DOCSLIB.ORG

Gestalt Therapy – Weekend 3 FIELD THEORY and HOLISM

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gestalt Therapy – Weekend 3 FIELD THEORY and HOLISM Your Trainer Today: Karen Booth Gestalt Therapy – Weekend 3 FIELD THEORY AND HOLISM Copyright © HYPNOTHERAPY TRAINING AUSTRALIA 2014 This weekend we will be covering: • What is Field Theory? • The history of Field theory in physics • Field theory and Gestalt Psychology • Parlett’s Five Principles of Field Theory • Holism, homeostasis and organismic self-regulation What is Field Theory? Gestalt Therapy is based on Field Theory; was originally developed by Kurt Lewin integrated into the Gestalt framework. The field is representative of the ‘whole’ all the parts within it are interconnected with, and influenced by, each other. emphasis is placed on the relationships within the organismic/environmental field, as well as how the organism functions within that constellation. Lewin writes: “Whether or not a certain type of behavior occurs depends not on the presence or absence of one fact or of a number of facts viewed in isolation, but upon the constellation (the structure of forces) of the specific field as a whole. The meaning of the single fact depends upon its position in the field.” (Lewin, 1952, p.150) THE HISTORY OF FIELD THEORY IN PHYSICS Isaac Newton Born 1643 - English physicist and mathematician Sir Isaac Newton, most famous for his law of gravitation, was instrumental in the scientific revolution of the 17th century. In the classical Newtonian physics, there was a split between objects and separate forces which could act on the objects. Newton's classic mechanistic view – • Each object has a core essence • View that objects exist independently to each other • Observer exists outside of what they are observing • Observer has no influence on what he/she observes • There is no field/ Mind/body split Maxwell's/ Einstein's relative individualistic field • Phenomena no longer have an essence outside of their containing field • Observer is outside of what is being observed • Individualistic view • Observer has no influence on what is being observed • There is a field in operation The modern view on field physics was complete with the convergence of: Relativity Theory (RT) Quantum Mechanics (QM). • Observer affects the creation of what is being observed • There is no duality – Observer acts as a force of creation of what is being observed • Phenomena exists relative to each other • Phenomena’s essence is of the field • Observer/participator has direct influence on that which he observes • There is a field in operation • Each observers view of reality is unique Gestalt field theory begins with the whole and the co created field. Gestalt Field Theory • The field is being constantly co-created between my phenomenological view point and another’s phenomenological viewpoint • I no longer live in isolation as an individual, outside of others’ worlds, but can, and do, only exist in relation to another. • The self, in the system of processes constantly organises the field into figure/ground formations depending on the emerging needs. Characteristics of Fields Systematic web of relationships Continuous in space and time Everything is of a field Phenomena are determined by the whole field Unitary whole: everything affects everything else Configured between the relationship of the observer and the observed Principle of contemporaneity Everything is becoming Constructive Relativism (or co-constructed reality) Looking at “my” world, I have to include the influence of the other and vice- versa. The other stands as a co-constructing participator of my phenomena, and I stand as a co-constructing participator of their phenomena. Both participate in a co-constructed field and meet at the contact boundary, which Buber referred to as the “between”. Co-Created Field The co-created field is the mutual field of self and other(s); each bringing to the field it’s own unique qualities to form a whole. Everyone and everything impacts on the field It is how we are plugging into each other, what is being co- created as we relate to and inter-react with one another, what we are accessing in ourselves and each other. “When we meet there [at the contact boundary] I change and you change through the process of encountering each other.” (Perls) In Gestalt therapy we are interested in the organism/environment field, that is: A person forms an interactive whole with their environment A person cannot be understood outside of their relational field The organism organises the field Gestalt Psychology & Gestalt Therapy (extracted & adapted from Yontef 1988:ch 8) The basic method of Gestalt therapy can be linked directly to the Phenomenological Field Theory of Gestalt psychology: It is the exploration of ‘what is’ ‘here and now’ over expertise and pre-conceived ideas It is based on trusting immediate experiences continued.. It seeks insight into the functional interrelationships that form the intrinsic structure of the whole (field) of any situation being studied (Kohler, 1969). It understands human nature as organised into patterns or wholes. Phenomenology uses experimentation rather than interpretation. It is not that there are 'things' which contact other 'things', but that "It is the contact that is the simplest and first reality." Perls, Hefferline & Goodman [1994/1951] (PHG). PHG also state ‘it is always to such an interacting field that we are referring, and not to an isolated animal’. Gestalt therapy leans towards modern physics, where the observer effects the nature and identity of what is being observed. Earlier theorists who described field theory in psychology are considered to have shaped Gestalt therapy’s development. William James 1842 –1910 • Was the first to consider the concept of the field. • James, was known as the father of American psychology who was particularly skilful in his time to have considered that the field as a concept was relevant to psychology. • James challenged the idea that the classical Newtonian