25 personal memories of experimental psychology and psychoanalysis: commentary by oliver turnbull...

7/25/2019 25 Personal Memories of Experimental Psychology and Psychoanalysis: Commentary by Oliver Turnbull (Bangor, Wales)

1/3

This article was downloaded by: [Gazi University]On: 19 August 2014, At: 08:11Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: MortimerHouse, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Neuropsychoanalysis: An Interdisciplinary Journalfor Psychoanalysis and the NeurosciencesPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rnpa20

Personal Memories of Experimental Psychology andPsychoanalysis: Commentary by Oliver Turnbull(Bangor, Wales)Oliver Turnbull Ph.D.

a

aSchool of Psychology, University of Wales, Bangor LL57 2DG, United Kingdom, Tel: 0044

(1248) 383670, Fax: 0044 (1248) 382599, e-mail:

Published online: 09 Jan 2014.

To cite this article:Oliver Turnbull Ph.D. (2000) Personal Memories of Experimental Psychology and Psychoanalysis:Commentary by Oliver Turnbull (Bangor, Wales), Neuropsychoanalysis: An Interdisciplinary Journal for Psychoanalysis and

the Neurosciences, 2:2, 258-259, DOI: 10.1080/15294145.2000.10773317

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15294145.2000.10773317

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained

in the publications on ourplatform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose ofthe Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication arethe opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be reliedupon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shallnot be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and otherliabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15294145.2000.10773317http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/15294145.2000.10773317http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15294145.2000.10773317http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/15294145.2000.10773317http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rnpa20


2/3

58

Luborsky, L.,

Crits-Christoph, P. (1998), Understanding

Transference: The Core Conflictual Relationship Theme

Method. Washington, DC: American Psychological As

sociation.

Panksepp, J (1999), Emotions as viewed by psychoanalysis

and neuroscience: An exercise in consilience. This

J

our-

nal 1(1): 15-38.

Shevrin,

(2000), The experimental investigation

of

un

conscious conflict, unconscious affect, and unconscious

signal anxiety. In:

Investigating Phenomenal Conscious-

ness: New Methodologies and Maps ed. M. Velmans.

London: John Benjamins.

Bond, J A., Brakel,

L

A., Hertel,

R

K., Wil

liams, W J (1996), Conscious and Unconscious

Oliver Turnbull

Processes: Psychodynamic Cognitive and Neurophysio-

logical Convergences. New York: Guilford Press.

Snodgrass, M., Shevrin, H.,

Kopka, M. (1993), Themedi

ation of intentional judgments by unconscious percep

tions: The influences of task strategy, task preference,

word meaning, and motivation. Consciousness Cog-

nit. 2:169-193.

Solms, M. (1995), New findings

on

the neurological organi

zation

of

dreaming: Implications for psychoanalysis.

Psychoanal. Quart. 64 1 :43-67.

Howard Shevrin

2021 Vinewood

Ann Arbor MI48 4

e mail: shevrin@ umich.edu

Personal Memories of Experimental Psychology an d Psychoanalysis

Commentary

by Oliver Turnbull (Bangor, Wales)

PaulWhittle's lecture was delivered to the Department

of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge

in 1994. Its publication evokes strong memories for

me because I had the privilege of attending the lecture

itself when I was about to complete my doctoral train

ing in that department. The talk was part of an ongoing

weekly series

of

scientific lectures, called Zangwill

Club meetings, after the eminent Cambridge neuropsy

chologist (who was head

of

the Cambridge department

for many years). The talks were most commonly given

by invited speakers, typically prominent psychologists

and neuroscientists. Members of the department's own

academic staff (such

as

Paul) did deliver Zangwill

Club talks from time to time. However, the topics cov

ered in the talks, whether delivered by internal or ex

ternal speakers, were invariably

of t he

'hard-nosed

scientific sort, focusing preferably on small and tracta

ble problems, and delivered with the usual barrage of

experimental data that are expected from a scientist.

Thus, data become the principal material

of

any talk,

and one's scientific credentials are (arguably) mea

sured by the quality of the empirical material. At

times it has seemed that the ideal data for such an

environment would involve a rather mathematical

looking function, based on systematically manipulat

ing an easily controlled variable, and plotted on a nice

tidy graph (a linear function would be best, but an

Oliver Turnbull

is

a Lecturer in Cognitive Neuroscience, School

of

Psychology, University of Wales, Bangor.

exponential function would still be acceptable). Using

these criteria, the difficult scientific work is in devising

an experiment clever enough to produce such neat re

sults. My recommendation for a successful talk (and

indeed a successful career) would be to have investi

gated psychological (if that is the correct term) phe

nomena as far away from the mind as

possible such

as

perceptual thresholds, or perhaps

time-to-collision investigations in visually guided ac

tion. In this sort of context, Paul is certainly correct

to suggest that the British are notoriously distrustful

of theory. In fact, if this empiricist attitude is typical

of

British psychology departments

in general

it is es

pecially true

of

Cambridge. The department prides it

self on having an especially rigorous scientific

outlook, and rejoices in its title

of Experimental

Psy

chology Department. It seemed to me then (as it seems

now) a rather inappropriate place to speak about psy

choanalysis.

