the absolutely critical importance of making all vii research relevant. These lessons came primarily through my service in various capacities at his research institute: first as research assistant for three years, then as associate director for one year (during which time I helped him to create the Canadian Self- Regulation Initiative), and ultimately as research director for a final year. I learned a tremendous amount. And furthermore, from another perspective, he paid for a lot of what follows. I will be forever grateful. An opportunity arose, at the end of the project, for me to take up a position in Geneva as an assistant to Marc Ratcliff in the Piaget Archives. This followed an invitation to speak at the FAPSE Centennial in 2012, as well as a ThinkSwiss Research Scholarship from the Swiss Embassy in 2014. And I was delighted to join his team. Marc is a rare scholar: he is fluent in a half-dozen languages, has PhDs in both developmental psychology (with Montangero at Geneva) and the history of science (with Bynum at UCL), and is a genuinely caring and supportive person who is interested only in doing good and interesting work with good and interesting people. He has built a fabulous team, and am grateful for their support. (I am especially thankful to Ariane Noël, and also Nathalie Delli-Gatti, whose support and friendship made my life in Geneva possible.) I am looking forward to working with this team for many years. And I am also glad to call Marc a friend. There is also a wider circle of friends of colleagues without whom this project would have been much more difficult. Most notably, however, are those at the Jean Piaget Society (which is not fan club, but is rather “the society for the study of viii knowledge and development”). JPS is my home-conference. This is partly for the subjects discussed at its meetings, and its audience of interested participants. But its stalwart members are the main reason. Chris Lalonde, Ashley Maynard, and Eric Amsel have become good friends. But I am also glad for such supportive and generous colleagues such as Mark Bickhard, Tom Bidell, Jan Boom, Nancy Budwig, Robert Campbell, Jeremy Carpendale, Brian Cox, Colette Daiute, Ayelet Lahat, Cynthia Lightfoot, Ulrich Mueller, Larry Nucci, Bill Overton, Pete Pufall, Geoffrey Saxe, Elliot Turiel, Abel Hernandez-Ulloa, and Phil Zelazo. And, of course, I must also thank and recognize Michael Chandler and Jeanette McCarthy-Gallagher as extraordinary mentors. My work has been supported over the years by several sponsors, funders, and awards. It is my privilege now to recognize them, and thank them. I was recruited into the doctoral program in Psychology in part through a York Graduate Award in 2007, although I had not yet completed my MA. This was followed by two awards from the Jean Piaget Society: the Pufall Award in 2009 and the International Emerging Scholars Award in 2010. (The latter was provided formally by the Jacobs Foundation.) In 2011- 2012, I was supported by an Ontario Graduate Scholarship. In 2012, I was honoured to be named a finalist for the Anne Anastasi Graduate Student Research Award by Division 1 of the American Psychological Association. In 2013, I received the Ambassador Gary J. Smith Award for research with an international focus. And in 2013-2014, I was supported by the Norman S. Endler Research Fellowship and the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Fellowship. Additional financial support was provided by the Science Directorate of the ix American Psychological Association, Cheiron: The International Society for the History of Behavioral & Social Sciences, the Présidence-Psy of the Faculté de Psychologie et des Sciences de l'Éducation at the University of Geneva, and the Fonds national suisse de la recherche scientifique (grant n° 100011-146145, to Marc Ratcliff).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Career Highlights
    VOL. 51, No. 4 JULY, 1944 THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW JAMES McKEEN CATTELL 1860-1944 In the history of American psychology both of these men. A paper on Lotze very few figures are so outstanding as won for Cattell a fellowship in philoso- that of James McKeen Cattell whose phy at Johns Hopkins, where he spent long and active life has just come to a the year of 1882-83, with John Dewey close. He did not, indeed, belong to the and Joseph Jastrow as fellow students. first generation of American scientific It was during this year that Stanley psychologists—consisting mainly of Wil- Hall set up his psychological laboratory liam James, G. Stanley Hall and George at Johns Hopkins, with some assistance Trumbull Ladd—but he was probably from this group of students, and it was the most influential of the second gen- there, apparently, that Cattell began his eration which included Titchener, Miins- "psychometric investigations," concerned terberg, James Mark Baldwin, Jastrow, with the timing of various mental proc- Sanford, and Scripture, with others com- esses. He took his data and his designs ing along just a little later. Though for improved apparatus back to Ger- Cattell was not a systematist and did not many the following year and remained found a school in that sense, he was the in Wundt's laboratory for the three leader in what became a widespread and years, 1883-1886, being for part of this distinctive movement in American psy- time Wundt's first laboratory assistant. chology. His interest from the very out- From the outset Cattell seems to have set of his career was in introducing quan- been impressed with the variability of titative methods into psychology and human performance and the consequent especially in using such methods for the need for long series of observations in measurement of individual differences.