reality of separate parts was not sufficient to understand our reality, particularly in psychology. Kurt Lewin (1890-1947) was a famous, charismatic psychologist who is now viewed as the father of social psychology. Born in Germany, Lewin emigrated to the USA as a result of World War II. Kurt Lewin (1890-1947) was a famous, charismatic psychologist who is now viewed as the father of social psychology. Born in Germany, Lewin emigrated to the USA as a result of World War II. Lewin (!951) described Field theory as an epistemology (or theory of knowledge/school of thought/methodology) • He saw it as a way of understanding reality and not the reality itself. • Lewin was well known for his terms "life space" and "field theory". • He was also known for his theories in studying group dynamics, solving social problems related to prejudice, and group therapy. • In Lewin’s field (or 'matrix') approach, he believed that for change to take place, the total situation has to be taken into account. Jan Smuts 1870-1950 • Smuts (1926) provides significantly more detail than Lewin in outlining the scientific ground he uses to build his theory. • Smuts described electromagnetic, and biological fields and returns his work to connect with relativity and the beginnings of quantum physics. • Smuts uses a language of connection and holism which is strikingly similar to Perls, Hefferline & Goodman (PHG). Smuts – cont.. • With his work on holism Smuts synthesised the work of quantum theory and Gestalt therapy, even though it was well before Gestalt therapy was developed. • Smuts was credited with coining the term holism. • His view was more Ontological view insomuch as he held a metaphysical view of nature and existence. Sample life space at a moment in time pre-therapy Sample life space at a moment in time post-therapy Emoto’s Water Experiment: The Power of Thoughts Through the 1990′s, Dr. Masaru Emoto performed a series of experiments observing the physical effect of words, prayers, music and environment on the crystalline structure of water Water crystal prior to prayer Water crystal after prayer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E hlw- 9PJkIE&list=PLKeIBnUnhVAUHmrxwG- Yy9nwMyok2Brqi Oh and by the way, the average human body is 60% water. Ponder that one a while… Heart energetic field by Heart Math Institute Malcom Parlett simplifies Parlett’s 5 Field Theory into 5 principles: Principles of Field 1. The Principle of Organization: Theory Meaning derives from looking at the total situation, the totality of co- existing facts. Everything is interconnected and the meaning derives from the total situation. 2. The Principle of Contemporaneity: This means that the emphasis is on the past-as- remembered-now and the future-as-anticipated-now. To put it another way; how the past and future are experienced in the present situation – ‘what is’ rather than what was or what will be. 3. The Principle of Singularity: Each situation and each person within that situation is unique. Generalizations and assumptions are therefore obsolete for they detract from the concrete reality of ‘what is’. 4. The Principle of Changing Process: This refers to the ever changing field; “one never steps into the same river twice”. The field is constantly in flux therefore each moment can only be experienced once in the exact same way. 5. The Principle of Possible Relevance: This principle emphasizes the necessity to inquire about the ‘obvious’; to bring to the foreground the often ignored phenomenology of the client so that it may be explored further for it’s possible relevance in the therapeutic situation. Malcolm Parlett’s ‘Five Field Theory Principles’ Main Principles of Field Theory Extracted from Mackewn 1997 People cannot be understood in isolation but only as integral and interactive wholes with their socio-cultural background and ecological environment. The Field consists of all the interactive phenomena of individuals and their environment. • Human behaviour cannot be attributed to any one cause but arises from the interlocking forces of the field – a constellation of factors.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Leadership Theory Leadership Toolbox Podcast Transcript Centennial Student Union & Student Activities Minnesota State University, Mankato
    Finding Your Strength/ Leadership theory Leadership Toolbox Podcast Transcript Centennial Student Union & Student Activities Minnesota State University, Mankato Welcome to the Student Activities’ Online Leadership Toolbox. My name is Greg Wilkins, and I am the Associate Director of Student Activities at Minnesota State Mankato. I am going to be your podcast guide. This podcast is about finding your strength through your leadership style. I will focus this conversation with the work of Kurt Lewin, a psychologist and leadership theorist. In 1939, a group of researchers led by psychologist Kurt Lewin set out to identify different styles of leadership. While further research has identified more specific types of leadership, this early study was very influential and established three major leadership styles. In the study, groups of schoolchildren were assigned to one of three groups with an authoritarian, democratic or laissez‐fair leader. The children were then led in an arts and crafts project. Researchers then observed the behavior of children in response to the different styles of leadership. Authoritarian Leadership (Autocratic) Authoritarian leaders, also known as autocratic leaders provide clear expectations for what needs to be done, when it should be done, and how it should be done. There is also a clear division between the leader and the followers. Authoritarian leaders make decisions independently with little or no input from the rest of the group. Researchers found that decision‐making was less creative under authoritarian leadership. Lewin also found that it is more difficult to move from an authoritarian style to a democratic style than vice versa. Abuse of this style is usually viewed as controlling, bossy, and dictatorial.