The Zangwill Club meetings were open to all,

and were invariably attended by the majority of aca

demic staff and graduate students from the depart

ment. The talks were generally regarded as occurring

in a friendly scientific atmosphere and usually sev

eral people took a trip to the pub afterwards for further

discussion with the speaker. However, it was also ex

pected that the speaker would have to answer a num

ber of tough questions from the floor at the end of

the talk, consistent with Cambridge's reputation as a

center of international scientific excellence. Thus, the


3/3

Response to Commentaries

meetings were seen as offering a forum for a lively

discussion

of

important scientific issues.

Before the talk began I was fairly clear about

what the content of Paul s talk would

be especially

since the title had been public for some time. On that

basis, I could foresee a number

of

possible scenarios

as to how the lecture might be

received and

almost

all of them were negative. My impression was that

Paul s original reputation in the department had been

based on his work on psychophysics-the sort of ex

perimental psychology so beloved by this empirically

minded institution. In spite

of

this (or perhaps

because

of

it?) his interest in psychoanalysis had grown over

the years, but it seemed well worth keeping such an

interest a secret, or at least playing it down. This de

partment would be the last place where one should

reveal an interest in an area regarded by almost all the

staff

as having little scientific credibility one might

as well have announced that you were interested in

astrology. However, over the years, Paul had chosen

to gradually reveal his arcane interest to his col

leagues; for example, by offering an optional under

graduate course on psychoanalysis.

1

Nevertheless,

Paul s interest in psychoanalysis was never mentioned

in the depar tment-except in rather hushed tones.

Thus, by standing up and announcing the basis for his

conviction in such a public forum, it seemed to me that

Paul was about to commit some variant of professional

suicide. I listened to the lecture with great trepidation,

and I still regard its delivery (given the nature

of

the

audience)

as

an act

of

great personal courage.

It is remarkable, therefore, that the reception

of

the paper should have been so muted; so reason-

I

Optional seems a rather inappropriate word to descr ibe the

course. Its content stood out starkly from the rest

of

the curriculum, and

although only an optional course, it was attended by almost all the under

graduates.

Response to Commentaries

Paul Whittle (Cambridge)

Several commentators expressed their heartfelt recog

nition of the personal situation I described, that of

taking psychoanalysis seriously in a university depart

ment of psychology. We should not lose sight of how

Paul Whittle is Lecturer in Experimental Psychology, University of

Cambridge.

259

able As I recall, there were a number

of

questions,

all of them implying that the audience had been lis

tening carefully, even

if

they were unfamiliar with

much of the content. Alas, I don t recall the specifics

of

the discussion after the talk. Nevertheless, it was

quite clear to me that the type

of

difficult question that

I had been anticipating-such as What on earth is

your evidence for these ridiculous claims? simply

did not appear. The audience may, of course, have

merely been humoring a colleague. However, I was

left with the feeling that the audience did understand

that experimental psychology did seem to be failing

to build a complete account of mental life, and I sus

pect that the audience was fairly comfortable with the

idea that psychoanalysis was a discipline trying to ad

dress some of the missing issues. This is not to say,

of

course, that the academic staff left the room with

a newfound respect for psychoanalysis, or with the

feeling that they were spending their careers pursuing

meaningless scientific questions. Naturally, all profes

sionals have a well-developed set of defenses designed

to avoid intrusive ideas that would undermine their

careers. However, I was left with the impression that

a number of people left the room a little more open

minded than when they entered it. As a general princi

ple, I would like to believe that even difficult argu

ments can be put across to a hostile audience, if they

are structured appropriately and it seems to me that

Paul s lecture achieved that aim.

Oliver Turnbull Ph.D.

School

Psychology

University

Wales Bangor LL57 2DG

United Kingdom

Tel: 0044 1248 383670

Fax: 0044 1248 382599

e mail: [email protected]

extraordinary it is that serious discussion of the past

century s most influential current of psychological

thought should be almost taboo in such departments.

Oliver Turnbull, in his perceptive description

of

the

occasion

of

my lecture, nicely describes his anxiety

(which I shared) about its reception in the supposedly

friendly atmosphere of the weekly departmental semi-

25 personal memories of experimental psychology and psychoanalysis: commentary by oliver turnbull...

Documents