[jon roeckelein] dictionary of theories, laws, and(bookza.org)

8/12/2019 [Jon Roeckelein] Dictionary of Theories, Laws, And(BookZa.org)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/jon-roeckelein-dictionary-of-theories-laws-andbookzaorg 1/178

Dictionaryof Theories,

Laws, and



Conceptsin Psychology



DICTIONARY OF THEORIES,LAWS, AND CONCEPTS

IN PSYCHOLOGY

Jon E. Roeckelein

GREENWOOD PRESS

Westport Connecticut • London



Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Roeckelein, Jon E.

Dictionary of theories, laws, and concepts in psychology Jon E.

Roeckelein.

p. c!.

"ncludes bibliographical references #p. $ and inde%.

"&'( )-*+*-*))- #alk. paper$

+. Psychology/Dictionaries. ". 0itle.

'1*+.R2 +334

+2)5.*/dc+ 36-*3+

'ritish Library Cataloguing in Publication Data is a7ailable.

Copyright 8 +334 by Jon E. Roeckelein

9ll rights reser7ed. (o portion of this book !ay be

reproduced, by any process or techni:ue, without the

e%press written consent of the publisher.

Library of Congress Catalog Card (u!ber; 36-*3+

"&'(; )-*+*-*))-

1irst published in +334

<reenwood Press, 44 Post Road =est, =estport, C0 )44+

9n i!print of <reenwood Publishing <roup, "nc.

Printed in the >nited &tates of 9!erica

O

0he paper used in this book co!plies with the

Per!anent Paper &tandard issued by the (ational

"nfor!ation &tandards ?rgani@ation #A*3.4-+34$.

+) 3 4 6 2 * +



0o Renee and Joshua, who appreciate se!antic and theoretical distinctions and

who show great faith, tolerance, understanding, and wisdo!B and to 0ho! er-

ha7e, who/using his uni:ue pedagogy/taught us that disco7eries and e%cite-

!ent are yet to be found lurking in the dusty !usty area of the history of

psychology.



CONTENTS

Preface i%

"ntroduction %i

9bbre7iations %7ii

Dictionary of 0heories, Laws, and Concepts in Psychology +

9ppendi% 9; 1re:uency of >sage of Concepts as &a!pled inPsychology 0e%tbooks, +442-+33 32

9ppendi% '; References/0e%tbooks &ur7eyed for Collection of Laws and 0heories in ++ ears of Psychology 2+

&elected 'ibliography 26

&ubect "nde% 23



PREFACE

"n discussing his i!printing e%peri!ents, Eckhard Fess once said that good

psychologists try to !ake psychology a science.

0he present work is !y atte!pt to be a GgoodG psychologist. ?ne of the

purposes of writing this dictionary of psychological concepts is to pro7ide a

useful referent or baseline set of key concepts for e%a!ining the difficult topics

of laws, theories, principles, effects, doctrines, and hypotheses in psychology.

Hore specifically, it is hoped that this book of psychological concepts !ay ser7e

as a 7aluable reference resource for answering :uestions in research concerning

the se!antic issues and proble!s surrounding the i!portant ter!s of GlawG and

GtheoryG as they ha7e appeared in the history of psychology. 1or e%a!ple, Fow

far has psychology co!e in the last +*) years concerning its de7elop!ent of

lawful cause/effect relationship state!entsI =here does psychology go fro!

here in its usage of the key descriptor conceptsI Fow scientific is the science of psychology as udged by the :uality and :uantity of its laws, theories, and other

descriptor ter!s and conceptsI Fow does psychology !easure up to the other

sciences, especially the GnaturalG sciences of physics, che!istry, and biology,

regarding the establish!ent of laws and theoriesI &ince so!e concepts are !ore

fir!ly established in psychology than others, which of the ter!s in psychology

pro7ide the !ost agree!ent a!ong psychologistsI Can we !ake psychology

!ore scientific through e%a!ination of the ter!s and concepts that is usesI "f so,

what new !easures and !ethods can we use specifically to acco!plish thisI

=hich are the GstrongerG laws in psychology, and which are the GweakerG lawsI

=hat are the !easurable !echanis!s through which laws change in significance

and status fro! weak to strong, or 7ice 7ersaI Fow long does it take a theory to

beco!e a lawI Fow 7alid, useful, or GgoodG are part icular laws and theories in

psychologyI0his dictionary !ay pro7ide a substanti7e basis and starting point for researching

and answering these and !any other such critical :uestions concerning the

ter!inological issues in psychology.

" sincerely hope so.



NTROD!CTON

Psychology, like any other science, seeks to describe and e%plain its obser7ations,

data, and pheno!ena through the use of rigorous cause/effect state!ents. &o!e

of these causal relationship state!ents lead to stronger and !ore certain

predictions concerning outco!es than others. 1or e%a!ple, the generali@ed ter!

of scientific law contains the strongest and !ost rigorous descripti7e account of

how causal 7ariables operate. 9!ong the other, less rigorous, descriptors or

concepts of how e7ents are connected in science in general and psychology in

particular are the generali@ed concepts of theory, hypothesis, effect, doctrine, and

principle. 0he ter! Ggenerali@ed conceptG here refers to a cause/effect

descriptor #e.g., GlawGB GtheoryG$ that defines a particular set of e7ents and an

e%pected outco!e #e.g., "law of effectGB Gcogniti7e dissonance theory"; "serial

position effect"). 0he following definitions of the 7arious descriptor generali@ed

concepts !ay ser7e as an initial guideline, or rule of thu!b, for !aking dis-

tinctions a!ong these generic ter!s.

0he ter! law !ay be defined as Ga 7erbal state!ent, supported by such a!ple

e7idence as not to be open to doubt unless !uch further e7idence is obtained, of the

way e7ents of a certain class consistently and unifor!ly occurG #English English,

+36, p. 44$.

0he ter! theory has been defined as Ga coherent e%planation #of an array of

logically interrelated propositions about a set of pheno!ena$ . . . which has un-

dergone so!e 7alidation and which !ay be applied to !any data, but which does not

ha7e the status of a lawG #Farri!an, +3, p. )+$. Psychological theories are said to

7ary with respect to te!poral duration of the target acti7ity where theories confined

to se:uences of brief duration are ter!ed Gsynchronic,G and those concerned with

e%tended durations are ter!ed GdiachronicG #<ergen, +33$. 9nother generaldistinction concerning theories is shown in Royce5s #+33$ two !aor facets of

theoretical psychology; the construction of Gsubstanti7e theoryG and G!etatheory.G

&ubstanti7e theory #e.g., Gscientific the-



%ii "(0R?D>C0"?(

oryG$ focuses on e%plaining the obser7ables and facts of a specifiable do!ain of

in7estigation, whereas !etatheory focuses on e%plaining the nature of theory

using conceptual linguistic analyses to clarify the !eanings and i!plications of

theoretical ter!s. Har% and <oodson #+36$ categori@e scientific theories with

respect to their !ode of construction into three !aor types; Gdeducti7eG #char-

acteri@ed by the deri7ation of propositions, to be e!pirically tested, on the basis

of logically related prior pre!ises$B Ginducti7eG #e!phasi@es the accu!ulation or

collection of disparate bits and pieces of data that are gradually articulated into

theoretical propositions without any e%plicit guidance$B and GfunctionalG #an

approach co!bining the best of deducti7e and inducti7e theory where s!all,

fre:uently !odified hypotheses are e!ployed as in7estigation tools and focus

their e!pirical attacks on specific beha7ioral proble!s$. (o theory, whate7er its

:ualities, is e7er final, e7en though all the predicti7e state!ents !ade fro! it

ha7e been 7erified perfectly. 0here always re!ains the possibility that any gi7entheory will be replaced by another theory that is si!pler, !ore general, or !ore

consistent with other rele7ant theories #Har% Filli%, +363$.

0he ter! hypothesis has been defined as a state!ent that Gatte!pts to e%plain a

s!all or li!ited set of facts, whereas a theory atte!pts to enco!pass a broad range

of facts and !ay e7en include se7eral hypothesesG #'uss, +36*, p. 6$.

0he ter! effect refers to Gan e7ent that in7ariably follows a specific other

pheno!enon as in a causal relationshipB a resultG #=ol!an, +36*$.

0he ter! doctrine has been defined as Ga principle established through past

decisions and interpretationsB a principle of faithB dog!aB tenet of belief supported

by a teacher, a school, or a sectG (Webster's, +34$. 0he ter! principle !ay be

defined as Ga general inference that is deri7ed fro! e!pirical studies but that cannot

be stated une:ui7ocally as a lawG #Farri!an, +3, p. +4$.

&ince all these ter!s #i.e., law, theory, hypothesis, effect, doctrine, and principle)!ay be considered in the class of Ggenerali@ed conceptsG /or ter!s that con7ey

differing a!ounts of certainty, predictability, and unifor!ity in psy-chology/the

proble! arises as to the choice of the GbestG ter! to use fro! this class when

describing any particular or specific causal pheno!enon. 9s so!e studies ha7e

pointed out #e.g., Roeckelein, +33c$, there are !any se!antic issues and proble!s

associated with distinguishing a!ong these generali@ed ter!s in psychology. 1or

instance, is the ter! law, in a scientific conte%t, itself o7erly GpretentiousGI Fill

#+36), p. +$ belie7es that it is, because the ter! law see!s to suggest that, gi7en

certain conditions, such and such will necessarily always occur. "n reality, says Fill,

!ost scientific laws are less precise than such cause/effect state!ents would i!ply,

and, especially when referring to psychological laws, these state!ents need to be

:ualified by phrases such as Gon the a7erageG or Gother things being e:ual.G

?ne se!antic proble! that will ha7e to be resol7ed e7entually in this area ofgenerali@ed ter!s and concepts is the :uestion, Fow does a presu!ed cause/effect

relationship co!e to be called a law? 1urther!ore, what are the !easurable

dyna!ics and criteria that go into the se!antic transfor!ation of phe-



"(0R?D>C0"?( %iii

no!ena fro! the status of tentati7e theory or hypothesis to that of rigorous law?

9s Har% #+36, p. $ points out, G0he de7elop!ent of laws is not an all-or-none

process, and the gradual achie7e!ent of increasingly reliable relationships !ust

be accepted as the nor!al !anner in which fully accepted laws are obtained.G

0urner #+36, pp. 2)-2$ re!inds us; G0here are different aspects to laws.

&o!e laws are deri7ed fro! within a theory #laws as 5theore!s of a for!al

theory5$, and so!e laws do not fall within the corpus of theore!s of a theoryB the

ter! law itself in science is a!biguous.G Horeo7er, says 0urner, it is the nature of

a law to be true, but the GtruthG or GfalsityG of laws is in itself another set of

interpreti7e issues re:uiring clarification both as to se!antic-definitional

assu!ptions and as to philosophical orientation. Perhaps, in the final analysis, as

Fu!e #+6*3-+6)$ and Einstein #+323$ suggested, it !ay be that nature5s GlawsG

are !ore in the !ind of the percei7er than in the e%ternal world.

?ther se!antic and Ginterpreti7eG :uestions concerning the generali@ed concepts in psychology are, Do specific persons so!eti!es Gin7entG laws, theories, and

hypothesesI 9re personalities #Ggreat !an theoryG$ in7ol7ed in Glaw!akingG and

Gtheori@ingG in psychologyI "s the !aor process surrounding the de7elop!ent of a

generali@ed concept !erely a social con7ention, or does it reflect GtrueG and

i!personal descriptions and disco7eries of natural e7entsI "s there a pattern or

direction in the de7elop!ent of the generali@ed concepts in psychology that is

analogous, generally, to the pattern and direction in the de7elop!ent of history

itselfI 1or instance, iney #+33*, pp. 6-3$ discusses 7arious perspecti7es and

hypotheses in the philosophy of history #e.g., cyclical hypothesisB linear-progressi7e

hypothesisB chaos hypothesis$. Do de7elop!ental ideas and sche!as such as

GcyclicalG and GchaosG apply e:ually well to analyses of the de7elop!ent of the

generali@ed concepts in psychologyI

>nani!ity and consensus of agree!ent by psychologists concerning such:uestions about the status of !any generali@ed concepts and ter!s in psychology do

not see! to be forthco!ing in the i!!ediate future. 9 si!ple set of state!ents

regarding the GtrueG distinctions a!ong the ter!s law, theory, hypothesis, doctrine,

effect, and principle is probably largely illusory and indefensible at this stage of

psychology5s !aturity. 0herefore, in atte!pting to understand the 7arious e7ents and

pheno!ena that e!ploy the generali@ed concepts in psychology, a reasonable

approach would be first to define the ter! or concept in :uestion and then to cite the

historical and current references that are pertinent in the de7elop!ent of that cause/

effect relationship state!ent #cf; Roe 1rederick, +34+$. "t see!s to be a well-

established fact concerning the generali@ed concepts in psychology that certain

concepts #theories, laws, etc.$ are e7ol7ing in the field and are constantly subect to

future change #e.g., is it theories of <estalt perceptual organi@ation or laws of <estalt

perceptual organi@ationI$.0he present book is an atte!pt to define and describe by source-referencing and

cross-referencing the key or !aor #and so!e interesting !inor$ generali@ed

concepts in psychology and to pro7ide access to the literature on the concepts that

explicitly e!ploy the generali@ed descriptors of law, theory, hypothesis,



%i7 "(0R?D>C0"?(

effect, doctrine, and principle in the field. 0he !ethod used here is to pro7ide

descripti7e entries regarding the concepts and then to cite original sources and

re7iews in which the concepts are e%plained and, thereby, gi7e the reader e% -

posure to the genesis, foundation, and de7elop!ent of each concept as well as to

its historical definition, analysis, and criticis!. "n addition, " ha7e atte!pted to

cite introductory psychology te%tbooks that were current when a gi7en concept

was first introduced, as well as later te%tbooks in order to indicate how so!e

concepts ha7e !aintained their referencing status o7er decades of use in

psychology. 1or e%a!ple, the Glaw of effectG and G=eber5s lawG ha7e re !ained

high in fre:uency of usage by te%tbook authors since these concepts were first

enunciated. ?n the other hand, the Glaw of dyna!ogenesisG and the Glaw of

habit,G for instance, ha7e shown a decrease in usage o7er the years. 0he

psychological concepts in this work ha7e been selected fro! ournal articles,

books, re7iews, !onographs, and histories of psychology. 0hese sources are pri!arily in the English language, but there are so!e references in the <er!an,

1rench, "talian, and &panish languages. 0he sources include references published

through the year +33.

9ppendi% 9 located at the end of this book is a data bank of the fre:uency

counts of concepts containing the key descriptors of law and theory across fi7e

ti!e periods #+442-+3+3, +3)-+3*3, +3)-+323, +3)-+363, +34)-+33$ co7-

ering ++ years of introductory psychology te%tbooks. 9ppendi% ' is a listing of

the te%tbooks sur7eyed across ++ years of introductory psychology te%tbooks.

0he criterion for choosing the concepts shown in 9ppendi% 9 was the sa!e as

the standard used for choosing concepts in this dictionary; the explicit

attach!ent of a descriptor ter! #e.g., GlawGB GtheoryG$ to concepts #e.g., "law of

effectGB Grecapitulation theory") as used by writers in the psychological

literature. 9ppendi% 9 !ay ser7e as a useful resource for in7estigators con-ducting e!pirical research in this area of key concepts and descriptors in psy-

chology. 1or e%a!ple, which of the key concepts cited in psychology te%tbooks

are GborrowedG or GsharedG and ha7e their origination in other sciences such as

physics, che!istry, biology, sociology, or anthropologyI 9nother possible use

for the data in 9ppendi% 9 is to GtrackG the usage of specific laws and theories

across ++ years of psychology te%tbooks in order to detect historical trends and

changes in writers5 usage of such ter!s #e.g., Roeckelein, +33c$.

?ccasionally, a single concept !ay be known by se7eral na!es #e.g., the Glaw

of parsi!onyG is the sa!e as G?cca!5s ra@orG and GHorgan5s canonG$, and, when

this occurs, a cross-referencing !ethod is used to connect the e:ui7alent na!es.