    [Show full text]
  • Personality Trait- Converging Evidence of Cognition and Job Expectation Among Management Students
    ISSN: 2395-1664 (ONLINE) ICTACT JOURNAL ON MANAGEMENT STUDIES, AUGUST 2015, VOLUME: 01, ISSUE: 03 DOI: 10.21917/ijms.2015.0018 PERSONALITY TRAIT- CONVERGING EVIDENCE OF COGNITION AND JOB EXPECTATION AMONG MANAGEMENT STUDENTS Kundhavai Santharam Department of Business Administration, Thiagarajar School of Management, India E-mail: [email protected] Abstract ago, and more than that, there were at least three personality Habitual patterns of behaviour, emotion and thought hold a higher theories formed, and all of them were mental analyses which stake than other factors in shaping individuals to transform as per the divide a person‟s mind into healthy or good mental factors. All expectations of corporate world. A psychophysical system of a student these exist due to the varied personality type which may be is strongly based on the background of school and college education, categorized from viewpoint of various perspectives. especially when the choice of management education is made by them there seems to be a great impact of personality traits over the 1.1 PERSONALITY AND ITS PERSPECTIVES employment that they seek. Hence, this paper used management students from a reputed B-school in Ahmedabad city of Gujarat to Perspectives that relate to personality include the trait, investigate the relationship between personality traits and biological, psychoanalytic, learning, phenomenological and expectations about workplace factors. Since previous research studies cognitive. The underlying assumption of the learning perspective highlight proven insights on personality trait perspective, this study especially is that all behaviour is learned through experiences has kept the same perspective as basis and endeavored in examining and by interaction with the environment.
    [Show full text]
  • The Stream of Desire and Jung's Concept of Psychic Energy
    The stream of desire and Jung’s concept of psychic energy Raya A. Jones Whether energy is God or God is energy concerns me very little, for how, in any case, can I know such things? But to give appropriate psychological explanations — this I must be able to do. (C. G. Jung) 1 It is a remarkable quality of Jung’s legacy that it appeals across diverse disciplines, but I put the above statement upfront as a reminder that as a therapist Jung was concerned first and foremost with explaining the kind of phenomena that clinicians confront in their patients. If a concept of energy or libido does the job, so to speak, that’s more important than whether the concept is metaphysically sound or not. Nevertheless, Jung did attempt to articulate a cogent theory of what precisely psychic energy might be. His theorizing about psychic energy took off in the 1912 monograph, Psychology of the Unconscious which four decades later was lightly revised as Symbols of Transformation.2 Seeking the appropriate psychological explanation for patients’ symptoms, he argued that the Freudian notion of libido as sexual energy is inapplicable to dementia praecox since the illness is associated with the generation of a fantasy world rather than with heightened sexuality. This argument set him on a line of 1 C.G. Jung, Collected Works, ed. Sir H. Read, M. Fordham, G. Adler, and W. McGuire, 20 vols, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1953-1983, vol. 8, The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche, §678. 2 C.G. Jung, Psychology of the Unconscious, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Turner & Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Personality Theory in Gestalt Theoretical Psycho- Therapy: Kurt Lewin’S Field Theory and His Theory of Systems in Tension Revisited
    GESTALT THEORY, DOI 10.2478/gth-2021-0002 © 2020 (ISSN 2519-5808); Vol. 43, No. 1, 29–46 Original Contributions - Originalbeiträge Bernadette Lindorfer1,2 Personality Theory in Gestalt Theoretical Psycho- therapy: Kurt Lewin’s Field Theory and his Theory of Systems in Tension Revisited 1. Introduction Psychotherapy is an intentional, planned, interactional process, which implies that the therapist has theoretical ideas about the human person and its func- tioning and about the nature and functioning of such an interactional process. Whether explicit or implicit, naïve or scientific, every psychotherapist has some kind of personality theory that guides her/his actions. One can understand a client’s anxiety as a punishment from God, as an innate constitutional trait, a learned reaction, an expression of unresolved instinctual conflicts, or as a result of the client’s psychological situation. Depending on her/his assumptions—whether or not she/he is aware of them—the therapist will experience the situation dif- ferently and will differently interact with her/him. Since psychotherapy schools consider themselves to be scientific, they are asked to make explicit assumptions, and thus also render these debatable and verifiable. By also reflecting on their own implicit, naïve, and prescientific personality conceptions, therapists further improve their ability to recognize and understand the naïve “personality theories” that underlie their clients’ experiences. Scientific personality theories intend to describe, explain, and predict the in- dividual peculiarities in the experiencing and behavior of people. Usually, they include terms and concepts about the personality structure and its dynamics and development. To date, no consensual paradigm exists, but there are many diffe- rent approaches in academic psychology and in the field of psychotherapy.