    [Show full text]
  • Piaget»S Genictic Epistemology; a Theoretical Critique of Ma.In Epistemic Concepts
    1, PIAGET»S GENICTIC EPISTEMOLOGY; A THEORETICAL CRITIQUE OF MA.IN EPISTEMIC CONCEPTS LESLIE SMITH A thesis submitted at the University of Leicester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. December 1981 School of Education, University of Leicester. UMI Number: U323106 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Disscrrlation Publishing UMI U323106 Published by ProQuest LLC 2015. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 -îM-esri , .7 ' 11. Recognition.I'm pleased by it, of course, but it's pretty catastrophic when I see how I'm understood. JEAN PIAGET The great man who at any time seems to be launching some new line of thought is simply the point of intersection or synthesis of ideas which have been elaborated by a continuous process of cooperation. JEAN PIAGET From the amoeba to Einstein, the growth of knowledge is always the same. KARL POPPER How difficult it isi How much more difficult psychology is than physics. ALBERT EINSTEIN 111. Foreword My own view of the work of Jean Piaget is that it embodies an exciting, novel and challenging conception of human knowledge and that his theory possesses a comprehensive breadth of vision that makes it a major intellectual achievement, I mention ray personal view at the outset, not in the expectation that it is necessarily shared by others but rather because it is my personal view, one which is not a view that others have to share to want to read further in this study.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Cite Complete Issue More Information About This Article
    Estudos e Pesquisas em Psicologia ISSN: 1676-3041 ISSN: 1808-4281 Universidade do Estado do Rio De Janeiro Ratcliff, Marc J.; Tau, Ramiro A networking model. The case of the International Center for Genetic Epistemology Estudos e Pesquisas em Psicologia, vol. 18, no. 4, 2018, pp. 1215-1238 Universidade do Estado do Rio De Janeiro Available in: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=451859498011 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System Redalyc More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America and the Caribbean, Spain and Journal's webpage in redalyc.org Portugal Project academic non-profit, developed under the open access initiative ARTIGOS A networking model. The case of the International Center for Genetic Epistemology Um modelo de rede. O caso do Centro Internacional de Epistemologia Genética Un modelo de red. El caso del Centro Internacional de Epistemología Genética Marc J. Ratcliff* University of Geneva - UNIGE, Genebra, Suíça Ramiro Tau** University of Geneva - UNIGE, Genebra, Suíça ABSTRACT The article reviews the process of conformation of the International Center for Genetic Epistemology (CIEG), which functioned at the University of Geneva between 1955 and 1986. This Center led by Jean Piaget had the collaboration of hundreds of researchers from around the world and from different disciplines. We will here review the configuration of the centripetal circuits that led to the constitution of an institution with a double centrality. On the one hand, taking into account the history of international scientific circulations, it is feasible to recognize in the CIEG a reference point from which the radial journeys of social exchanges with different scientific communities can be reconstructed.