1or e%a!ple, entries for G?cca!5s ra@orG and GHorgan5s canonG are included in

the entry for the Glaw of parsi!ony.G 9lso, in order to sa7e page space

concerning the single !ultina!ed concepts, the set of references applying tosuch concepts are listed under whiche7er na!e is !ost co!!only cited,

regardless of conceptual, logical, or theoretical le7els. 0hus, for e%a!ple, the

specific concept na!e of GFering5s color theoryG is subordinate here to the !ore

general concept na!e of Gtetrachro!atic theory,G but the for!er na!e



A""re#i$tions

9b. Monigl . Preuss. 9k. 9bhandlung der Monigl ische Preussisch 9kade!ie

=issen. der =issenschaftlich

9cta Physio. &can. 9cta Physiology &candina7ia

9cta Psy. 9cta Psychologica

9cta Psy. 0ai. 9cta Psychologica 0aiwanica #0aipei$

9cta Psychiat. (eur. 9cta Psychiatrica et (eurologica

9dd. Proc. (at. Ed. 9ddresses and Proceedings of the (ational

9ssoc. Education 9ssociation

9d!in. &ci. Nuar. 9d!inistrati7e &cience Nuarterly

9d7. E%p. &oc. Psy. 9d7.

&tud. 'eh. 9d7anc. &ci.

9!er. 9nthro.

9!er. Ed. Res. 9!er.

Ed. Res. J. 9!er.

"!ago

9!er. J. Clin. Fyp. 9!er.

J. Fu!. <enet. 9!er. J.

Hed. &ci. 9!er. J. ?phthal.

9!er. J. ?rthopsychiat.

9!er. J. Phys. 9nthro.

9!er. J. Physics 9!er. J.

Physio.

9d7ances in E%peri!ental &ocial Psychology

9d7ances in the &tudy of 'eha7ior 9d7ance!ent of

&cience

9!erican 9nthropologist

9!erican Educational Research 9!erican

Educational Research Journal 9!erican "!ago

9!erican Journal of Clinical Fypnosis 9!erican

Journal of Fu!an <enetics 9!erican Journal of

Hedical &cience 9!erican Journal of

?phthal!ology 9!erican Journal of

?rthopsychiatry 9!erican Journal of Physical

9nthropology 9!erican Journal of Physics

9!erican Journal of Physiology



%7iii 9''RE"90"?(&

9!er. J. Psy.

9!er. J. Psychiat.

9!er. J. Psychoan.

9!er. J. Psychother.

9!er. J. &ci.

9!er. Pol. Nuar.

9!er. Pol. &ci. Re7.

9!er. Psy.

9!er. Psy. &oc.

9!er. &ci.

9!er. &oc. Re7.

9ni!. Learn. 'eh.9nn. 9!er. 9cad. Pol.

&oc. &ci.

9nn. Clin. Res.

9!erican Journal of Psychology

9!erican Journal of Psychiatry

9!erican Journal of Psychoanalysis

9!erican Journal of Psychotherapy

9!erican Journal of &cience

9!erican Politics Nuarterly

9!erican Political &cience Re7iew

9!erican Psychologist

9!erican Psychological &ociety

9!erican &cientist

9!erican &ociological Re7iew

9ni!al Learning and 'eha7ior

9nnals of the 9!erican 9cade!y of Political and&ocial &cience

9nnals of Clinical Research

9nn. "nter. Hed. 9nnals of

"nternal Hedicine

9nn. "nternat. Hed. 9nnals of

"nternational Hedicine

9nn. (eur. 9nnals of

(eurology

9nn. (.. 9cad. &ci. 9nnals of the

(ew ork 9cade!y of &ciences

9nn. Physik 9nnals der

Physik

9nn. Psy. l59nnee

Psychologie

9nn. Re7. 9nthro. 9nnual

Re7iew of 9nthropology

9nn. Re7. (eurosci. 9nnual

Re7iew of (euroscience

9nn. Re7. Phar!. 0o%. 9nnual

Re7iew of Phar!acology 0o%icology

9nn. Re7. Physio. 9nnual

Re7iew of Physiology

9nn. Re7. Psy. 9nnual

Re7iew of Psychology

9P9 9!ericanPsychological 9ssociation

9pp. Cog. Psy. 9pplied

Cogniti7e Psychology

9r. 9nat. Physio. 9rchi7 fur



9nato!ie und Physiologie

9r. 9nat. Physio., Leip@ig

9rchi7 der 9nato!isch

und Physiologie, Leip@ig

9r. 9nat. Psy.

9rchi7es of 9nato!y andPsychology

9r. <en. Psychiat.

9rchi7es of <eneral

Psychiatry

9r. ges. Physio.

9rchi7 fur die gesa!te

Physiologie

9r. ges. Psy.

9rchi7 fur die gesa!te

Psychologie9r. Hikr. 9nat.

9rchi7 der

Hikroskopische

9nato!isch

9r. (eur. Psychiat.

9rchi7es of (eurological

Psychiatry

9r. (euro.

9rchi7es of (eurology



9''RE"90"?(& %i%

9r. (euro. Psychiat.

9r. Psy.

9r. Psy., (..

9r. Psychiat. (er7enkr.

9ud. "nst.

9ust. Psy.

'asic 9pp. &oc. Psy.

'eh. 'rain &ci. 'eh.

9nal. Letters 'eh. Hono.

9rchi7es of (eurological Psychiatry

9rchi7es of Psychology

9rchi7es of Psychology, (ew ork

9rchi7 der Psychiatrie and (er7enkrankheiten

9udio7isual "nstruction

9ustralian Psychologist

'asic and 9pplied &ocial Psychology

'eha7ioral and 'rain &ciences

'eha7ior 9nalysis Letters

'eha7ior Honographs

'eh. (euro.

'eha7ioral (euroscience

'eh. Res. Heth., "nst., 'eha7ior

Research Hethods, "nstru!ents,

Co!p. Co!puters

'eh. Res. 0heory 'eha7ioral

Research 0heory

'eh. &ci. Law 'eha7ioral

&ciences and the Law

'eh. &ci. 'eha7ioral

&cience

'eh. &upp. 'eha7ior

&upple!ents

'eh. 0her. 'eha7ior

0herapy

'er. "nter. Cong. E%p. Psy. 'erlin

"nternational Congress of E%peri!ental

Psycholog

y

'er. &achs. <es. =iss. 'erichte

<esellschaft=issenschaft, Leip@ig, Hath.

Leip@ig Hath-Phys. Physiks.

'io. Psy. 'iological

Psychology

'rit. J. Cri!. 'ritish

Journal of Cri!inology

'rit. J. <uid. Coun. 'ritishJournal of <uidance and Counseling

'rit. J. Pol. &ci. 'ritish

Journal of Political &cience

'rit. J. Psy. 'ritish

Journal of Psychology



'rit. J. Psy. Hono. &upp.

'ritish Journal of

Psychology Honograph&upple!ents

'rit. J. Psychiat.

'ritish Journal of

Psychiatry

'rit. Hed. 'ull.'ritish Hedical 'ulletin

'ull. 'ur. &tan.

'ulletin of the 'ureau of

&tandards

'ull. l59ca. Roy. &ci.

'ru%.

'ulletins de l59cade!ie

Royale des &ciences,

de 'ru%elles

'ull. l59cad. R. &. Let.

'ulletin, Royal

9cade!ie&ciencesLettr

es'eau%-

'eau%-9rts 'el.

9rts'elgiu!

'ull. Hath. 'iophys.

'ulletin of Hathe!atical'iophysics

'ull. Henn. Clin.

'ulletin of theHenninger Clinic



9''RE"90"?(&

'ull. (at. Res. Coun. 'ulletin of the (ational Research Council

'ull. Psychono!. &oc. 'ulletin of the Psychono!ic &ociety

'ull. &oc. d59nat. 'ulletin &ociete d59nato!ie

C.R. &oc. 'io. He!. Co!ptes Rendus &ociete 'iologi:ue He!oir

C.R. &oc. 'io. Paris Co!ptes Rendus &ociete 'iologi:ue Paris

Can. J. 9d!in. &ci. Canadian Journal of 9d!inistrati7e &cience

Can. J. Psy. Canadian Journal of Psychology

Can. Hed. 9ssoc. J. Canadian Hedical 9ssociation Journal

Char. Pers. Character and Personality

Child De7. Child De7elop!ent

Child De7. Hono. Child De7elop!ent Honographs

Clin. Psy. Re7. Clinical Psychology Re7iewCog. Psy. Cogniti7e Psychology

Cog. 0her. Res. Cogniti7e 0herapy and Research

Co!. Ren. &oc. 'io. Co!ptes Rendus de la &ociete de 'iologie

Co!!. Hono. Co!!unications Honographs

Co!p. Psy. Hono. Co!parati7e Psychology Honographs

Conte!p. Psy. Conte!porary Psychology

Contr. Psy. 0heor. Contributions to Psychological 0heory

Coun. Psy. 0he Counseling Psychologist

De7. Hed. Child (eur. De7elop!ental Hedicine and Child (eurology

De7. Psy. De7elop!ental Psychology

Diss. 9bs. "nter. Dissertation 9bstracts "nternationalEd. Psy. Heas. Educational and Psychological Heasure!ent

Ed. Psy. Educational Psychologist

EE< Clin. (europhysio. Electroencephalography and Clinical

(europhysiology

Ele!. &chool J. Ele!entary &chool Journal

Ency. Psy. Encyclopedia of Psychology

Ergebn. Physio. Ergebnis Physiologie

Eug. Nuart. Eugenics Nuarterly

Eur. J. &oc. Psy. European Journal of &ocial Psychology

E%cep. Child. E%ceptional Children

E%p. Clin. Phar!. E%peri!ental Clinical Phar!acology

1ed. Proc. 1ederation Proceedings

<enet. Psy. Hono. <enetic Psychology Honographs

<eron. <erontologist



9''RE"90"?(& %%i

Fandbk. E%p. Psy. Fandbook of E%peri!ental Psychology

Fandbk. <en. E%p. Psy. Fandbook of <eneral E%peri!ental Psychology

Fandbk. (or!. Path. Fandbuch der (or!alen and Pathological

Physio. Physiologie

Far. 'us. Re7. Far7ard 'usiness Re7iew

Far. Ed. Re7.

Fealth Psy.

Fu!. 'eh.

Fu!. Co!!. Res.

Fu!. De7.

Fu!. 1act.

Fu!. Rel.

"!p. Fu!. Perf. Res. Nuar.

"ndi7. Psy. 'ull.

"nst. Child =elf. Hono. "nstr.

&ci.

"nt. Ency. >nif. &ci.

"nt. J. 'eh. De7.

"nt. J. Clin. E%p. Fyp.

"nt. J. <roup Psychother.

"nt. J. "ndi7. Psy.

"nt. J. Pol. Ed.

"nt. J. Psy.

"nt. J. Psychiat.

"nt. J. Psychoanal.

"nt. J. &oc. Psychiat.

J. 9bn. Psy.

J. 9bn. &oc. Psy.

J. 9cou. &oc. 9!er.

J. 9lt. &tates Cons.

Far7ard Educational Re7iew

Fealth Psychology

Fu!an 'eha7ior

Fu!an Co!!unications Research

Fu!an De7elop!ent

Fu!an 1actors

Fu!an Relations"!pro7ing Fu!an Perfor!ance; 9 Research

Nuarterly

"ndi7idual Psychology 'ulletin

"nstitute of Child =elfare Honographs

"nstructional &cience

"nternational Encyclopedia of >nified &cience

"nternational Journal of 'eha7ioral De7elop!ent

"nternational Journal of Clinical and E%peri!ental

Fypnosis

"nternational Journal of <roup Psychotherapy

"nternational Journal of "ndi7idual Psychology

"nternational Journal of Political Education

"nternational Journal of Psychology

"nternational Journal of Psychiatry

"nternational Journal of Psychoanalysis

"nternational Journal of &ocial Psychiatry

Journal of 9bnor!al Psychology

Journal of 9bnor!al and &ocial Psychology

Journal of the 9coustical &ociety of 9!erica

Journal of 9ltered &tates of Consciousness

J. 9!er. 9ca. Child Journal of the 9!erican 9cade!y of Child

Psychiat. Psychiatry

J. 9!er. 9cad. Psychiat. Journal of the 9!erican 9cade!y of Psychiatry

J. 9!er. 9cad. Psychother. Journal of the 9!erican 9cade!y of

Psychotherapists

J. 9!er. Hed. 9ssoc. Journal of the 9!erican Hedical 9ssociation



Journal of E%peri!ental Education Journal of E%peri!ental Psychology



9''RE"90"?(& %%iii

J. E%p. Psy.; <en. Journal of E%peri!ental Psychology; <eneral

J. E%p. Psy.; Fu!. Perc. Journal of E%peri!ental Psychology; Fu!anPerf. PerceptionPerfor!ance

J. E%p. Psy.; Journal of E%peri!ental Psychology; Learning

Learn.He!.Cog. He!oryCognition

J. 1rank. "nst. Journal of the 1ranklin "nstitute

J. <en. Physio.

J. <en. Psy.

J. <enet. Psy.

J. Feal. &oc. 'eh.

J. Fist. 'eh. &ci.

J. Fu!. Psy.

J. Fu!. &tress

J. "ndi7. Psy.

J. Learn. Dis.

J. Han. 1a!.

J. Hath. 'eh.

J. Hath. Psy.

J. He!. Lang.

J. Hent. "!ag.

J. Hent. &ci.

J. Hind 'eh.

J. Hissouri Hed. 9ssoc.

J. Horph.

J. (er7. Hent. Dis.

J. (europhysio.

J. (.. 9cad. &oc. &ci.

J. ?pt. &oc. 9!er.

J. ?rg. 'eh.

J. Parapsy.

J. Pers.

J. Pers. 9ssess.

J. Pers. &oc. 'eh.

J. Pers. &oc. Psy.

J. Pers. &oc. Psy. Hono.

J. Pers. &oc. Psy. Hono.

&upp.

Journal of <eneral Physiology

Journal of <eneral Psychology

Journal of <enetic Psychology

Journal of Fealth and &ocial 'eha7ior

Journal of the Fistory of the 'eha7ioral &ciences

Journal of Fu!anistic Psychology

Journal of Fu!an &tressJournal of "ndi7idual Psychology

Journal of Learning Disabilities

Journal of Harriage and the 1a!ily

Journal of Hathe!atical 'eha7ior

Journal of Hathe!atical Psychology

Journal of He!ory and Language

Journal of Hental "!agery

Journal of Hental &cience

Journal of Hind and 'eha7ior

Journal of the Hissouri Hedical 9ssociation

Journal of HorphologyJournal of (er7ous and Hental Disorders

Journal of (europhysiology

Journal of the (ew ork 9cade!y of &ocial

&ciences

Journal of the ?ptical &ociety of 9!erica

Journal of ?rgani@ational 'eha7ior

Journal of Parapsychology

Journal of Personality

Journal of Personality 9ssess!ent

Journal of Personality and &ocial 'eha7ior

Journal of Personality and &ocial Psychology


Honographs


Honographs &upple!ent

http://j.org/

http://j.org/

http://j.org/



%%i7 9''RE"90"?(&

J. Pheno!. Psy.

J. Phil.

J. Phil., Psy., &ci. Heth.

J. Physio.

J. Pol.

J. Pol. Hil. &oc.

J. Pop.

J. Psychiat. Res.

J. Psychoso!. Res.

J. Rehab.

J. Res. Pers.

J. &e% Res.

J. &oc. Pers. Rel.

J. &oc. 'eh. Pers.

J. &oc. Clin. Psy.

J. &oc. "ss.

J. &truc. Learn.

J. &tud. 9lc.

J. 0ransper. Psy.

J. >nif. &ci.

J. erb. Learn. erb. 'eh.

J. oc. 'eh.J. =ash. 9cad. &ci.

Honatb. 9ugenheilk.