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Principles from Psychology That We Can Use to Inform Web Design
    Designing with Psychology in Mind 5 principles from psychology that we can use to inform web design @bokardo Kurt Lewin “Founder of Social Psychology” B=⨍(PE) Lewin’s Equation B=⨍(PE) Behavior is a function of a Person & their Environment We can’t change the Person B=⨍(PE) But we can change Behavior by designing the Environment Ahem...that’s our job. When we as web designers create screens we are de!ning the universe for our users. We are crafting an environment through which all activity occurs. This is a huge responsibility! If something doesn’t exist in the interface, it doesn’t exist period. In this way we are playing God... The Stanford Prison Experiment http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKW_MzREPp4 The Lucifer Effect raises a fundamental question about human nature: How is it possible for ordinary, average, even good people to become perpetrators of evil? In trying to understand unusual, or aberrant behavior, we often err in focusing exclusively on the inner determinants of genes, personality, and character, as we also tend to ignore what may be the critical catalyst for behavior change in the external Situation or in the System that creates and maintains such situations. (aka the Fundamental Attribution Error) Behavior change: Change people from offline shoppers to online buyers Behavior change: Change people from prospective to happy clients Behavior change: Change people from readers to subscribers What do web designers do? observe record in!uence respond to induce guide Web designers change behavior monitor elicit support enable manipulate encourage provoke de"ne Changing behavior is what web designers do.
    [Show full text]
  • Kurt Lewin's Change Model: a Critical Review of the Role of Leadership and Employee Involvement in Organizational Change
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Hussain, Syed Talib et al. Article Kurt Lewin's change model: A critical review of the role of leadership and employee involvement in organizational change Journal of Innovation & Knowledge (JIK) Provided in Cooperation with: Elsevier Suggested Citation: Hussain, Syed Talib et al. (2018) : Kurt Lewin's change model: A critical review of the role of leadership and employee involvement in organizational change, Journal of Innovation & Knowledge (JIK), ISSN 2444-569X, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Vol. 3, Iss. 3, pp. 123-127, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2016.07.002 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/190739 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Life and Work of the Psychologist Bluma Zeigarnik (1901
    Review Neurosciences and History 2018; 6(3): 116-124 Life and work of the psychologist Bluma Zeigarnik (1901-1988) M. Marco Department of Neurology. Hospital Parc Taulí, Sabadell, Barcelona, Spain. ABSTRACT Bluma Zeigarnik is one of the most important figures in Soviet psychology. She was initially linked to Kurt Lewin’s Gestalt psychology in Berlin in the 1920s, and described the famous “Zeigarnik effect” with respect to interrupted tasks. After returning to the USSR in 1931, she was in contact with members of the cultural-historical school of psychology and worked in the field of pathopsychology, a discipline at the intersection between psychology and psychiatry, but belonging to the first. During the Second World War, she worked in the neuropsychological rehabilitation of patients with head trauma, and showed interest in lobotomy in the post-war years. A Jew, and stigmatised for having lived in Germany, she suffered Stanilist persecution in both her personal and her scientific life. Rehabilitated after the death of the dictator, she gained international recognition in the final years of her long life, during which she maintained her scientific and academic activity. KEYWORDS Bluma Zeigarnik, psychopathology, “Zeigarnik effect,” Stalinism, Kurt Lewin, Susanna Rubinshtein Introduction This work aims to raise awareness of this figure, both in terms of her personal life and her scientific and In the context of the Russian/Soviet neurosciences, professional activity. the cultural-historical school of psychology occupies a central position, led by Lev Vygotsky and other relevant Material and methods scientific figures including his two “Troika” colleagues I reviewed the international literature on the life and Aleksandr Luria, founder of modern neuropsychology, work of Bluma Zeigarnik, and consulted some relevant and Aleksei Leontiev, with the support of a distinguished works published in Russian, her native language.