    [Show full text]
  • Theories of Intelligence, Learning, and Motivation As a Basis for Praxis
    Theories of Intelligence, Learning, and Motivation as a Basis for Praxis Dr Eulalee Nderu-Boddington Ph.D. Education Assistant Professor at Prince Sultan University Riyadh Saudi Arabia May 26th 2008 ABSTRACT This paper examines how Piaget, Werner, and Gardner differ regarding the roles of cognition, intelligence, and learning in the developmental process. Piaget believes in the predominance of genetic factors. Werner stresses the influence of biological factors, while Gardner proposes that the environment plays a greater influence in how intelligence and learning are acquired. This paper also surveys research on achievement and learning strategies and their role in student motivation. The development of conceptual understanding is related to prior knowledge, interest, learning goals, and achievement goals. Introduction This paper focuses on the developmental theories of Werner, Gardner, and Piaget, all of whom have significantly influenced the field of education through their differing understandings of how students learn from childhood to adulthood. Most researchers agree that a combination of biology and environment affects personality and intelligence, but they differ in assigning relative importance to these two influences. Although poor nutrition, poor health care, and head injuries have been linked to poor IQ scores, for the most part environmental variables have not been found to account for a substantial portion of observed variations in human intelligence. Therefore, some psychologists believe heredity is the dominant influence on intelligence. They base their views on research that concentrates on variations among people in general cognitive ability or IQ. Others believe that such research overemphasizes the concept of IQ and gives too much credit to genetics (Azar, 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Educational Psychology: a Cultural Psychological and Semiotic View
    Educational Psychology: A Cultural Psychological and Semiotic View Howard A. Smith Faculty of Education Queen's University Kingston ON K7L3N6 Canada Email: [email protected] Paper presented at the meeting of the Australian Association for Research in Education Adelaide, December 1998 Abstract The paper supports previous writings by claiming that two psychologies, the causal and the purposive, exist based on their very different metaphors about how world events may be understood. Mechanism, the world view embracing the metaphor of the machine, seeks the lawful and generalizable results sought by causal psychology. Contextualism, the world view based on the metaphor of the historic event, seeks to understand events based on situational meanings and is the perspective adopted by purposive psychology and, by extension, semiotics. The differing types of representation and meaning, along with some research on memory, are used to illustrate the differing views and research priorities of these two perspectives. Finally, five implications of adopting a semiotic perspective in educational research and practice are outlined. Educational Psychology: A Cultural Psychological and Semiotic View It is with this end in view, the provision of a natural as opposed to an artificial theory of thinking, that we begin with the consideration of signs Ogden & Richards, 1949, p. 50 Traditional educational psychology is distinguished by its focus on the measured behaviour of group performances and on resulting generalizable findings. However, an alternative perspective exists that focuses on the ongoing meaning-making achieved by both individuals and groups within particular sociocultural settings. This alternative view, cultural psychological and semiotic in nature, is concerned with understanding phenomena and their ongoing processes instead of with establishing causal relationships among discrete products or variables.
    [Show full text]
  • JEAN PIAGET (1896–1980) Alberto Munari1
    The following text was originally published in Prospects: the quarterly review of comparative education (Paris, UNESCO: International Bureau of Education), vol. XXIV, no. 1/2, 1994, p. 311–327. ©UNESCO:International Bureau of Education, 2000 This document may be reproduced free of charge as long as acknowledgement is made of the source. JEAN PIAGET (1896–1980) Alberto Munari1 A portrait of an educator that is also a portrait of the great Swiss epistemologist and psychologist might, at first glance, seem surprising. Indeed, why should Jean Piaget be regarded as an educator?—since he never practised that profession and always refused the title of educationist, going so far as to affirm: ‘I have no views on teaching’ (Bringuier, 1977, p. 194), and since all his writings on education2 do not amount to more than a three-hundredth3 part of his œuvre as a whole. Such bafflement is altogether in order if we refer only to Piaget’s own scientific output. But it is less surprising if we remember the many books that we owe to other authors on the educational implications of Piaget’s achievement4. Indeed, for several years, we have ceased to count the number of educators and educationists in different countries who explicitly refer to Piaget’s work to justify their methods and principles. But is the interpretation always the same? Do writers invariably refer to Piagetian psychology, or do they evoke other aspects of his complex and many- sided work? To which of the very different Piagets do we owe the most important contributions: to Piaget the biologist, Piaget the epistemologist or Piaget the psychologist? or are we particularly indebted to the educational ‘politician’?—as one might call Piaget in his capacity as Director of the International Bureau of Education.