Learn. Hot.

Lunds >ni7. 9rs.

Harr. 1a!. Li7.

He!. Cog.

He!. Reg. 9cc. &ci. Let.

9rt. Hod.

He!. &oc. 'io.

Hinn Hed.

Hono. &oc. Res. Child De7.

Hot. E!o.

Hulti7ar. 'eh. Res.

(eb. &y!. Hot.

Journal of Pheno!enological Psychology

Journal of Philosophy

Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and &cientific

Hethod

Journal of Physiology

Journal of Politics

Journal of Political and Hilitary &ociology

Journal of Population

Journal of Psychiatric Research

Journal of Psychoso!atic Research

Journal of Rehabilitation

Journal of Research in Personality

Journal of &e% Research

Journal of &ocial and Personal Relationships

Journal of &ocial 'eha7ior and Personality

Journal of &ocial and Clinical Psychology

Journal of &ocial "ssues

Journal of &tructural Learning

Journal of &tudies on 9lcohol

Journal of 0ranspersonal Psychology

Journal of >nified &ciences

Journal of erbal Learning and erbal 'eha7ior

Journal of ocational 'eha7ior

Journal of the =ashington 9cade!y of &ciences

Mlinical Honatsblatter der 9ugenheilkunde

Learning and Hoti7ation

Lunds >ni7ersities 9rsskrift

Harriage and 1a!ily Li7ing

He!ory and Cognition

He!orie della Regia 9ccade!ia di &cien@e, Lettre

9rti in Hodena

He!ories de la &ociete de 'iologie

Hinnesota Hedicine

Honographs of the &ociety for Research in Child

De7elop!ent

Hoti7ation and E!otion

Hulti7ariate 'eha7ior Research

(ebraska &y!posiu! on Hoti7ation

http://j.pol.mil/

http://j.pol.mil/

http://j.pol.mil/



9''RE"90"?(& KK

(ew Eng. J . Hed. (ew England Journal of Hedicine

?ccup. Hent. Feal. ?ccupational Hental Fealth

?rg. 9d!in. &ci. ?rgani@ation and 9d!inistrati7e &ciences

?rg. 'eh. Fu!. Dec. ?rgani@at ional 'eha7ior Fu!an Decision

Proc. Processes

?rg. 'eh. Fu!. Per. ?rgani@ational 'eha7ior and Fu!an Perfor!ance

Pap. 9!er. Congr. <en. Papers of the 9!erican Congress of <eneral

&e!ant. &e!antics

Perc. Hot. &kills Perceptual and Hotor &kills

Perc. Psychophys.

Pers. "ndi7. Diff.

Personnel Psy.

Pers. &oc. Psy. 'ull.

Pflug. 9r. ges. Physio.

Phil. Hag.

Phil. &ci.

Phil. &er.

Phil. &tud.

Phil. 0rans.

Phil. 0rans. Roy. &oc. Lon.

Phys. &oc. earbk.

Physio. 'eh.

Physio. Re7.

Physio. Aoo.

Pogg. 9nn. Phys. Che!.

Pogg. 9nn. Physik

Proc. 9!er. Phil. &oc.

Proc. (at. 9cad. &ci.

Proc. Phy. &oc. Lon.

Proc. R.&. Lon.

Proc. &oc. Psyc. Res.

Proc. =est. J. Co!p. Conf.

Prof. Psy. Psy. 'ull. Psy.

'ull. Hono. &upp. Psy.

1orsch.

Perception and Psychophysics

Personality and "ndi7idual Differences

Personnel PsychologyPersonality and &ocial Psychology 'ulletin

Pflugers 9rchi7 <esa!te Physiologie

Philosophy Haga@ine

Philosophy of &cience

Philosophical &eries

Philosophische &tudien

Philosophical 0ransactions

Philosophical 0ransactions of the Royal &ociety of

London

Physical &ociety earbook

Physiology and 'eha7ior Physiological Re7iew

Physiological Aoology

Poggendorf 9nnales der Physiologie and Che!ie

Poggendorf 9nnales der Physik

Proceedings of the 9!erican Philosophical &ociety

Proceedings of the (ational 9cade!y of &ciences

Proceedings of the Physics &ociety of London

Proceedings of the Royal &ociety of London

Proceedings of the &ociety for Psychical Research

Proceedings of the =estern Joint Co!puter

ConferenceProfessional Psychology

Psychological 'ulletin

Psychological 'ulletin Honograph &upple!ent

Psychologische 1orschung



%%7i 9''RE"90"?(&

Psy. "n:. Psychological "n:uiry

Psy. "ss. Psychological "ssues

Psy. Hono. Psychological Honographs

Psy. Rec. Psychological Record

Psy. Rep. Psychological Reports

Psy. Re7. Psychological Re7iew

Psy. Re7. Hono. &upp. Psychological Re7iew Honograph &upple!ent

Psy. &ci. Psychological &cience

Psy. &tud. Psychological &tudies

Psy. 0oday Psychology 0oday

Psychiat. 9nn. Psychiatric 9nnals

Psychiat. Nuar. Psychiatric Nuarterly

Psychiat. Nuar. &upp. Psychiatric Nuarterly &upple!ent

Psychoan. Psychother. Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy

Psychoan. Re7. Psychoanalytic Re7iew

Psychoan. &tudy Child Psychoanalytic &tudy of the Child

Psychoanal. Psy. Psychoanalytic Psychology

Psychono!. &ci. Psychono!ic &cience

Psychophar!. 'ull. Psychophar!acology 'ulletin

Psychophy. Psychophysiology

Psychoso!. Hed. Psychoso!atic Hedicine

Psychother.; 0heory Res. Psychotherapy; 0heory, Research, and Practice

Prac.

Pub. ?pin. Nuar. Public ?pinion NuarterlyNuar. J. E%p. Psy. Nuarterly Journal of E%peri!ental Psychology

Nuar. Re7. 'io. Nuarterly Re7iew of 'iology

Rep. Res. &oc. Psy. Representati7e Research in &ocial Psychology

Repl. &oc. Psy. Replications in &ocial Psychology

Res. Har. Research in Harketing

Res. Publ. 9ssoc. (er7.

Hent. Dis.

Re7. 9nthro.

Re7. Ed. Res.

Re7. 1ran. Endo.

Re7. Pers. &oc. Psy.

Re7. Res. Ed.

Re7. &oc. Econ.

&. 9fr. J. Psy.

&. 9fr. Hed. J.

Research Publication of the 9ssociation of (er7ous

Hental Disease

Re7iew of 9nthropology

Re7iew of Educational Research

Re7ue 1rancaise d5Endocrinologie

Re7iew of Personality and &ocial PsychologyRe7iew of Research in Education

Re7iew of &ocial Econo!y

&outh 9frican Journal of Psychology

&outh 9frican Hedical Journal



9''RE"90"?(& %%7ii

&chi@o. 'ull.

&chwei@ A. Psy. 9n.

&ci. 9!er.

&ci. Hon.

&it@ber. 9kad. =iss. 'erlin

&oc. 'eh. Pers.

&oc. 'io.

&oc. 'io. He!. Paris

&oc. 1or.

&oc. Prob.

&oc. Psy. Nuar.

&oc. Res.

&chi@ophrenia 'ulletin

&chwei@ Aeitschrift fur Psychologie 9nwend

&cientific 9!erican

&cientific Honthly

&it@ungsberichte 9kade!ie =issenschaft der 'erlin

&ocial 'eha7ior and Personality

&ociete des 'iologi:ue

&ociete 'iologi:ue He!oirs, Paris

&ocial 1orces

&ocial Proble!s

&ocial Psychology Nuarterly

&ocial Research

&oc. &ci. (atl. 'ull. &ociete &cience (ational 'ulletin

&ociety 9d7. &oc. Psy. &ociety for the

9d7ance!ent of &ocial Psychology

(ews. (ewsletter

&tud. Ed. Psy., (at. Cen. &tudies in

Educational Psychology, (ational Center

>ni7. of >ni7ersities

0each. Coll. Contr. Ed. 0eachers CollegeContributions to Education

0heory Psy. 0heory andPsychology

0heory Res. &oc. Ed. 0heory and

Research in &ocial Education>. "owa &tud. Child =elf. >ni7ersity of"owa &tudies of Child =elfare

>. ?re. Pub. &tud. Psy. >ni7ersity of

?regon Publications of &tudies in

Psychology

>ni7. Cal. Pub. Psy. >ni7ersity of

California Publications in Psychology

is. Res. ision Research

oc. <uid. Nuar. ocational<uidance Nuarterly

outh &oc. outh and&ociety

A. 'io. Aeitschrift fur'iologisch

A. Mlin. Psy. Psychother. Aeitschrift fur



Mlinische Psychologie und

Psychot

herapie

A. Psy.Aeitschrift fur Psychologie

A. Psy. Physio. &inn.

Aeitschrift fur Psychologieund Physiologie

&innesor

gange

A. &inn.Aeitschrift fur

&innesphysiologie

A. 0ierpsy.Aeitschrift fur

0ierpsychologie

Ab. Psychoan.Aentlichblatt Psychoanalyse

Abl. Physio.

Aeitblatter der Physiologie



Dictionary of Theories,Laws, and Concepts

in Psychology



A

9'C 0FE?R. 0he 9!erican psychologist 9lbert Ellis #+3+*/ $ de7eloped

rational-e!oti7e therapy #RE0$, which is a directi7e, confrontational psycho-

therapy designed to challenge and !odify clients5 irrational beliefs thought to

cause their personal distress #Ellis, +3+, +366, +346$. RE0 is based on Ellis5

AB theory #=ood =ood, +33*$. 0he 9 refers to the acti!ating e7ent, the B

to the person5s belief about the e7ent, and the to the e!otional conse#ence

that follows. Ellis clai!s that it is not the e7ent that causes the e!otional con-

se:uence, but rather the person5s belief about the e7entB that is, 9 does not

cause , but B causes . "f the belief is irrational, then the e!otional

conse:uence can be e%tre!e distress. 'ecause reality does not confor! to such

irrational beliefs as GE7eryone should lo7e !eG or G" !ust be perfect,G patients

who hold such beliefs are open to frustration and unhappiness. "rrational beliefscause people to 7iew an undesirable e7ent as a catastrophe rather than !erely

as a disappoint!ent, an%iety, or incon7enienceB in addition, persons !ay go on

to feel an%ious about their an%iety and depressed about their depression #Ellis,

+346$. RE0 and AB theory help clients to see rationally and logically that

their false beliefs and unrealistic e%pectations are the real causes of their

proble!s. 9s clients begin to replace irrational beliefs with rational beliefs,

their e!otional reactions beco!e !ore appropriate, less distressing, and !ore

likely to lead to constructi7e beha7ior #Ellis, +363$. &ee also C?<("0"E

0FER9P, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

RE1ERE(CE&

Ellis, 9. #+3+$. 9 g#ide to rational li!ing. Englewood Cliffs, (J; Prentice-Fall.

Ellis, 9. #+366$. 0he basic clinical theory of rational-e!oti7e therapy. "n 9. Ellis R. <rieger #Eds.$, $andboo% of rational&eoti!e therapy. (ew ork; &pringer.

Ellis, 9. #+363$. Rational e!oti7e therapy. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, #rrent

psychothera&

pies. "tasca, Peacock.



9'(E5& E11EC0

Ellis, 9. #+346$. 0he i!possibility of achie7ing consistently good !ental health. Aer. sy.,

*, *-*62.

=ood, E., =ood, &. #+33*$. +he world of psychology. 'oston; 9llyn 'acon.

9'(E5& E11EC0. &ee 9'(E5& L9=.

9'(E5& L9=. 0he English che!ist and physiologist =illia! de =i7eleslie 9bney

#+4-+3)$ de7eloped this principle concerning the additi7ity of het-erochro!atic

lu!inances #GbrightnessesG$, which states that the lu!inance of a !i%ture of

differently colored lights is e:ual to the su! of the lu!inances of the co!ponents.

Abney's law has not generally been fully supported by later research, and,

interestingly, :uestions about the law lie at the root of a theoretical debate in

colori!etry #Judd, +322$. 0he deficiencies of Abney's law ha7e been known for a

long ti!e #<raha!, +32$, but the weaknesses ha7e been e7aded or tolerated byscientists only until recently #cf; "7es, +3+, +3+2B Dresler, +32*$. 9 pheno!enon of

perception called Abney's effect refers to 7isual conditions in7ol7ing the sudden

illu!ination of a large surface area #cf; abert's law- cosine law, which states that

the illu!ination on a surface 7aries directly as the cosine of the angle between the

incident ray and the perpendicular to the surfaceB =arren, +3*$. 0he perception of

light in Abney's effect is that it see!s to co!e on first in the center of the patch of

area and then spread to the edges instead of appearing on the total area e:ually all at

the sa!e ti!e. &ubse:uently, when the light is e%tinguished, the outer edges

disappear first, first followed by the center area disappearing last #Reber, +332$. "n

addition to these pheno!ena, 9bney is pro!inent for his contributions to the science

of photography, including stellar photography, and for his disco7ery of how to !ake

photographic plates that are sensiti7e to red and infrared light #Huir, +33$. &ee also

C?L?R H"K0>RE L9=&0FE?R ?1B <R9&&H9((5& L9=&B (E=0?(5&L9=PR"(C"PLE#&$ ?1 C?L?R H"K0>RE.

RE1ERE(CE&

9bney, =., 1esting, E. #+44$. Colour photo!etry. hil. +rans. oy. /oc., on., +66,

*-2.

9bney, =. #+436$. 0he sensiti7eness of the retina to light and colour. hil. +rans. oy. /oc.,

on. 012A, +22-+3*.

"7es, F. #+3+$. &tudies in the photo!etry of lights of different colors. ". 0he addition of

lu!inosities of different color. hil. 3ag., *, 42-42*.

9bney, =. #+3+*$. esearches in colo#r !ision. London; Long!ans, <reen.

"7es, F. #+3+2$. 0he transfor!ation of color-!i%ture e:uations fro! one syste! to another. 4.

5ran%. 6nst., 072, 6*-6)+.

=arren, F. #Ed.$ #+3*$. 8ictionary of psychology. Ca!bridge, H9; Foughton Hifflin.

Le<rand, ., <eblewic@, E. #+3*6$. La dualite de la 7ision au% brilliances ele7ees. Ann. sy., 97, +-+.

Peiron, F. #+3*3$. La dissociation de l5adaptation lu!ineuse et de l5adaptation chro!a-ti:ue.

Ann. sy., 2, +-+.



9CC?HH?D90"?(, L9=PR"(C"PLE ?1 *

Dresler, 9. #+32*$. 0he non-additi7ity of heterochro!atic brightnesses. +ransactions

of the 6ll#ination :ngineering /ociety, ondon, 07, ++-+2.Judd, D. #+322$. Radical changes in photo!etry and colori!etry foreshadowed by

C"E actions in Aurich. 4. pt. /oc. Aer., <, 436-434.

&perling, F. #+324$. 9n e%peri!ental in7estigation of the relationship between colour

!i%ture and lu!inous efficiency. "n =is#al probles of colo#r. &y!posiu!, (a-

tional Physical Laboratory, &epte!ber *-2, +326. London; Fer Haesty5s &ta-

tionery ?ffice.

<raha!, C. #+32$. Color !i%ture and color syste!s. "n C. <raha! #Ed.$, =ision

and !is#al perception. (ew ork; =iley.Huir, F. #Ed.$ #+33$. aro#sse dictionary of scientists. (ew ork. Larousse.

Reber, 9. #+332$. +he eng#in dictionary of psychology. (ew ork; Penguin 'ooks.

9'(?RH9L"0, 0FE?R"E& ?1. &ee P&CF?P90F?L?<, 0FE?R"E&

?1.

9'&0R9C0"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE& ?1. &ee C?<("0"E &0LE H?DEL&.

9CC?HH?D90"?(, L9=PR"(C"PLE ?1. 0he concept of accoodation in

psychology has a 7ariety of !eanings depending on the conte%t in which it is used.