    [Show full text]
  • Kurt Lewin's Leadership Studies and His Legacy to Social Psychology: Is There Nothing As Practical As a Good Theory?
    Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 45:4 DOI: 10.1111/jtsb.12074 Kurt Lewin’s Leadership Studies and His Legacy to Social Psychology: Is There Nothing as Practical as a Good Theory? MICHAEL BILLIG ABSTRACT This paper re-examines Kurt Lewin’s classic leadership studies, using them as a concrete example to explore his wider legacy to social psychology. Lewin distin- guished between advanced “Galileian” science, which was based on analysing particular examples, and backward “Aristotelian” science, which used statistical analyses. Close examination of the way Lewin wrote about the leadership studies reveals that he used the sort of binary, value-laden concepts that he criticised as “Aristotelian”. Such concepts, especially those of “democracy” and “autocracy”, affected the way that he analysed the results and the ways that later social scientists have understood, and misunderstood, the studies. It is argued that Lewin’s famous motto—“there is nothing as practical as a good theory”—is too simple to fit the tensions between the leadership studies and his own views of what counts as good theory. Keywords: Kurt Lewin, leadership studies, democracy and autocracy, social psychology, Aristotelian science, good theory Kurt Lewin is often depicted as a mythic figure in the history of social psychology: the textbooks typically describe him as the founding father of experimental social psychology, a genius whose life was tragically cut short. Like many mythic figures, Lewin symbolically seems to unite contradictory elements. His famous motto— “there is nothing as practical as a good theory”—appears to unite theory and practice within the orbit of experimental methodology.
    [Show full text]
  • Kurt Lewin and Experimental Psychology in the Interwar Period
    '55#466'21 @744)1%71%"#5("#0'5!&#14"#5 2!6243&')2523&'#F4D3&')DG !& ( ) E @7#4)'1 921 11 #4)'1B #4 4 5'"#16"#4 70 2)"6E 1'9#45'6 6@7#4)'1C 42$D4D 1E #1"4'() #46@ #4#(1"#4 &')2523&'5!&#1(7)6 6 C 42$D'!&#)#")#B & 76!&6#4C PD 42$D4D 84%#1#11 QD 42$D4D'6!&#))D 5& #46#'"'%60SD'QIPR Forward I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Dr. Jürgen Renn, Director of the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, who supported my pre-doctoral research from the early ideation, through all of its ups and downs until the final line of the disputatio at the Humboldt University of Berlin. Beyond that, the Institute enabled my research project by granting me a PhD scholarship and providing a fruitful work environment, while the well-organized MPIWG library offered me the opportunity to assemble the majority of the material for this book. I am obliged to Professor Dr. Mitchell Ash for his commentaries and insights from his vast knowledge in the history of psychology, as well as for being part of my PhD committee de- spite the geographical distance. I would like to also thank Dr. Alexandre Métraux for advising me on questions related to Lewin’s philosophy of science. Moreover, I am highly indebted to Dr. Massimilano Badino for his scholarly advice, but even more so for his friendship and moral support whenever I needed it. In addition to that, he en- couraged and prepared me to present my work in a variety of international conferences.