    [Show full text]
  • Developmental Psychology: Incorporating Piaget's and Vygotsky's Theories in Classrooms
    Journal of Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives in Education Vol. 1, No. 1 (May 2008) 59 - 67 Developmental Psychology: Incorporating Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s Theories in Classrooms Barbara Blake and Tambra Pope In today’s society, there is disagreement of their students’ cognitive development, which will among researchers and educators as to the role of lead to the needs of the whole child being satisfied. developmental psychology and its application in the Cognitive psychology is a branch of psychology elementary classrooms. It is widely accepted in the that focuses on studies mental processes, which educational field that children must go through the include how people think, perceive, remember, and process of learning to think and thinking to learn. learn. Its core focus is on how people acquire, Therefore, teachers, who can incorporate the process, and store information. It is advantageous theories of Piaget and Vygotsky into their teaching for teachers to understand cognitive psychology strategies, will be better able to increase student because it can help them improve their teaching and achievement. student learning. Teachers become more cognizant Developmental Psychology, the study of to how people process, learn, and remember age-related changes in behavior, examines the information, which helps them plan more effective psychological processes of development, which lessons and create positive learning environments means it describes the sequence of biological, for their students. By using appropriate cognitive, and socio-emotional changes that humans developmental instructional techniques, teachers undergo as they grow older. It describes the growth have been able to increase the test scores of children of humans, which consists of physical, emotional, in public schools (Black & Green, 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory: an Introduction
    Davidson Films Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory: An Introduction Discussion Topics with Albert Bandura, PhD 1. This video includes footage from many parts of the world and historical times, reflecting the far- reaching aspects of Bandura’s theories and books. The best online source of information about Albert Bandura’s work, and other scholars who are using his theories, is at Emory University. It is at www.des.emory.edu/mfp/efftalk.html 2. Dr. Bandura was cited as the fourth most eminent psychologist of the 20th century from a study that combined journal citations, textbook citations and a survey of 1725 members of the American Psychological Society. B.F. Skinner was at the top of the list, followed by Jean Piaget, Sigmund Freud, then Albert Bandura. Numbers five to ten were Festinger, Rogers, Schachter, Miller, Thorndike, and Maslow. Unfortunately, there was not a woman until number 58, Elizabeth Loftus. 3. The Triadic Model. Our graphic was inspired by a conversation with Professor Frank Pajares at Emory University and a PowerPoint presentation he created. All six possible directions for interactions are illustrated in this video: B to E — a mentor and younger worker in an office vignette B to P — a jogger checking his own performance E to B — a mentor and younger worker in an office vignette E to P — people being instructed and experiencing modeled behavior P to B — cuts of various people, ending with basketball players P to E — a jaywalking sequence You may want your students to create their own examples to better understand the model.
    [Show full text]
  • Psychology and Classifications of the Sciences Fernando Vidal ICREA (Catalan Institution for Research and Advanced Studies)
    Psychology and Classifications of the Sciences Fernando Vidal ICREA (Catalan Institution for Research and Advanced Studies) Translated by Jacob Krell Psychologie: piste l’homme et, close et figée, lui inflige une autopsie. — Michel Leiris, Langage tangage1 he history of psychology as an autonomous discipline is driven not only by its theoretical, methodological, and institutional developments but also by the elab­ oration of the concept of psychology itself and by theorizations of its position among Tother domains of knowledge. Classificatory schemes of the sciences have a preeminent function in such a context. They imply a reflection that exceeds the problems proper to any one discipline, and precisely because they both reflect situations of fact and embody metascientific ideals, they contribute not only to the project of identifying domains of knowledge but also to the process of defining them. This is what Francis Bacon (1561–1626) noted in theNovum Organum (1620) when he observed that “[t]he received division of the sciences [is] suitable only for the received totality of the sciences,” and that “we find in the intellectual as in the terrestrial globe cultivated tracts and wilderness side by side.” 2 1 Michel Leiris, Langage, tangage ou ce que les mots me disent (Paris: Gallimard, 1995). 2 Francis Bacon, Novum Organum, in The Instauratio Magna, Part II: Novum Organum and Associated Texts, ed. Graham Rees with Maria Wakely (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2004), 27. A good introduction to the topic of 2 republics of letters For psychology, classifications of the sciences have had a twofold significance.3 On the one hand, from the moment psychology sought to institute itself as an autonomous science, it began to conceptualize its inclusion within the general order of the sciences, and this process turned out to be one of its best modes of self­legitimation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hiring of James Mark Baldwin and James Gibson Hume at Toronto in 1889
    History of Psychology Copyright 2004 by the Educational Publishing Foundation 2004, Vol. 7, No. 2, 130–153 1093-4510/04/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/1093-4510.7.2.130 THE HIRING OF JAMES MARK BALDWIN AND JAMES GIBSON HUME AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO IN 1889 Christopher D. Green York University In 1889, George Paxton Young, the University of Toronto’s philosophy professor, passed away suddenly while in the midst of a public debate over the merits of hiring Canadians in preference to American and British applicants for faculty positions. As a result, the process of replacing Young turned into a continuation of that argument, becoming quite vociferous and involving the popular press and the Ontario gov- ernment. This article examines the intellectual, political, and personal dynamics at work in the battle over Young’s replacement and its eventual resolution. The outcome would have an impact on both the Canadian intellectual scene and the development of experimental psychology in North America. In 1889 the University of Toronto was looking to hire a new professor of philosophy. The normally straightforward process of making a university appoint- ment, however, rapidly descended into an unseemly public battle involving not just university administrators, but also the highest levels of the Ontario govern- ment, the popular press, and the population of the city at large. The debate was not pitched solely, or even primarily, at the level of intellectual issues, but became intertwined with contentious popular questions of nationalism, religion, and the proper place of science in public education. The impact of the choice ultimately made would reverberate not only through the university and through Canada’s broader educational establishment for decades to come but, because it involved James Mark Baldwin—a man in the process of becoming one of the most prominent figures in the study of the mind—it also rippled through the nascent discipline of experimental psychology, just then gathering steam in the United States of America.