"n general ter!s, it refers to any !o7e!ent or adust!ent #physical or psychological$

that is !ade to prepare the organis! for so!e sti!ulus input. "n the conte%t of 7ision

#9lpern, +3$, it refers to the auto!atic adust!ent process wherein the shape of the

lens of the eye changes to focus on obects situated at different distances fro! the

obser7er. 0he suspensory liga!ents hold the lens in a relati7ely flattened position

when the nor!al eye is at rest and can focus clearly on obects that are about ) feet

away #distant 7ision$. =hen obects are closer than ) feet #near 7ision$, the ciliary

!uscles contract, which causes rela%ation of the suspensory liga!ents and which, inturn, allows the flattened lens to thicken or bulge in shape, causing a sharper focus of

light rays on the retina #Fochberg, +32$. 0he ter! accoodation sensation refers

to a sensation that acco!panies changes of 7isual adust!ent that is attributable to

changes in tension of the ciliary !uscles that control the shape of the lens, and the

ter! accoodation tie refers to te!poral duration fro! the !o!ent a 7isual

sti!ulus is presented in the line of 7ision until the lenses of the eyes ha7e adusted

for clear 7ision of an obect #=arren, +3*$. 'artley #+32+$ reported that le7el of

illu!ination has an effect on 7isual acco!!odation and that the !ost likely theory

of the physiological !echanis! for acco!!odation is that of a basic tonal

background caused by 7ascular inner7ation of the sy!pathetic ner7ous syste! that

affects the oculo!otor ner7e to !ake specific focusing adust!ents. "n the conte%t of

infant and childhood de7elop!ent, Jean Piaget #+32, +36)$ used the ter!

accoodation to refer to the child5s !odification of ideas or concepts of the worldin response to new e%periences in the en7iron!ent or in response to e%periences that

are inconsistent with pre7iously



9CC?HH?D90"?(, L9=PR"(C"PLE ?1

known ideas or concepts. Related ter!s in Piaget5s theoretical 7iewpoint areassiilation #incorporating new or !odified ideas and concepts into the child5s

e%isting cogniti7e structure$ and schea #the de7elop!ent of an organi@ed cog-

niti7e structure or pattern as a result of acco!!odation and assi!ilation$. 9c-

cording to Piaget, sche!a #or Gsche!eG or Gsche!ataG$ nor!ally de7elop during

the first two years of the child5s life. =hen acco!!odation is used in the conte%t

of ner7e acti7ity, it describes the increased e%citability of the ner7e that occurs

when a constant sti!ulus #such as an electric current$ is applied to the ner7e, and

the subse:uent slow decrease #Gacco!!odationG$ in ner7e e%citability with

continued sti!ulation. =hen the sti!ulus is ter!inated, a sudden drop in ner7e

e%citability occurs. 9fter such a se:uence of e7ents and following ter!ination of

the sti!ulating e7ent, the ner7e is less sensiti7e briefly to sti!ulation than it was

before initiation of the original sti!ulus. Accoodation is used in a social

psychological and sociological conte%t to refer to a process of social adust!entthat is designed to create or !aintain group har!ony #Reber, +332$. 0he notion

of accoodation in the case of social beha7ior !ay take the for! of

bargaining, conci liation, conflict resolution, co!pro!ise, arbitration,

negotiation, or truce-!aking a!ong the concerned or antagonistic indi7iduals,

groups, or nations #Rubin 'rown, +362B Druck!an, +366$. "n a historical

conte%t, in the area of attention, the ter! accoodation is archaic and referred

to the person5s adust!ent or readust!ent that was essential to the !a%i!al

clearness #0itchener, +3)4, referred to Gsensory clearnessG or GattensityG$ of an

i!pression when the nor!al !ean accoodation tie was !easured to be

about one and one-half second with a range between ). and *.) seconds #=ar-

ren, +3*$. &ee also '9L9(CE, PR"(C"PLE&0FE?R ?1B 1E&0"(<ER5&

C?<("0"E D"&&?(9(CE 0FE?RB P"9<E05& 0FE?R ?1 DEEL-

?PHE(09L &09<E&.

RE1ERE(CE&

'aldwin, J. #+43$. $andboo% of psychology. (ew ork; Folt.

0itchener, E. #+3)4$. ect#res on the experiental psychology of feeling andattention. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

=arren, F. #+3+3$. $#an psychology. 'oston; Foughton Hifflin

=arren, F. #Ed.$ #+3*$. 8ictionary of psychology. Ca!bridge, H9; Foughton

Hifflin. 'artley, &. #+32+$. 0he psychophysiology of 7ision. "n &. &. &te7ens

#Ed.$, $andboo% of experiental psychology. (ew ork; =iley.

Piaget, J. #+32$. +he constr#ction of reality in the child. (ew ork; 'asic 'ooks.9lpern, H. #+3$. 9cco!!odation. "n F. Darson #Ed.$, +he eye. ol. *. (ew

ork; 9cade!ic Press.

Fochberg, J. #+32$. erception. Englewood Cliffs, (J; Prentice-Fall.

Piaget, J. #+36)$. Piaget5s theory. "n P. Hussen #Ed.$, arichael's an#al of child

psychology. (ew ork; =iley.

Rubin, J., 'rown, '. #+362$. +he social psychology of bargaining and negotiation. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.



9CF"EEHE(0 H?0"90"?(, 0FE?R ?1 2

Druck!an, D. #Ed.$ #+366$. >egotiations /ocial psychological perspecti!es.

'e7erly Fills, C9; &age.Reber, 9. #+332$. +he eng#in dictionary of psychology. (ew ork; Penguin 'ooks.

9CF"EEHE(0 H?0"90"?(, 0FE?R ?1. need achie7e!ent

achie7e!ent need. 0he 9!erican psychologist Fenry 9. Hurray #+43*-+344$ first

defined an indi7idual5s need for achie7e!ent (achie!eent oti!ation, or nAch)

as a desire for significant acco!plish!ents, for !astering skills, for o7erco!ing

obstacles in the way of one5s success, or for rapidly attaining high stan-dard#s$

#Hurray, +3*4$. Hurray and other researchers, such as the 9!erican psy-

chologists Da7id C. HcClelland #+3+6/ $ and John =. 9tkinson #+3*/ $,

de7eloped 7arious ways to !easure the concept of achie!eent oti!ation,

pro!inent a!ong which is the use of personality Gproecti7eG tests #such as the

0he!atic 9pperception 0est, or 090, where the person5s task is to in7ent storiesabout the content of a!biguous pictures or photos$. HcClelland #+3+$ e%tended

the concept of nAch fro! the le7el of analysis of the indi7idual to that of entire

societies or cultures. 0he theoretical underpinnings of achie!eent oti!ation,

including both GintrinsicG and Ge%trinsicG !oti7es, ha7e two essential

co!ponents; an assu!ed energi@ing or !oti7ating !echanis! that directs a

person toward goals and a set of internali@ed conditions or standards #whether

created by oneself or by others$ that represent personal fulfill!ent or achie7e-

!ent. 9 nu!ber of studies ha7e critici@ed the theory of nAch. 1or e%a!ple,

=einstein #+33$ found low reliability and :uestionable 7alidity assess!ents for

the 090 !easuresB Haehr and (icholls #+34)$ critici@ed the nAch researchers5

narrow e!phasis on personality as a crucial deter!inant of beha7ior and their

inability to find ade:uate results concerning nAch in wo!en #cf; =einer, Johnson,

Hehrabian, +34B Forner, +36$. ?n the other hand, Lindgren #+36$ suggeststhat the unsatisfactory 7alidity and reliability assess!ents of nAch !easures !ay

be due to the atte!pt to !easure a spectru! of personality traits that is too broad,

and proposed that forced-choice types of :uestions, rather than proecti7e-types

of tests, be used where indi7iduals being tested would choose between

Gachie7e!ent-relatedG and Gaffiliation-relatedG personal styles. 0he nAch

7iewpoint was aug!ented in the +36)s when the field of cogniti!e psychology

first appeared and placed e!phasis upon a person5s GcognitionsG about the nature

and purpose of achie7e!ent in a cultural conte%t #Haehr (icholls, +34)$.

0hen, by the +34)s, the unresol7ed :uestion was raised as to whether nAch

should be studied as a personality trait, as suggested by personality psychologists,

or as a cogniti7e beha7ior, as suggested by cogniti7e psychologists. Perhaps

future research on the concept of nAch !ay show greater reconciliation of the

areas of personality psychology and cogniti7e psychology. &ee also H?-0"90"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

RE1ERE(CE&

Hurray, F. #+3*4$. :xplorations in personality. (ew ork; ?%ford >ni7ersity Press.



9CF"EEHE(0 H?0"90"?(, 0FE?R ?1

9tkinson, J. #+324$. 3oti!es in fantasy, action, and society. (ew ork; an

(ostrand. HcClelland, D. #+3+$. +he achie!ing society. (ew ork; an (ostrand.9tkinson, J. #+3$. An introd#ction to oti!ation. (ew ork; an (ostrand.

HcClelland, D. #+32$. (eed achie7e!ent and entrepreneurship; 9 longitudinal

study. 4. ers. /oc. sy., 0, *43-*3.

9tkinson, 4., @ 1eather, (. #Eds.$ #+3$. 9 theory of achie!eent oti!ation. (ew

ork; =iley.

Feckhausen, F. #+36$. +he anatoy of achie!eent oti!ation. (ew ork;

9cade!ic Press.

Feckhausen, F. #+34$. 9chie7e!ent !oti7ation research; Current proble!s and

so!e contributions toward a general theory of !oti7ation. "n =. 9rnold #Ed.$,

>ebras%a /yposi# on 3oti!ation. Lincoln; >ni7ersity of (ebraska Press.

=einer, '., Johnson, P., Hehrabian, 9. #+34$. 9chie7e!ent !oti7ation and the

recall of inco!pleted and co!pleted e%a! :uestions. 4. :d. sy., <1, +4+-+42.

=einstein, H. #+33$. 9chie7e!ent !oti7ation and risk preference. 4. ers. /oc.

sy., 09, +2*-+6.

HcClelland, D., =inter, D. #+36+$. 3oti!ating econoic achie!eent. (ew ork;

1ree Press.

Fo!er, H. #+36$. 0oward an understanding of achie7e!ent-related conflicts in

wo!en. 4. /oc. 6ss., *7, +6-+6.

HcClelland, D. #+36*$. 0esting for co!petence rather than for Gintelligence.G Aer.

sy., *7, +-+.

9tkinson, 4., @ Raynor, J. #Eds.$ #+36$. 3oti!ation and achie!eent. =ashington,

DC; =inston.

=einer, '. #Ed.$ #+36$. Achie!eent oti!ation and attrib#tion theory. Horristown,

(J; <eneral Learning Press.

Lindgren, F. #+36$. Heasuring need to achie7e by (ach (aff scale-9 forced-choice

:uestionnaire. sy. ep., 91, 3)6-3+).

HcClelland, D., 9tkinson, 4., Clark, R., Lowell, E. #+36$. +he achie!eentoti!e. (ew ork; "r7ington.

Feckhausen, F. #+366$. 9chie7e!ent !oti7ation and its constructs; 9 cogniti7e

!odel. 3ot. @ :o., +, 4*-*3.

HcClelland, D. #+364$. Hanaging !oti7ation to e%pand hu!an freedo!. Aer. sy.,

99, )+-+).

Haehr, H., (icholls, J. #+34)$. Culture and achie7e!ent !oti7ation; 9 second

look. "n (. =arren #Ed.$, /t#dies in cross&c#lt#ral psychology. ol. *. (ew

ork; 9cade!ic Press.

Feckhausen, F. #+34$. 0he de7elop!ent of achie7e!ent !oti7ation. "n =. Fartup

#Ed.$, e!iew of child de!elopent research. ol. . Chicago; >ni7ersity of

Chicago Press.

Cooper, =. #+34*$. 9n achie7e!ent !oti7ation no!ological network. 4. ers. /oc.

sy., , 4+-4+.

Dweck, C., Elliott, E. #+34*$. 9chie7e!ent !oti7ation. "n P. Hussen E. Fether-ington #Eds.$, $andboo% of child psychology. ol. . (ew ork; =iley.

HcClelland, D. #+34*$. &ources of adult !oti7es in patterns of parent beha7ior in

early

childhood. 4. ers. /oc. sy., , 2-26.

HcClelland, D. #+342$. $#an oti!ation. <len7iew, "L; &cott, 1ores!an.



9CF5& L9=&PR"(C"PLE&0FE?R 6

9CF"EEHE(0 H?0"90"?( 0FE?R ?1 =?RM. &ee =?RM

C9REER?CC>P90"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

9CF5& L9=&PR"(C"PLE&0FE?R. 0he <er!an psychologist (ar@iss 9ch

#+46+-+3$ was one !e!ber of the group of researchers #others included ).

Mulpe, F. =att, M. Harbe, and M. 'uhler$ at the fa!ous =ur@burg GnewG

e%peri!ental school in <er!any during the early +3))s. 0he =ur@burg group

studied thought processes 7ia 7erbali@ed introspection and co!ple% cogniti7e

e7ents #as opposed to studying sensations, which was the pri!ary e!phasis at the

>ni7ersity of Leip@ig under =ilhel! =undt5s leadership$. 9ch5s work on

syste!atic e%peri!ental introspection, awareness, and deterining tendency was

ger!inal to the e%odus of e%peri!ental psychologists away fro! the e%clusi7e

use of introspection as a research !ethod. 9ch5s !ethod of e%peri!ental intro-spection was syste!atic in that it clearly delineated the li!its of a participant5s

introspection #i.e., Glooking into one5s own e%perience and reporting on itG$ to the

Gfore,G the G!id,G and the GafterG periods for !aking introspecti7e reports during

the conduct of an e%peri!ent. 9ch also achie7ed relati7ely high le7els of

precision in his studies by using de7ices such as the GFipp chronoscopeG #an

apparatus for !easuring ti!e inter7als, first !ade by Hathias Fipp, a watch-

!aker, in +4*B =arren, +3*B 9ch, +3)2$ during his e%peri!ents. 9ch5s prin-

ciples concerning deterining tendency in e%peri!ents contain what are, perhaps,

the !ost i!portant aspects of his work for present-day e%peri!ental

psychologists. 9ch showed that there were #nconscio#s infl#ences operating on

the beha7ior of the participants in his e%peri!ents, including the instructions that

were gi7en by the e%peri!enter to the participant. 0he deterining tendencies

were thought to be known by so!e !eans other than the participant5sintrospection. 9n e%a!ple of deterining tendency is pro7ided by 'oring, Lang-

feld, and =eld #+3*3, p. *43$, who describe an e%peri!ent on hypnosis #cf; ?rne,

+363$. 9fter the subect #the word GparticipantG see!s to be the fa7ored ter! to

use today in e%peri!ental conte%ts$ was hypnoti@ed, the suggestion was !ade

that after waking, two cards with two digits on each would be shown. 1or the first

card, the person was to gi7e the su! of the digits, and for the second card, he was

to gi7e the difference between the two digits. >pon waking fro! the hypnotic

state, a card was shown on which the digits and were writtenB the person

i!!ediately said G4.G =hen the second card was shown, containing the digits

and , the sa!e indi7idual said G.G 0he person had no !e!ory of the prior

suggestion and could gi7e no e%planation of what he had said about the cards, nor

did it occur to the person that 4 was the su! of and or that was the

difference between and . 9ccording to Ach's principle, the deter!iningtendencies Gfi%G the course of thought by fa7oring certain GassociationsG that

spring fro! the i!!ediate or current situation and inhibit other associations. "n

this way, the tendencies gi7e directi7e order in a situation containing a nu!ber of

co!peting possibilities and enable an answer to be gi7en



4 9C0"90"?(9R?>&9L 0FE?R

to the :uestion of why a particular possibility is !ateriali@ed rather than any other

one. ?ther e%peri!ents ha7e indicated that deter!ining tendencies function to

gi7e co!pletion to already established patterns of thought #cf; Aeigarnik effectB

!ind!ental set$ and !ay reinforce old associations that the indi7idual !ay ha7e

partially established. 9ccording to Ach's principle, the directi7e or deter!ining

tendency !akes the action of a person !ore than a rigid !echanical se:uence of

e7ents such as is found in the !o7e!ents of a !achine 0he ter! deterining

tendencies is so!ewhat archaic today and is replaced by 7alidity-and control-

sensiti7e ter!s in e%peri!ental psychology such as Gpreparatory set,G Gde!and

characteristics of the situation,G Gecological 7alidity of the e% peri!ent,G and

Ge%peri!enter effectG #'runswik, +36B Ray, +33$. &uch conte!porary ter!s

seek to sensiti@e and !oti7ate the e%peri!enter to control 7arious potentially

confounding 7ariables that !ay e%ist in the psychological e%peri!ent where there

is a dyna!ic interplay between the participant, the e%peri!enter, and thee%peri!ental setting or conte%t. &ee also 9&&?C"90"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE&

?1B H"(DHE(09L &E0, L9= ?1B PERCEP0"?( #". <E(ER9L$,

0FE?R"E& ?1B AE"<9R("M E11EC0PFE(?HE(?(.