    [Show full text]
  • A Theoretical Model
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Gail Patricia Robinson for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education presented on June 6, 1977 Title: THE ACQUISITION OF VALUES: A THEORETICAL MODEL Abstract Approved: Redacted for /Privacy p/ Dr. Mary Jane Wall Values pervade every aspect of our lives, yet often our values remain elusive, even hidden from ourselves. Our values emerge, rich in feelings, but often unlabeled, to tell us what to do and how to do it. The conflicts among our various values cause us embarrassment and pain in our decision making. Since values play such an important role in our lives, it is important that we try to understand what our values are, how they are formed, and how they determine our behavior. The main purpose of this thesis is to present a theoretical model of what values are and how they are acquired. This thesis develops a model based on the assumption that since a person is alive, motion must be considered. By placing the primary focus of human personality on motion and relations, new ways of view- ing values will be needed. Herein, values will not be thought of as static objects, but rather dynamic processes. The creation of a Values Acquisition Model is approached from two perspectives. The first perspective considers the point of view of the individual. The second concerns the individual's interaction with society. By definition a Personal Value System cannot come into existence without both aspects. My Values Acquisition Model consists of four parts. These are: The Personal Component and its resulting Personal Construction System; the Interaction Component and its resulting Personal Value System (see figure).
    [Show full text]
  • 4. Group Dynamics Group Dynamics Is a System of Behaviors and Psychological Processes Occurring Within a Social Group (Intragrou
    4. Group dynamics Group dynamics is a system of behaviors and psychological processes occurring within a social group (intragroup dynamics), or between social groups (intergroup dynamics). The study of group dynamics can be useful in understanding decision- making behavior, tracking the spread of diseases in society, creating effective therapy techniques, and following the emergence and popularity of new ideas and technologies. Group dynamics are at the core of understanding racism, sexism, and other forms of social prejudice and discrimination. These applications of the field are studied in psychology, sociology, anthropology, political science, epidemiology, education, social work, business, and communication studies. 4.1 History The history of group dynamics (or group processes)] has a consistent, underlying premise: 'the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.' A social group is an entity, which has qualities that cannot be understood just by studying the individuals that make up the group. In 1924, Gestalt psychologist, Max Wertheimer identified this fact, stating ‘There are entities where the behavior of the whole cannot be derived from its individual elements nor from the way these elements fit together; rather the opposite is true: the properties of any of the parts are determined by the intrinsic structural laws of the whole’ (Wertheimer 1924, p. 7). As a field of study, group dynamics has roots in both psychology and sociology. Wilhelm Wundt (1832–1920), credited as the founder of experimental psychology, had a particular interest in the psychology of communities, which he believed possessed phenomena (human language, customs, and religion) that could not be described through a study of the individual.
    [Show full text]
  • Psychologues Américains
    Psychologues américains A G (suite) M (suite) • Robert Abelson • Gustave M. Gilbert • Christina Maslach • Gordon Willard • Carol Gilligan • Abraham Maslow Allport • Stephen Gilligan • David McClelland • Richard Alpert • Daniel Goleman • Phil McGraw • Dan Ariely • Thomas Gordon • Albert Mehrabian • Solomon Asch • Temple Grandin • Stanley Milgram • Blake Ashforth • Clare Graves • Geoffrey Miller • David Ausubel • Joy Paul Guilford (psychologue) • Moubarak Awad • George Armitage H Miller B • Theodore Millon • G. Stanley Hall • James Baldwin • Daria Halprin N (psychologue) • Harry Harlow • Theodore Barber • Alan Hartman • Ulric Neisser • Gregory Bateson • Torey Hayden • Richard Noll • Diana Baumrind • Frederick Herzberg • Alex Bavelas • Ernest Hilgard O • Don Beck • James Hillman • Benjamin Bloom • Allan Hobson • James Olds • Edwin Garrigues • John L. Holland Boring • John Henry Holland P • Loretta Bradley • Evelyn Hooker • Nathaniel Branden • Carl Hovland • Baron Perlman • Urie Bronfenbrenner • Clark Leonard Hull • Walter Pitts • Joyce Brothers • Jerome Bruner J R • David Buss • Howard Buten • William James • Joseph Banks Rhine • Kay Redfield Jamison • Kenneth Ring C • Irving Janis • Judith Rodin • Arthur Janov • Carl Rogers • John Bissell Carroll • Joseph Jastrow • Milton Rokeach • James McKeen Cattell • Julian Jaynes • Eleanor Rosch • Raymond Cattell • Arthur Jensen • Marshall Rosenberg • Cary Cherniss • Frank Rosenblatt • Robert Cialdini K • Robert Rosenthal • Mary Cover Jones • Julian Rotter • Lee Cronbach • Daniel Kahneman • Paul Rozin
    [Show full text]