    [Show full text]
  • An Examination of Introductory Psychology Textbooks in America Randall D
    Ouachita Baptist University Scholarly Commons @ Ouachita Articles Faculty Publications 1992 Portraits of a Discipline: An Examination of Introductory Psychology Textbooks in America Randall D. Wight Ouachita Baptist University, [email protected] Wayne Weiten Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.obu.edu/articles Part of the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine Commons, and the Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Weiten, W. & Wight, R. D. (1992). Portraits of a discipline: An examination of introductory psychology textbooks in America. In C. L. Brewer, A. Puente, & J. R. Matthews (Eds.), Teaching of psychology in America: A history (pp. 453-504). Washington DC: American Psychological Association. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Scholarly Commons @ Ouachita. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons @ Ouachita. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 20 PORTRAITS OF A DISCIPLINE: AN EXAMINATION OF INTRODUCTORY PSYCHOLOGY TEXTBOOKS IN AMERICA WAYNE WEITEN AND RANDALL D. WIGHT The time has gone by when any one person could hope to write an adequate textbook of psychology. The science has now so many branches, so many methods, so many fields of application, and such an immense mass of data of observation is now on record, that no one person can hope to have the necessary familiarity with the whole. -An author of an introductory psychology text If we compare general psychology textbooks of today with those of from ten to twenty years ago we note an undeniable trend toward amelio- We are indebted to several people who provided helpful information in responding to our survey discussed in the second half of the chapter, including Solomon Diamond for calling attention to Samuel Johnson and Noah Porter, Ernest R.
    [Show full text]
  • Developmental Psychology - Houcan Zhang, Xiaochun Miao
    PSYCHOLOGY – Vol. I - Developmental Psychology - Houcan Zhang, Xiaochun Miao DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY Houcan Zhang Beijing Normal University, PRC, China Xiaochun Miao East China Normal University, Shanghai, PRC, China Keywords: Developmental psychology, cognitive development, longitudinal study, cross design method, genetic epistemology, behaviorism, behavioral genetics, cross- sectional study, life-span development, issue of nature and nurture, psychoanalysis Contents 1. Introduction 2. Brief History 3. Schools of Developmental Psychology 4. New Developments 5. The Future of Developmental Psychology Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketches Summary Developmental psychology is a branch of modern psychology that studies the ontogenetic development of individual human beings, which includes all stages of development from the prenatal until old age and death. There have been two major discussions in the theoretical issues of human development: 1) the interplay between biological inheritance and social environment, and 2) whether psychological development is continuous (quantitative) or discontinuous (qualitative). The longitudinal and cross-sectional methods are two preferred designs in the study of human development, but, combining the advantages of both, a cross-design paradigm has been proposed. UNESCO – EOLSS The study of human development started with John Locke in England and Jean-Jacques Rousseau in France. Other influential contributors to the field were Charles Darwin, Wilhelm Preyer, G. Stanley Hall, Louis W. Stern, Karl and Charlotte Buhler, Alfred Binet, Lewis Terman,SAMPLE Sigmund Freud, John B.CHAPTERS Watson, B.F. Skinner, Albert Bandura, Arnold Gesell, Jean Piaget, Eric Erikson, and Lev Vygotsky. The major theories that have shaped developmental psychology are psychoanalysis (Freud), behaviorism (Watson), genetic epistemology (Piaget), and the theory of the historical-cultural developmental process of the mind (Vygotsky).
    [Show full text]