RE1ERE(CE&

9ch, (. #+3)2$. ber die Willenstatig%eit and das 8en%en. :ine experientalle nter&s#ch#ng

it eine Anhange ber das $ippsche hronos%op. <ottingen, =est <er!any;

andenhoeck Ruprecht.


'oring, E. <., Langfeld, F., =eld, F. #+3*2$. sychology A fact#al textboo%. (ew ork;

=iley.

&troud, J. #+3*4$. 6ntrod#ction to general psychology. (ew ork; Prentice-Fall. 'oring, E. <.,

Langfeld, F., =eld, F. #+3*3$. 6ntrod#ction to psychology. (ew ork; =iley.

9ch, (. #+3$. ehrb#ch der psychologie. ol. *; ra%tische psychologie. 'a!berg;

'uchner.

'runswik, E. #+36$. /ysteatic and representati!e design of psychological experients.

'erkeley; >ni7ersity of California Press.

?rne, H. #+363$. ?n the si!ulating subect as a :uasi-control group in hypnosis research;

=hat, why, and how. "n E. 1ro!! R. &hor #Eds.$, $ypnosis 8e!elopents in

research and new perspecti!es. (ew ork; 9ldine.

Ray, =. #+33$. 3ethods toward a science of beha!ior and experience. Pacific <ro7e, C9;

'rooksCole.

9C0"90"?(9R?>&9L 0FE?R. 0he ter! acti!ation theory was !ost

pro!inently used by Donald '. Lindsley #+32+$ as a working theory for e!otion.

0he concept acti!ate !eans not only Gto !ake acti7eG but also Gto render capable of

reactingG #=oodworth &chlosberg, +32$. 9t one end of a con tinuu! of acti7ationis a strong reaction to sti!ulation, and at the other end is the condition of :uiescence,

sleep, or death, with little or no reaction to sti!ulation. 0he acti!ation-aro#sal

theory de7eloped fro! work in the area of physiology, specifically on the electrical

acti7ity of the brain where the cerebral



9C0"90"?(9R?>&9L 0FE?R 3

corte% was seen to be aroused by discharge of a lower center of the brain in the

hypothala!ic region. 0he general for! of the acti!ation theory is a for! of the

older Genergy-!obili@ationG concept of e!otion #Cannon, +3+2$ where early

studies showed how the body prepares for e!ergency action during states of rage

and fear. 0he use of the ter! acti!ation is generally restricted to the energi@ing

influence of one internal syste!, such as the reticular acti7ating syste!, on

another one and is not an e%act synony! for either GarousalG #a general ter!$ or

Gsti!ulationG #acti7ation produced by specific e%ternal sources$. Fistorically, the

concept of acti!ation was central to the study and de7elop!ent of dri7es, !oti7es,

and e!otions in psychology. "t has been relati7ely easy to identify beha7ioral

states as le7els of arousal #cf; 'erlyne5s, +3), +36+, Gaesthetic arousal,G which

can be raised through properties of sti!ulus patterns such as no7elty$, but parallel

physiological processes were !ore difficult to disco7er. 0he

electroencephalograph #EE<$ has been a so!ewhat successful indicator of arousalle7el where the lower fre:uency EE< is obser7ed when beha7ioral arousal

declines, but, gi7en certain e%ceptions to this si!ple relationship, the EE< is only

an appro%i!ate indicator of arousal. 9lso associated with the aro#sal theory is the

sleep/wakefulness cycle of organis!s where an indi7idual goes to sleep when

input falls below a certain le7el. 0his hypothesis #'re!er, +3*2$ is tenable when

considering the general nocturnal sleeping habits of hu!ans, but it has difficulty

when e%plaining the beha7ior of certain ani!al species that sleep during the day

and are !ost acti7e at night. 0he sensory input interpretation of arousal was

predo!inant until the studies by Horu@@i and Hagoun #+33$ at the >ni7ersity of

Pisa in "taly and Lindsley, 'owden, and Hagoun #+33$ at the >ni7ersity of

California at Los 9ngeles #>CL9$ in the >nited &tates showed that se7ering all

the sensory ner7es in cats #without da!aging the reticular for!ation$ was

acco!panied by nor!al wakefulness/sleep patterns in the EE<. 0he 7iew today#Le7inthal, +34*$ has changed so!ewhat fro! the si!ple picture of the reticular

for!ation as the !aor acti7ator for arousal patterns and includes the recognition

that EE< arousal signs are not always consistent with changes in beha7ioral

arousal. &ee also C9((?(C9((?(/'9RD 0FE?RB DR"E, 0FE?R"E&

?1B EH?0"?(, 0FE?R"E&L9=& ?1B L"(D&LE5& 9C0"90"?( 0FE?RB

H?0"90"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1B &PRE9D"(<-9C0"90"?( H?DEL ?1

HEH?R.

RE1ERE(CE&

Cannon, =. #+3+2$. Bodily changes in pain, h#nger, fear, and rage. (ew ork;9ppleton.

're!er, 1. #+3*2$. Cer7eau isole et physiologie du so!!eil. oin. en. /oc. Bio.,

(aris), 007, +*2-++.Darrow, C. #+3$. 0he electroencephalogra! and psychophysiological regulation of

the brain. Aer. 4. sychiat., 02*, 63+-634.

Duffy, E., Lacey, ). #+3$. 9daptation in energy !obili@ation; Changes in general

le7el of pal!ar skin conductance. 4. :xp. sy., 9, *6-2.

Lindsley, D., 'owden, J., Hagoun, F. #+33$. Effect upon EE< of acute inury tothe brain ste! acti7ating syste!. ::C @ lin. >e#rophysio., +, 62-4.



+) 9C0"90"?( H?DEL ?1 HEH?R ?R<9("A90"?(

Horu@@i, <., Hagoun, F. #+33$. 'rain ste! reticular for!ation and acti7ation of the EE<.

::C @ lin. >e#rophysio., 0, 22-6*.

Lindsley, D., &chreiner, L., Mnowles, =., Hagoun, F. #+32)$. 'eha7ioral and EE<

changes following chronic brain ste! lesions in the cat. ::C @ lin. >e#rophy&

sio., *, 4*-34.

Duffy, E. #+32+$. 0he concept of energy !obili@ation. sy. e!., <7, *)-).

Lindsley, D. #+32+$. E!otion. "n &. &. &te7ens #Ed.$, $andb%. :xp. sy., pp. 6*-2+. (ew

ork; =iley.

Duffy, E. #+326$. 0he psychological significance of the concept of GarousalG or Gacti7ation.G

sy. e!., , 2-62.

Hal!o, R. #+323$. 9cti7ation; 9 neuropsychological di!ension. sy. e!., , *6-*4.

'erlyne, D. #+3)$. onflict, aro#sal, and c#riosity. (ew ork; Hc<raw-Fill. Duffy, E.

#+3$. Acti!ation and beha!ior. (ew ork; =iley.

=oodworth, R., &chlosberg, F. #+32$. :xperiental psychology. (ew ork; Folt, Rinehart,

=inston.

'erlyne, D. #+36+$. sychobiology and aesthetics. (ew ork; 9ppleton-Century-Crofts.

Le7inthal, C. #+34*$. 6ntrod#ction to physiological psychology. Englewood Cliffs, (J;

Prentice-Fall.

9C0"90"?( H?DEL ?1 HEH?R ?R<9("A90"?(. &ee 1?R<E0-

0"(<HEH?R, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

9C0"90"?(-&(0FE&"& 0FE?R. &ee DRE9H 0FE?R.

9D9P090"?(, PR"(C"PLE&L9=& ?1. 0he ter! adaptation deri7es fro! the

Latin word adaptare, !eaning Gto fit,G and has a 7ariety of !eanings in science. "n

the discipline of biology, adaptation refers to structural or beha7ioral changes of an

organis!, or part of an organis!, that fit it !ore perfectly for the en7iron!ental

conditions in which it li7es where the changes ha7e e7olutionary sur7i7al 7alue. "n

the area of physiology, adaptation is the change or adust!ent of a sense organ to

so!e inco!ing sti!ulation, and the ter! sensory adaptation includes a decreased

sensiti7ity to sti!uli due to prolonged sti!ulation #also called negati!e adaptation;

=arren, +3*$. "n psychology, in general, adaptation is the change in :uality, clarity,

or intensity of a sensory e%perience that occurs with continuous and unchanged

sti!ulation. "n psychology, in particular, adaptation !ay be discussed in a !ultitude

of conte%ts, a!ong which are 7isual adaptation, olfactory adaptation, pain

adaptation, cutaneous adaptation, and gustatory adaptation #=oodworth

&chlosberg, +32$. "n !is#al adaptation, a set of processes takes place after change

of e%posure fro! dark to light #or light to dark$ whereby the eye is !ore capable of

recei7ing sti!uli under the new conditionsB included here are dark, light, and

chro!atic adaptation. 8ar% #GscotopicG$ adaptation is the process of adust!ent ofthe eyes to low intensities of illu!ination that takes about four hours to co!plete,

e7en though effecti7e dark adaptation takes only about *) !inutes #where the retinal

cones take only about 6 !inutes to adapt, and the rods take the full four



9D9P090"?(, PR"(C"PLE&L9=& ?1 ++

hours to adapt$. "t is esti!ated that the totally dark-adapted eye is about + !illion

ti!es as sensiti7e as the nor!ally illu!inated eye #Reber, +332$. ight #Gpho-

topicG$ adaptation is the process of adust!ent of the eye to a high le7el of light

intensity where the pupil of the eye is constricted, and the retinal cones are

acti7ated, !aking the eye relati7ely insensiti7e to light of lower intensities. 8ar%

adaptation is the shift in retinal receptors fro! the photopic #cones$ syste! to the

scotopic #rods$ syste!, while light adaptation is the shift fro! the sco-topic to

the photopic syste!. 0he ter! brightness adaptation refers to a decrease in the

brilliance of a sti!ulus that is caused by an increase in the general il lu!ination of

the surrounding 7isual field. olor #Gchro!aticG or GspectralG$ adaptation is

alteration of hue or saturation or both, due to a pre7ious e%posure to light of so!e

other wa7elength #also called color fatig#e; =arren, +3*$B during color

adaptation, an indi7idual5s absolute threshold of sensiti7ity to hue is raised. ross

adaptation #Reber, +332$ is adust!ent to all sti!uli of a group of sti!uli aftere%posure to only one of the sti!uli fro! that group. "n olfactory adaptation, for

instance, a person !ay beco!e adapted to one odor that subse:uently will

produce in her or hi! a di!inution in sensit i7ity to a large nu! ber and 7ariety of

other odors. /ocial #or GculturalG$ adaptation is the !odification or adust!ent of

personal beha7ior that is necessary to !aintain har!onious interaction with other

indi7iduals in the group #Gsocial acco!!odationG$, such as e%hibiting confor!ity

beha7ior to the custo!s #or taboos$ of a particular social group. =hen used in a

learning conte%t, adaptation refers to a change in an organis!5s !ode of beha7ior

that results in !ore effecti7e or !ore satisfactory adust!ent to the pre7ailing

situation, as well as the eli!ination of irrele7ant beha7ior as learning progresses

#=ol!an, +36*$. 9s used in the area of personality psychology, adaptation has

been used to denote a process of upward adust!ent and co!pensation for one5s

innate deficiencies #9dler, +32$, as a !odification in dri7es, e!otions, andattitudes in adusting to the en7iron!ent #1ro!!, +3+$, and as a critical concept

in a theory of the ego #Fart!ann, +3$. 0he ter! adaptation tie is defined as

the ti!e that elapses fro! the onset of a continuous sti!ulus up to the point

where any further sti!ulation causes no further change in the responsi7eness of

the sensory organ or syste!. 9s used in !ore infor!al ter!s, adaptation tie is

the ti!e needed in adust!ent for efficient perfor!ance of a task. 9lso, there is

genetic adaptation #species-specific characteristics, such as long necks in

giraffes, that are distillations of e7olutionary processes o7er !any generations

that help the organis! to sur7i7e in a changing en7iron!ent$, phenotypic

adaptation #te!porary adust!ents of the indi7idual, such as the return of one5s

ability to see clearly after a period in a darkened roo! following e%posure to

bright lights$, and percept#al adaptation #the ability to adust to an artificially

displaced, or e7en in7erted, 7isual field$. 0he related concept of habit#ation,whose older definition was Gthe process of beco!ing adapted to a gi7en sti!ulus,

situation, or general en7iron!entG #=arren, +3*$, has been redefined today in

!ore !odern ter!s as Gthe gradual eli!ination of an unconditioned response,

espe-



+ 9D9P090"?(-LEEL 0FE?R9D9P0"E (?(RE&P?(D "(< 0FE?R. &ee &LEEP, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

cially an orienting response, by the repeated presentation of the unconditional

sti!ulus, and will not occur to highly no%ious sti!uliG #Carlson, +33)$. 0hus,

the principlelaw of adaptation has been a 7aluable o!nibus concept in the

history of psychology and other disciplines, where it has helped to ad7ance the

scientific understanding of organis!s5 functional, physical, and social adust-

!ents to an e7er-changing en7iron!ent. &ee also D9R="(5& E?L>0"?(

0FE?RB F9'"0F9'"0 1?RH90"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE& ?1B

F9'"0>90"?(, PR"(C"PLEL9= ?1B FEL&?(5& 9D9P090"?(-LEEL

0FE?RB P>RM"(JE E11EC0PFE(?HE(?(&F"10B &ELE5& 0FE-

?RH?DEL ?1 &0RE&&.

RE1ERE(CE&

&tratton, <. #+436$. ision without in7ersion of the retinal i!age. sy. e!., , *+-*).

&eashore, C. #+3*$. 6ntrod#ction to psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

0itchener, E. #+34$. 9 textboo% of psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.


Fecht, &., &hlaer, &. #+3*4$. 9n adapto!eter for !easuring hu!an dark adaptation.

4. pt. /oc. Aer., *7, 3-62.

Cro@ier, =. #+3)$. 0he theory of the 7isual threshold. F. ?n the kinetics of adaptation.

roc. >at. Acad. /ci., *, **-**3.

1ro!!, E. #+3+$. :scape fro freedo. (ew ork; 97on 'ooks.

Fecht, &., Fsia, . #+32$. Dark adaptation following light adaptation to red and white

lights. 4. pt. /oc. Aer., 9<, +-6.

Cohen, J. #+3a$. Color adaptation of the hu!an eye. Aer. 4. sy., 23,4-++).

Cohen, 4. #+3b$. Color adaptation to +32. sy. B#ll., 9, ++-+).

?sgood, C. #+32*$. 3ethod and theory in experiental psychology. (ew ork; ?%ford

>ni7ersity Press.

9dler, 9. #+32$. +he indi!id#al psychology of Alfred Adler A systeatic presentation in

selections fro his writings. (ew ork; Farper Row.

Fess, E. #+32$. &pace perception in the chick. /ci. Aer., 01<, 6+-4).

Fart!ann, F. #+3$. :go psychology and the proble of adaptation. (ew ork; "nter-

national >ni7ersities Press.

Mohler, ". #+3$. +he foration and transforation of the percept#al world. (ew ork;

"nternational >ni7ersities Press.

=oodworth, R., &chlosberg, F. #+32$. :xperiental psychology. (ew ork; Folt,

Rinehart, =inston.

Rock, ". #+3$. +he nat#re of percept#al adaptation. (ew ork; 'asic 'ooks. =ol!an,

'. #Ed.$ #+36*$. 8ictionary of beha!ioral science. (ew ork; an (ostrand Reinhold.

Carlson, (. #+33)$. sychology +he science of beha!ior. 'oston; 9llyn 'acon.


9D9P090"?(-LEEL 0FE?R. &ee FEL&?(5& 9D9P090"?(-LEEL

0FE?R.



+ 9DLER5& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0

not unlike the older concept of the so#l #Fall Lind@ey, +364$. 9dler5s theory

of therapy e!phasi@es the goals of the therapist to be the establish!ent of a

relationship of trust, to disco7er and understand the patient5s Gassu!pti7e uni-

7erse,G to re7eal these assu!ptions to the person in such a way that they

beco!e subect to self-correction and facilitate change, to con7ey a sense of

worth and faith in the person5s inner strength, and to offer the patient a !odel

for good beha7ior and effecti7e coping strategies #Dreikurs, +36B Dink!eyer,

Pew, Dink!eyer, +363B &hul!an, +33$. 9dler5s personality theory

e%e!plifies a hu!anistic orientation toward indi7idual de7elop!ent that is

contrary to 1reud5s !ore !aterialistic conception of the person and gi7es

hu!ans the characteristics of altruis!, cooperation, hu!anitarianis!,

awareness, uni:ueness, dignity, and creati7ity. 9dler5s work and concepts

#while yet unrecogni@ed by so!e psychologists$ ha7e been generally 7alidated,

ha7e influenced !ost current personality theories #including psychoanalytic

approaches$, and ha7e led to a continuation of the 9dlerian tradition in this

country #Dreikurs, +32)B Dreikurs, Corsini, Lowe, &onstegard, +323B Ellis,

+36+B Corsini, +366$. &ee also 9LL-P?R05& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0B

'"R0F ?RDER 0FE?RB 1RE>D5& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0B

H9&L?=5& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0B R?<ER&5 0FE?R ?1

PER&?(9L"0.

RE1ERE(CE&

9dler, 9. #+3+)$. >ber !annliche Einstellung bei =eiblichen (eurofiken. Db. sychoan.,

0, +6-+64.

9dler, 9. #+3+$. +he ne#rotic constit#tion. (ew ork; 9rno Press.

9dler, 9. #+3+6$. /t#dy of organ inferiority and its psychical copensation. (ew

ork; (er7ous and Hental Diseases.

9dler, 9. #+36$. +he practice and theory of indi!id#al psychology. (ew ork;Farcourt,

'race, =orld.

9dler, 9. #+33a$. robles of ne#rosis. London; Megan Paul.

9dler, 9. #+33b$. +he science of li!ing. (ew ork; <reenberg.9dler, 9. #+3*)$. "ndi7idual psychology. "n C. Hurchison #Ed.$, sychologies of0192.

=orcester, H9; Clark >ni7ersity Press.

9dler, 9. #+3*+$. What life sho#ld ean to yo#. 'oston; Little, 'rown.9dler, 9. #+3*6$. Position in fa!ily constellation influences life style. 6nter. 4. 6ndi!.

sy., 9, ++-6.

9dler, 9. #+3*3$. /ocial interest A challenge to an%ind. (ew ork; Putna!.

'otto!e, P. #+3*3$. Alfred Adler A biography. (ew ork; Putna!.1reud, &. #+3)$. An o#tline of psychoanalysis. (ew ork; (orton.

Ja!es, =. #+36$. Maren Fo!ey and Erich 1ro!! in relation to 9lfred 9dler. 6ndi!.

sy. B#ll., , +)2-++.

Dreikurs, R. #+32)$. 5#ndaentals of Adlerian psychology. Chicago; 9dler "nstitute.

Colby, M. #+32+$. ?n the disagree!ent between 1reud and 9dler. Aer. 6ago, 7,



3-*4.

9nsbacher, F., 9nsbacher, R. #Eds.$ #+32$. +he indi!id#al psychology of Alfred

Adler. (ew ork; 'asic 'ooks.

9dler, 9. #+326$. +he ed#cation of children. London; 9llen >nwin.



9<<RE&&"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1 +2

Dreikurs, R., Corsini, R., Lowe, R., &onstegard, H. #+323$. Adlerian faily co#nseling.

Eugene; >ni7ersity of ?regon Press.

=ay, L. #+3$. Adler's place in psychology. (ew ork; Coll ier 'ooks.

?rgler, F. #+3*$. Alfred Adler +he an and his wor%. (ew ork; Li7eright. 9nsbacher, F.,

9nsbacher, R. #Eds.$ #+3$. /#periority and social interest by Alfred Adler. E7anston, "L;

(orthwestern >ni7ersity Press.

Clark, M. #+36$. "!plications of 9dlerian theory for an understanding of ci7il rights proble!s

and action. 4. 6ndi!. sy., *9, +4+-+3).

Dreikurs, R. #+36$. sychodynaics, psychotherapy, and co#nseling ollected papers.

Chicago; 9dler "nstitute.

Ellis, 9. #+36+$. Reason and e!otion in the indi7idual psychology of 9lfred 9dler. 4. 6ndi!.

sy., *E, 2)-.

Hosak, F. #Ed.$ #+36*$. Alfred Adler $is infl#ence on psychology today. Park Ridge, "L;

(oyes Press.

&perber, H. #+36$. 3as%s of loneliness Alfred Adler in perspecti!e. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

Corsini, R. #+366$. "ndi7idual education. 4. 6ndi!. sy., 99, 32-*3.

Fall, C., Lind@ey, <. #+364$. +heories of personality. (ew ork; =iley.

Dink!eyer, D., Pew, =., Dink!eyer, D., Jr. #+363$. Adlerian co#nseling and psychotherapy.

Honterey, C9; 'rooksCole.

9nsbacher, F. #+33$. 9lfred 9dler. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

&hul!an, '. #+33$. 9dlerian psychotherapy. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley.

9E&0FE0"C&, PR"(C"PLE ?1. &ee AE"&"(<5& PR"(C"PLE.

910ERD"&CF9R<E, L9= ?1. &ee &M"((ER5& DE&CR"P0"E 'EF9-

"?R?PER9(0 C?(D"0"?("(< 0FE?R.

910ER"H9<E L9=. &ee EHHER05& L9=.

9<<RE&&"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1. 0he concept of aggression is a 7ery general and

co!ple% pheno!enon that refers to a wide 7ariety of acts, has !any causes, and

is hard to predict and control. Co!!only, the ter! is used for beha7iors that !ay

be !oti7ated by frustration or fear, by a desire to cause fear in others, or by a

desire to pro!ote one5s own interests and ideas. Patterns of usage of the concept

of aggression usually indicate so!e theoretical orientation bias on the writer5s

part #Reber, +332$. 1or instance, ethologists consider aggression to be an

e7olutionarilygenetically deter!ined instinctual pattern of beha7iors in 7ol7ing

specific en7iron!ental sti!uli #e.g., territorial in7asion$B classical psy-

choanalysts #i.e., 1reudians$ consider aggression to be a conscious correlate of

0hanatos #e.g., death wish beha7iorsB =eis!an, +362$B learning theorists !ayregard aggression as a displaced response to any frustrating situation #e.g.,

fr#stration&aggression hypothesis , Hiller, +3+, where one person !ay attack an

innocent bystander out of inability to achie7e so!e unrelated goal$B and



+ 9<<RE&&"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1

social-learning theorists !ay consider aggression to be a for! of learned and

reinforced beha7ior gained by i!itating or obser7ing so!e other indi7idual who

engages in aggressi7e acts #e.g., young boy i!itates his father5s aggression toward

an ethnic-!inority person$. 0he concept of aggression, !uch like the concept of

personality, see!s to play a central role in !any theoretical orientations where

usage follows theory, and it is difficult to disco7er !utually agreed-upon

definitions of the ter!. <oldstein #+33$ has categori@ed the theories of ag&

gression as to their theoretical conte%ts and as to their association with concepts

such as instincts, dri7es, and learningsocial-learning factors. 0here is a persis tent

popular belief that aggression is instinct#al, where acts of aggression are !erely

the !anifestation of an innate tendency to fight. 9ccording to this 7iew #e.g.,

9rdrey, +3B Loren@, +3B Horris, +36$, aggressi7e energy ste!!ing fro! this

uncontrollable instinct is generated spontaneously, continuously, and at a constant

rate in the indi7idual. &uch aggressi7e energy builds up o7er ti!e #e.g., Loren@5shydra#lic odel of aggression), and the !ore that accu!ulates, the weaker the

sti!ulus that is needed to set it off into o7ert aggressi7e acts. 9lso, if too !uch

ti!e elapses since the last aggressi7e act, it !ay occur spontaneously for no

apparent reason. 0hus, according to this orientation, aggressi7e energy ine7itably

accu!ulates, and ine7itably it !ust be e%pressed. Perhaps this is the reason that

co!petiti7e sports e7ents #particularly Gbodily contactG sports$ ha7e been so

popular throughout history. E7en though e!pirical studies do not 7erify the

Gdraining offG or Gcathartic-e%pressionG rationale for aggression, instinct theory is

attracti7e to !any people as a basis for aggression because it is a co!prehensi7e

and easy blend of anecdote, analogical leaps, unsyste!atic ournalis!, self-

ser7ing rationali@ation, irresponsibility, and undefined concepts #<oldstein,

+33$. 9ccording to the dri!e theory of aggression, aggressi7e acts ste! fro! a

heightened state of arousal or dri7e that is reduced through o7ert e%pression ofaggressi7e beha7ior #'aron, +366$. Consistent with this approach is the classical

fr#stration&aggression hypothesis #Dollard, Doob, Hiller, Howrer, &ears,

+3*3$, which states in its !odified for! #Hiller, +3+$ that frustration produces

instigations to a nu!ber of different types of responses, one of which is an

instigation to aggression. ariations of this hypothesis ha7e been the fr#stration&

regression hypothesis #'arker, De!bo, Lewin, +3+$ and the fr#stration

fixationhypothesis #Haier, +33$. Certain other aspects of the dri!e theory

approach to understanding aggression e!phasi@e the strength of the instigating

e7ents, the i!portance of the frustrated goal response to the indi7idual, the

nu!ber of frustrated response se:uences, the degree of frustration, the a!ount of

potential punish!ent for aggression, and the dyna!ics of displace!ent and

catharsis in dealing with aggression. 0he research on the fr#stration&aggression

hypothesis #'uss, +3+B 'erkowit@, +3B 1eshbach, +36)B Aill!an, +363$ and itsrelated ideas was e7entually te!pered by the fact that it essentially in7ol7ed a

logical circularity of reasoning #Johnson, +36B cf; law of effect), and the dri!e

theory approach ga7e way so!ewhat to the social learning theory of aggression

#e.g., 'andura, +36*$, which e!phasi@es that the causes of aggressi7e



+4 9<"(<, 0FE?R"E& ?1

=eis!an, 9. #+362$. 0hanatology. "n 9. 1ried!an, F. Maplan, '. &adock

#Eds.$,oprehensi!e textboo% of psychiatry. 'alti!ore; =illia!s

=ilkins Hoyer, M. #Ed.$ #+36$. hysiology of aggression. (ew ork;

Ra7en Press.

Rosen@weig, &. #+36$. 9ggressi7e beha7ior and the Rosen@weig Picture-1rustration

#P-1$ study. 4. lin. sy., 9*, 442-43+.

0hiessen, D. #+36$. +he e!ol#tion and cheistry of aggression. &pringfield, "L;

0ho!as. 'aron, R. #+366$. $#an aggression. (ew ork; Plenu!.

1eld!an, H. #+366$. riinal beha!ior A psychological analysis. (ew ork; =iley.

1rodi, 9., Hacaulay, 4., @ 0ho!e, P. #+366$. 9re wo!en always less aggressi7e than

!enI 9 re7iew of the e%peri!ental literature. sy. B#ll., 7, *-).

Lefkowit@, H., Eron, L., =alder, L., Feus!ann, L. #+366$. Crowing #p to be

!iolent.

(ew ork; Perga!on Press.

HcCord, J. #+363$. &o!e child rearing antecedents to cri!inal beha7ior in adult!en. 4. ers. /oc. sy., 9E, +66-+4.

Aill!an, D. #+363$. $ostility and aggression. Fillsdale, (J; Erlbau!.Fa!berger, M., Lohr, J. #+34)$. Rational restructuring for anger control; 9 :uasi-

e%peri!ental case study. og. +her. es., , 33-+).

Haccoby, E., Jacklin, C. #+34)$. &e% differences in aggression; 9 reoinder and

reprise. hild. 8e!., <0, 3-34).

<oldstein, 9., Can, E., Da7idson, =., =ehr, P. #+34+$. 6n response to aggression.

(ew ork; Perga!on Press.Honahan, J. #Ed.$ #+34+$. +he clinical prediction of !iolent beha!ior. =ashington,

DC; (ational "nstitute of Hental Fealth.

<oldstein, 9., Rosenbau!, 9. #+34$. Aggress&less. Englewood Cliffs, (J;

Prentice-Fall.

Mornadt, F.-J. #+34$. Aggressionsoti! and Aggressionshe#ng. 'ern; Fuber.

1reed!an, J. #+34$. Effect of tele7ision 7iolence on aggressi7eness. sy. B#ll.,1, 6.

1reed!an, J. #+34$. 0ele7ision 7iolence and aggression; 9 reoinder. sy. B#ll., 022,

*6-*64.

Josephson, =. #+346$. 0ele7ision 7iolence and children5s aggression; 0esting the pri!-

ing, social script, and disinhibition predictions. 4. ers. /oc. sy., <9, 44-43).

'erkowit@, L. #+343$. 1rustration-aggression hypothesis; E%a!ination and

refor!ulation.

sy. B#ll., 02, 23-6*.=ido!, C. #+343$. Does 7iolence beget 7iolenceI 9 critical e%a!ination of the

literature. sy. B#ll., 02, *-4.

'erkowit@, L. #+33)$. ?n the for!ation and regulation of anger and aggression.

Aer. sy., <, 3-2)*.

<oldstein, 9. #+33$. 9ggression. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;=iley. Reber, 9. #+332$. +he eng#in dictionary of psychology. (ew ork; Penguin

'ooks.

9<"(<, 0FE?R"E& ?1. &tudies of aging and beha7ior changes o7er the



entire life span ha7e led to the conclusion that cogniti7e and other functions

increase and i!pro7e through the first ) years or so of life, hold that le7el

for the ne%t )-) years, and then narrow and close down in a final

deterioration phase #9!es, +33$. Research at the <esell "nstitute of Child

De7elop!ent #<esell, +34B <esell "lg, +3B <esell, "lg, 9!es, +32B

9!es, <illespie,



9<"(<, 0FE?R"E& ?1 +3

Faines, "lg, +363$ has suggested the principle that children should be pro!oted

in school on the basis of their beha!ioral age rather than their chronological age

and, by e%tension, that this sa!e basic principle should guide one5s e%pectations

of an indi7idual5s functioning. Differences in indi7iduals as a result of age ha7e

been studied by cross&sectional #groups of persons of different ages are obser7ed

at the sa!e ti!e$, longit#dinal #the sa!e group of persons is obser7ed at different

ages$, and se#ential !ethods #co!bination of cross-sectional with longitudinal

!ethods to study cohort effects or influences that occur in the e%periences of

disparate age groupsB &chaie, +32B 'altes, +34$. 0he relati7ely new field called

geriatric psychology #the science of the beha7ior and diseases of the agedB

&il7er!an, +33$ has e!erged in the last 2) years where e%peri!ental studies of

the aging process ha7e been conducted #cf; the broader science of aging called

gerontology; Hanaster, +33$. 9 nu!ber of generali@ations, so!e fairly ob7ious

and predictable, concerning beha7ior changes in later life ha7e been described#Denny, +33$. 1or e%a!ple, about )O of one5s cortical cells !ay be lost by age

4)-3)B fats increase, and water content decreases o7er the life spanB 7isual

abilities start to decline in !iddle age, where acco!!odation and acuity lessen

due to elasticity loss in the eyes5 lens and where changes in the retina in older age

increase sensiti7ity to glare and affect color 7isionB auditory abilities begin to

decline in !iddle age, where perception of the higher fre:uencies !ay disappear

and where hearing loss later in life !ay lead to stress, depression, and e!otional

disturbancesB long-ter! !e!ory deficits in the aged are usually retrie7al

proble!s, and short-ter! !e!ory difficulties occur when the learning task

re:uires di7ided attention, but span of !e!ory re!ains intact until e%tre!e old

ageB 9l@hei!er5s disease #na!ed after the <er!an neurologist 9lois 9l@hei!er,

+4-+3+2, who first described it in +3)6$, in7ol7ing progressi7e !ental

i!pair!ent that usually begins with a deficit in recent !e!ory and is caused byconsistent cellular changes in the aging brain, !ay be obser7ed beginning in

!iddle age #2-) years of age$B and, in proble!-sol7ing situations, older people

tend to ask uninfor!ati7e :uestions, to be distracted by redundant and irrele7ant

infor!ation, and to treat both negati7e and positi7e instances of a concept as

positi7e, and apparent rigidity in old persons !ay be due to their inabili ty to

profit fro! negati7e infor!ation. +heories of aging are basically !odels of

balance or Gtrade-offG; in old age, a person !ay lose energy reser7e but gain an

ability to control e!otional reactions and, thereby, conser7e energy. 9ccording to

this 7iew, two general kinds of changes #i.e., losses or gains ) can be e%pected

with old age #'altes, +346$. Paul 'altes #+3*3/ $, a pioneer of life&span

de!elopental psychology, stresses that persons continue to !aintain a capacity

for change across the entire life span. 'altes and his colleagues #'altes &chaie,

+36*B (esselroade 'altes, +363B 'altes =illis, +34$ argue for the plasticityof intelligence in aging persons and also ad7ance the notion of interdisciplinary

collaboration in order to !ore fully understand the role of social change in

psychological de7elop!ent. arious perspecti7es on the causes of aging ha7e

been proposed #'aron, +33$,



&chaie, M. #+32$. 9 genetic !odel for the study of de7elop!ental proble!s. sy.

B#ll.,

, 3-+)6.



9<"(<, 0FE?R"E& ?1 +

'altes, P. #+34$. Longitudinal and cross-sectional se:uences in the study of age and generation

effects. $#. 8e!., 00, +2-+6+.

<oulet, L., 'altes, P. #Eds.$ #+36)$. ife&span de!elopental psychology esearch and

theory. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

'altes, P., Labou7ie, <. #+36*$. 9dult de7elop!ent of intellectual perfor!ance; De-

scription, e%planation, and !odification. "n C. Eisdorfer H. Lawton #Eds.$, +he

psychology of ad#lt de!elopent and aging. =ashington, DC; 9!erican Psycho-

logical 9ssociation.

'altes, P., &chaie, M. #Eds.$ #+36*$. ife&span de!elopental psychology ersonality

and socialiGation. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

9!es, L. #+36$. Calibration of aging. 4. ers. Assess., 97, 2)2-23.

'rown, 9. #+36$. &atisfying relationships for the elderly and their patterns of disengage!ent.

Ceron., 0, 24-.

=alsh, D. #+362$. 9ge differences in learning and !e!ory. "n D. =oodruff J. 'irren #Eds.$,

Aging /cientific perspecti!es and social iss#es. (ew ork; an (ostrand Reinhold.

'instock, R., &hanas, E. #Eds.$ #+36$. $andboo% of aging and the social sciences. (ew

ork; an (ostrand Reinhold.

&heehy, C. #+36$. assages redictable crises of ad#lt life. (ew ork; Dutton. Craik, 1.

#+366$. 9ge differences in hu!an !e!ory. "n J. 'irren M. &chaie #Eds.$,

$andboo% of the psychology of aging. (ew ork; an (ostrand Reinhold. 1rich, C.,

Fayflick, L. #Eds.$ #+366$. $andboo% of the biology of aging. (ew ork;

an (ostrand Reinhold.

9!es, L., <illespie, C., Faines, 4., @ "lg, 1. #+363$. +he Cesell 6nstit#te's child fro one to

six. (ew ork; Farper Row.

'arrow, <., &!ith, P. #+363$. Aging, ageis, and society. &t. Paul, H(; =est. (esselroade,

4., @ 'altes, P. #Eds.$ #+363$. ongit#dinal research in the st#dy of beha!ior and

de!elopent. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

'irren, 4., @ &loane, R. #Eds.$ #+34)$. $andboo% of ental health and aging. Englewood

Cliffs, (J; Prentice-Fall.'altes, P., =illis, &. #+34$. Plasticity and enhance!ent of intellectual functioning in old

age; Penn &tate5s 9dult De7elop!ent and Enrich!ent Proect #9DEP0$. "n 1. Craik

&. 0rehub #Eds.$, Aging and cogniti!e processes. (ew ork; Plenu!.

'altes, P. #+346$. 0heoretical propositions on life-span de7elop!ental psychology; ?n the

dyna!ics between growth and decline. 8e!. sy., *9, ++-.

&althouse, 0. #+346$. 9ge, e%perience, and co!pensation. "n C. &chooler M. &chaie

#Eds.$, ogniti!e f#nctioning and social str#ct#re o!er the life co#rse. (; 9ble%.

&chaie, M. #+344$. 9geis! in psychological research. Aer. sy., 9, +63-+4*.

Ryff, C. #+343$. 'eyond Ponce de Leon and life satisfaction; (ew directions in :uest of

successful ageing. 6nt. 4. Beh. 8e!., 0*, *2-22.

Pal!ore, E. #+33)$. Ageis >egati!e and positi!e. (ew ork; &pringer.

Carstensen, L. #+33+$. &electi7ity theory; &ocial acti7ity in life-span conte%t. "n M. &chaie

#Ed.$, Ann#al re!iew of geriatrics and gerontology. (ew ork; &pringer. 'aron, R.

#+33$. sychology. 'oston; 9llyn 'acon.

Coon, D. #+33$. 6ntrod#ction to psychology. &t. Paul, H(; =est.

Pal!ore, E. #Ed.$ #+33*$. 8e!elopents and research on aging An international hand&

boo%. =estport, C0; <reenwood Press.



9LEK9(DER5& L9=

9!es, L. #+33$. 9ging; 'eha7ior changes. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew

ork; =iley.Denny, H. #+33$. 9ge differences. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

Hanaster, <. #+33$. <erontology. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

&il7er!an, F. #+33$. <eriatric psychology. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley.

Ai!bardo, P., =eber, 9. #+33$. sychology. (ew ork; FarperCollins.

9LEK9(DER5& L9=. &ee "&"?(&"<F0, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

9L<E'R9"C &>HH90"?(, L9= ?1. &ee &M"((ER5& DE&CR"P0"E

'EF9"?R?PER9(0 C?(D"0"?("(< 0FE?R.

9L<?R"0FH"C-FE>R"&0"C 0FE?R. 0he ter! algorith refers to a precise anduna!biguous direction #GprescriptionG$ for carrying out a defined se:uence of

relati7ely ele!entary operations in order to sol7e a certain class or type of proble!

#Landa, +33$. 9n e%a!ple of an algorith! is the use of a flowchart #i.e., a techni:ue

that first poses a :uestion and then, depending on the answer, directs the indi7idual to

go to another :uestion, etc., until a final answer is achie7ed$ for finding the greatest

co!!on deno!inator of two natural nu!bers. 0he e%ecution of the cogniti7e

operations according to the directions of an algorith! is called the algorithic

process, and, since each algorith! is applicable to a wide set of proble!s that belong

to a certain class, it represents a general and guaranteed !ethod for proble! sol7ing.

0he related ter! he#ristic, howe7er, denotes only a Grule of thu!bG approach that

!ay direct a proble!-sol7ing process but does not guarantee a solution to the

proble!. 9n e%a!ple of a heuristic rule is, 0ry to sol7e a related proble! if the

proposed proble! cannot i!!ediately be sol7ed. "n this case, the set of directions iscalled a he#ristic prescription. Feuristic prescriptions, as co!pared to algorith!ic

prescriptions, contain a certain a!ount of a!biguity and uncertainty. Classes of

proble!s, according to this approach, !ay be 7iewed as Galgorith!ically sol7able,G

Galgorith!ically unsol7able,G or Gunknown as to algorith!ical sol7ability.G 0hus, in

the case of so!e proble!s, an appropriate algorith! !ay not e%ist #e.g., algorith!s

for pro7ing !ost !athe!atical theore!s$, or an algorith! !ay be inefficient #e.g.,

an algorith! for finding the opti!u! !o7e in a chess ga!e$ #Reber, +332$. 0he

practical significance of using algorith!s for proble!-sol7ing tasks is that it allows

children and a7erage adult learners to sol7e certain proble!s that, otherwise, !ight

see! to be beyond their cogniti7e, intellectual, or sensori!otor capabilities. 0he

algorithic&he#ristic theory #9F0$, for!ulated by Le7 Landa in +32-+3+ while in

the >&&R, is able to deal with a wide 7ariety of learning, instructional, and

perfor!ance proble!s, which include the de7elop!ent of general !ethods ofthinking in studentsB the psychological and logical structure of different !ethods of

thinkingB classifica-



9L<?R"0FH"C-FE>R"&0"C 0FE?R *

tion of particular !ethods by different functional and logical characteristicsB

differences between algorith!ic prescriptions and processes and their interac-

tionsB for!ation in students of the ability for self-progra!!ing, self-regulation,

and self-control of their cogniti7e and practical acti7itiesB and !ethods of

designing indi7iduali@ed adapti7e instruction in algo-heuristics, including usage

of co!puters. 0he area of research in7ol7ing instr#ctional theory prescribes the

steps used to design effecti7e instructional strategies, such as the identification

of the educational goals #i.e., what the learner should be able to do after instruc-

tion$ and the identification of prototypic cogniti7e processesrules #i.e., what the

learner !ust learn in order to perfor! successfully on tasks associated with the

educational goals$ #e.g., <agne, +32, +33B 'runer5s theory of instr#ction, +3B

&candura, +36*, +34)B Reigeluth, +34+$. Fistorically, the theorydoctrine of

foral discipl ine-training #e.g., Lund, +3**B Hunn, +3$ was an approach to

education that ad7ocated that so!e subectscourses #e.g., Latin$ ought to be

studied, independently of any content that they !ight ha7e, because they ac-

:uainted the student with basic principles #or Gfor!sG$ that will ulti!ately pro7e

of 7alue in other ways and generally ser7e to Gtrain the !ind.G 0he enthusias!

for this theory has wa%ed and waned se7eral ti!es o7er the years #Reber, +332$.

Conte!porary instr#ctional theory pro7ides a generali@ed basis for instructional

prescriptions that, in principle, !ay be used with any particular subect !atter

that !ight be of interest/no !atter how co!ple% that subect !atter #&candura,

+33$. &ee also C?<("0"E &0LE H?DEL&.

RE1ERE(CE&

Lund, 1. #+3**$. sychology An epirical st#dy of beha!ior. (ew ork; Ronald Press. Polya,

<. #+32$. $ow to sol!e it A new concept of atheatical ethod. Princeton, (J;

Princeton >ni7ersity Press.

Hunn, (. #+3$. sychology. (ew ork; Foughton Hifflin

<agne, R. #+32$. +he conditions of learning. (ew ork; Folt, Rinehart, =inston. 'runer, J.

#+3$. +oward a theory of instr#ction. Ca!bridge; Far7ard >ni7ersity Press. &candura, J.

#+36*$. /tr#ct#ral learning. 6. +heory and research. London; <ordon

'reach.

Landa, L. #+36$. AlgorithiGation in learning and instr#ction. Englewood Cliffs, (J;

Educational 0echnology Publications.

Herrill, P. #+366$. 9lgorith!ic organi@ation in teaching and learning; Literature and research in

the >.&.9. 6p. $#. erf. es. H#ar., , 3*-++.

Landa, L. #+364$. &o!e proble!s in algo-heuristic theory of thinking, learning, and instruction.

"n J. &candura C. 'ainerd #Eds.$, /tr#ct#ral-process odels of coplex h#an

beha!ior. 9lphen aan den Rin; &ithoff (oordhoff.

&candura, J. #+34)$. 0heoretical foundations of instruction; 9 syste!s alternati7e to cogniti7e

psychology. 4. /tr#c. earn., , *6-*3.

Reigeluth, C. #Ed.$ #+34+$. rescripti!e theories of instr#ction. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

<roner, R., <roner, H., 'ischof, =. #Eds.$ #+34*$. 3ethods of he#ristics. Fillsdale, (J;

Erlbau!.



9L"E(90"?( 0FE?R"E&

Landa, L. #+34*$. 6nstr#ctional reg#lation and control ybernetics, algorithiGation, and

he#ristics in ed#cation. Englewood Cliffs, (J; Educational 0echnologyPublications.

<laser, R. #+33)$. 0he ree!ergence of learning theory within instructional research.

Aer. sy., <, 3-*3.

<agne, R. #+33$. Learning outco!es. ". "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley.

Landa, L. #+33$. 9lgorith!ic-heuristic theory. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew

ork; =iley.

Harton, 1. #+33$. Learning outco!es. "". "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;=iley.

&candura, J. #+33$. "nstructional theory. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley.


Hc<uire, =. #+336$. Creati7e hypothesis generating in psychology; &o!e useful

heuristics. Ann. e!. sy., 7, +-*).

9L"E(90"?( 0FE?R"E&. &ee F?R(E5& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0B

P&CF?P90F?L?<, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

9LL-?R-(?(E L9=PR"(C"PLE. 0his principle, disco7ered by the 9!erican

physiologist Fenry Pickering 'owditch #+4)-+3+6$ while he was studying

cardiac !uscle #=arren, +3*$, states that in any single ner7e or !uscle fiber the

response to a sti!ulus abo7e threshold le7el is !a%i!al, independent of the

intensity of the sti!ulus, and dependent only on the condition of the cell at the

!o!ent of sti!ulation. 0he all&or&none property of the ner7e i!pulse is contained

in the fact that its a!plitude is always the sa!e where the neural code is

deter!ined by fre:uency rather than si@e of the ner7e response. &tronger sti!uli

result in !ore i!pulses being generated per second, but each sti!ulus has thesa!e a!plitude #9drian, +3+, +3**$. 0he process of ner7e conduction has been

likened to the burning of a fuse because both processes in7ol7e the progressi7e

release of energy by local action #=oodworth &chlosberg, +32$. Fowe7er, it is

true that not all fuses or all ner7e fibers ha7e the sa!e a!ount of energy

a7ailableB thick fuses and thick ner7e fibers trans!it a larger disturbance and

trans!it it faster. "t is also true that the a7ailable energy in any ner7e fiber 7aries

fro! ti!e to ti!e with corresponding changes in the !agnitude and speed of the

i!pulse. 0he all&or&none law, howe7er, is still 7alid because the ner7e fiber either

reacts with all of its a7ailable energy, or else #if the sti!ulus is too weak$ it does

not react at all. 0he top speed of the ner7e i!pulse is esti!ated to be +)) !eters

per second and is attained only in the larger fibers of the body. 0hin fibers

conduct i!pulses at !uch slower rates, down to about + !eter per second in so!e

ani!al species. 0he !aor difference between the fuse and the ner7e fiber in thisanalogy is that the ner7e fiber restores itself after each i!pulse occurs, while the

fuse does not. ?nly a s!all a!ount of the stored energy is !o!entarily a7ailable

at the surface of the ner7e fiber where the local acti7ity takes place. 0he energy is

pro!ptly replaced as soon as this portion is



9LLP?R05& C?(1?RH"0 FP?0FE&"& 2

9LLP?R05& C?(1?RH"0 FP?0FE&"&. 0he 9!erican social psychologist

1loyd Fenry 9llport #+43)-+364$ proposed that conforing beha7ior

consu!ed by the single ner7e i!pulse. Fowe7er, the replace!ent process takes a

short a!ount of ti!e, and a second i!pulse cannot follow i!!ediately. 9t this

stage in the process, the fiber is said to be in its absol#te refractory phase

#?sgood, +32*, refers to these e7ents collecti7ely as the refractory law). 0hen,

within a !illisecond or so, the fiber has reco7ered enough to allow a 7ery strong

sti!ulus to create a 7ery weak i!pulse. 1ollowing this relati!e refractory phase

of firing, there is a gradual buildup of a7ailable energy where the sti!ulus

threshold is decreased, and the !agnitude and speed of the i!pulse are in-

creased. ?sgood #+32*$ coins the ter! essential identity law, which is related to

the physiological all&or&none law and refers to the fact that ner7e i!pulses are

all the sa!e in kind. 1or e%a!ple, i!pulses tra7eling in optic ner7e fibers differ

:ualitati7ely in no way fro! i!pulses in cutaneous fibers, and acti7ity in the

7isual areas of the corte% does not appear to differ :ualitati7ely fro! acti7ity in

the so!esthetic, or e7en in the !otor, areas. 0he all&or&none principle fro!

physiology has been e%panded conceptually to the area of the psychology of

learning where it refers to associations of learned !aterials that are either for!ed

co!pletely on a single trial or not for!ed at all #cf; one&trial learning of

<uthrie, +32B &kinner, +32*$. 0he all&or&none law-principle has been

consistently well referenced and represented in psychology te%tbooks fro! +442

through +33 #Roeckelein, +33$. &ee also C?(0"(>"0 0FE?RB

<>0FR"E5& 0FE?R ?1 'EF9"?RB &M"((ER5& DE&CR"P0"E

'EF9"?R?PER9(0 C?(D"0"?("(< 0FE?R.

RE1ERE(CE&

9drian, E. #+3+$. 0he all-or-none principle in ner7e. 4. hysio., E, 2)-6.

=atson, J. '. #+3+3$. sychology 5ro the standpoint of a beha!iorist.Philadelphia; Lippincott.

Dunlap, M. #+3$. +he eleents of scientific psychology. &t. Louis, H?; Hosby.

9drian, =. #+3**$. 0he all-or-nothing reaction. :rgebn. hysio., 9<, 6-622.


Hifflin. 'oring, E. <., Langfeld, F., =eld, F. #+3*2$. sychology A fact#al

textboo%. (ew

ork; =iley.

Hunn, (. #+3$. sychology. (ew ork; Foughton Hifflin

'rink, 1. #+32+$. E%citation and conduction in the neuron. "n &. &. &te7ens #Ed.$,

$andb%. :xp. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

<uthrie, E. #+32$. +he psychology of learning. (ew ork; Farper Row.

?sgood, C. #+32*$. 3ethod and theory in experiental psychology. (ew ork;

?%ford >ni7ersity Press.&kinner, '. 1. #+32*$. /cience and h#an beha!ior. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

=oodworth, R., &chlosberg, F. #+32$. :xperiental psychology. (ew ork;

Folt, Rinehart, =inston.



Roeckelein, J. E. #+33$. Citation of laws and theories in te%tbooks across ++ years

of psychology. sy. ep., E1, 363-334.



9LLP?R05& 1>(C0"?(9L 9>0?(?H PR"(C"PLE

can be recogni@ed by its distincti7e distribution, which takes the shape of an

in7erted J cur7e #9llport, +3*$. 9 few people o7erconfor! #are to the left of

the cur7e5s peak$, the o7erwhel!ing !aority are positioned e%actly at the

peak, which accounts for the spike of the J, and a !inority de7iate fro! the

nor!, which accounts for an elongated, but low-le7el, tail. 9llport 7alidated

his confority hypothesis !ainly by obser7ations in field situations in7ol7ing

acti7ities such as reporting to work, using holy water in a Catholic church, and

stopping at a stop sign. 9llport5s data refer pri!arily to situations where

adherence to standards is enforced #Gco!pliant beha7iorG$. onfority is seen

as an inter!ediate stage between superficial co!pliance and per!anent

internali@ation and as a conflict between what a person basically is and what

group !e!bership induces fro! the indi7idual #Corsini, +33$. &ee also

900"0>DE900"0>DE CF9(<E, 0FE?R"E& ?1B '&09(DER

"(0ERE(0"?( E11EC0B C?(1L"C0, 0FE?R"E& ?1B <R?>P0F"(M

PFE(?HE(?(.

RE1ERE(CE&

9llport, 1. #+3$. /ocial psychology. 'oston; Foughton Hifflin9llport, 1. #+3*$. 0he J-cur7e hypothesis of confor!ing beha7ior. 4. /oc. sy., <,

+++4*.

&herif, H. #+3*2$. 9 study of so!e social factors in perception. Ar. sy., *E, no. +46.

1estinger, L., &chachter, &., 'ack, M. #+32)$. /ocial press#res in inforal

gro#ps A st#dy of h#an factors in ho#sing. (ew ork; Farper.

9sch, &. #+32+$. Effects of group pressure upon the !odification and distortion of

udg!ent. "n F. <uet@kow #Ed.$, Cro#ps, leadership, and en. Pittsburgh;

Carnegie. 9sch, &. #+322$. ?pinions and social pressure. /ci. Aer., 019, *+-*2.

9sch, &. #+32$. &tudies of independence and confor!ity. ". 9 !inority of one

against a unani!ous !aority. sy. 3ono., E2, no. +.&herif, H., &herif, C. #+3$. eference gro#ps :xplorations into confority and

de!iation of adolescents. (ew ork; Farper Row.

aughan, <. #+3$. 0he trans-situational aspect of confor!ity beha7ior. 4. ers., 9*,

**2-*2.

9llen, . #+32$. &ituational factors in confor!ity. "n L. 'erkowit@ #Ed.$, Ad!ances

in experiental social psychology. ol. . (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

Follander, E., =illis, R. #+36$. &o!e current issues in the psychology ofconfor!ity and nonconfor!ity. sy. B#ll., 7, -6.

Eagly, 9. #+364$. &e% differences in influenceability. sy. B#ll., 7<, 4-++.Cooper, F. #+363$. &tatistically co!bining independent studies; 9 !eta-analysis of

se% differences in confor!ity research. 4. ers. /oc. sy., 9E, +*+-+.

Corsini, R. J. #+33$. Confor!ity. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

&a!uel, =. #+33$. Confor!ing personality. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy.

(ew ork; =iley.

9LLP?R05& 1>(C0"?(9L 9>0?(?H PR"(C"PLE. 0he 9!erican

psychologist <ordon =illard 9llport #+436-+36$ studied, researched, and taught in



9LLP?R05& 1>(C0"?(9L 9>0?(?H PR"(C"PLE 6

of psychology. "n his e%ploration and de7elop!ent of personality theory, 9llport

concei7ed of personality as an organi@ed whole #rather than !erely a collection

of habits$ where one5s self can !ake choices and influence the growth or out-

co!e of its own personality #9llport, +322$. 9llport for!ulated the concept of

f#nctional a#tonoy of oti!es, which e!phasi@ed the e!ergence of new !o-

ti7ational syste!s in a person5s life #9llport, +3*6$. 0he principle of f#nctional

a#tonoy describes the case where well-established habits #such as a person5s

going to work for + hours a day for !any years and earning a great deal of

!oney$ can beco!e ends or !oti7es in the!sel7es #such as continuing to go to

work for + hours a day, e7en though the person has beco!e wealthy, could

easily retire, and actually does not need to work at all$. 9ccording to the prin&

ciple of f#nctional a#tonoy of oti!es, !eans to a goal beco!e ends in the!-

sel7es where the original acti7ities ha7e now beco!e !oti7es and function

independently of the purposes or needs that they initially ser7ed. =hen it wasfirst introduced, the concept of f#nctional a#tonoy was both contro7ersial and

radical because it ran counter to the pre7ailing theories of !oti7ation, which

stressed !echanis!s directly linked to basic physiological needs #<oranson,

+33$. 9llport5s idea raised the possibility that si!ple and co!ple% !oti7es can

function :uite separately fro! any direct physiological dri7e or need. 0he con-

cept of f#nctional a#tonoy liberali@ed the area of !oti7ation inas!uch as it

allowed the indi7idual to be an acti7e #rather than a passi7e$ entity whose be-

ha7ior could be present-oriented, as well as future-oriented, and not !erely past-

oriented. Judging by its absence in !ost current introductory psychology

te%tbooks, the principle of f#nctional a#tonoy of oti!es see!s to be less

referenced generally today than it was years ago, e7en though the ter! see!s,

fro! casual obser7ation, to ha7e beco!e part of psychologists5 infor!al 7ocab-

ulary. 0hus, the notion of f#nctionally a#tonoo#s oti!es #though contro7ersialat one ti!eB Fall Lind@ey, +364$ no longer see!s particularly strange and has

been accepted and absorbed into the !ainstrea! of psychology. "ndeed, recent

theories of !oti7ation ha7e proposed and described Gsupra-G or Ge%tra-

physiologically basedG needs in shaping indi7iduals5 personali ty such as !o ti7es

for e%ploration, curiosity, !astery, !anipulation, self-actuali@ation, sensation-

seeking, and co!petence #<oranson, +33$. &ee also 9LLP?R05& 0FE?R ?1

PER&?(9L"0B H?0"90"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

RE1ERE(CE&

9llport, <. #+3*6$. 0he functional autono!y of !oti7es. Aer. 4. sy., <2, ++-

+2. 9llport, <. #+3)$. 0he psychologist5s fra!e of reference. sy. B#ll., 9E, +-4.

9llport, <. #+32*$. 0he trend in !oti7ational theory. Aer. 4. rthopsychiat., *9,

+)6-

++3.

9llport, <. #+322$. Becoing Basic considerations for a psychology of personality.

(ew Fa7en, C0; ale >ni7ersity Press.

Hischel, =., Ebbesen, E., Aeiss, 9. #+36*$. &electi7e attention to the self;&ituational and dispositional deter!inants. 4. ers. /oc. sy., *E, +3-+.



4 9LLP?R05& 0FE?R ?1 E(E&0R>E(CE


Hischel, =., Peake, P. #+34$. 'eyond dea 7u in the search for cross-situationalconsistency. sy. e!., 71, 6*)-622.

<oranson, R. #+33$. 1unctional autono!y. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew

ork; =iley.

9LLP?R05& 0FE?R ?1 E(E&0R>E(CE. e7ent-structure theory. 0his theory

of perception, de7eloped by 1loyd Fenry 9llport #+43)-+364$, who! !any consider

to be the father of e%peri!ental social psychology, consists of a kinetic geo!etry

#Gkine!aticsG$ of the self-closedness of ongoing-e7ent series and associati7e

probability concepts of the energies #i.e., e7ents$ in7ol7ed in the self-closed

structures and their interrelationships. 9s one can sense here, the progra!!atic

nature of this rather intriguing theory is stated in so!ewhat abstract ter!s. 0his is

because the !odel was intended to be applied to !any different pheno!ena at

7arious le7els of analysis. 9llport5s theoretical !odel of e!ent&str#ct#re atte!pted tocast the laws of nature under two headings; a for!al principle of nature in ter!s

other than G:uantitati7eG and a principle of GcorporationG of !any perceptual and

social pheno!ena. "f the theory is true, said 9llport #+322, p. $, Gnature is not a

!achine, nor are organis!s controlled by :uantitati7e or !echanical laws.. . . 0Qhe

theory is ad7anced !erely as one way of looking at the proble! of structure, one

atte!pt to fatho! the !ystery of the for! and unity of nature which ha7e thus far

been left largely untouched by science.G 9llport5s theory of enestr#ence holds that

social structure has no physical or anato!ical basis but consists of cycles of e7ents

that GhoopG and return upon the!sel7es to co!plete and sustain the cycle. 0o !any

psychologists, the e!ent&str#ct#re theory suggested by 9llport see!s to be a rather

a!bitious prescription for the synthesis and consolidation of other theories of

perception and social beha7ior into a unifying and cohesi7e syste!. 9llport5s +36

article in the Aerican sychologist is reco!!ended, especially, to the interestedreader. &ee also PERCEP0"?( #". <E(ER9L$, 0FE?R"E& ?1B PERCEP0"?( #"".

C?HP9R90"E 9PPR9"&9L$, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

RE1ERE(CE&

9llport, 1. #+3)$. 9n e7ent-syste! of collecti7e action. 4. /oc. sy., 00, +6-2.

9llport, 1. #+32$. 0he structuring of e7ents; ?utline of a general theory with

applications to psychology. sy. e!., 0, 4+-*)*.

9llport, 1. #+322$. +heories of perception and the concept of str#ct#re. (ew ork;

=iley. 0annenbau!, 9., 9llport, 1. #+32$. Personality structure and group

structure; 9n

interpreti7e study of their relationship through an e7ent-structure hypothesis. 4.

Abn. /oc. sy., <9, 6-4).

Feider, 1. #+323$. ?n perception and e7ent structure, and the psychologicalen7iron!ent; &elected papers. sy. 6ss., +, +-+*.

9llport, 1. #+3$. 9 structurono!ic concept of beha7ior; "ndi7idual and collecti7e. ".&tructural theory and the !aster proble! of social psychology. 4. Abn. /oc.

sy., , *-*).

9llport, 1. #+36$. 9 theory of enestruence #e7ent-structure$. Aer. sy., **, +-+.



9LLP?R05& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0 3

9LLP?R05& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0. "n taking an eclectic and hu!anistic

approach to the study of personality, <ordon =illard 9llport #+436+36$ drew on

a wide 7ariety of sources, fro! =illia! HcDougall5s theory of !oti7es

#HcDougall, +3*$ to the e%peri!ental-social psychological analysis of beha7ior

#9llport, +3)$. =hile 9llport also drew so!e of his ideas fro! the

psychodyna!ic theories of personality #e.g., 1reud, +3)$, he was opposed

strongly to the 1reudian 7iews of the unconscious, and he reected any reduc-

tionist theory that attributed hu!an beha7ior to innate instincts, childhood con-

ditioning, or repressed co!ple%es #ernon, +33$. "n e%a!ining the other sciences

and scientific !odels, 9llport #+36$ opposed e%tensi7e borrowing fro! the

natural sciences and belie7ed that the !ethods and theoretical !odels that ha7e

been useful in the physical sciences !ay only !islead one when atte!pting to

study co!ple% hu!an beha7ior. 9llport thought of personality as an organi@ed

entity that is future-oriented and not !erely a bundle of habits and fi%ations#9llport, +322$. Fe argued that one5s self #or propri#) is able to !ake choices

where it can influence the de7elop!ent of its own personality along with

adusting to the e!ergence of new !oti7ational syste!s #Gfunctional autono!y of

!oti7esG$. 9llport e!phasi@ed a !ultifaceted !ethodological approach toward

personality study that co!bined the idiographic #study and analysis of single

cases$ and the noothetic #disco7ery of general or uni7ersal laws that apply to all

hu!ans$ 7iewpoints #9llport, +3a$. E7en though 9llport hi!self de7eloped

7arious tests of personality traits, 7alues, and attitudes, he saw little !erit in

conducting factorial-type studies of personality #9llport, ernon, Lind@ey,

+3*++32+B 9llport, +3*6B cf; Cattell, +3, +32$. 9llport5s theory of personality

#9llport, +3*6, +3+$ is often called a trait theory where traits #i.e., enduring

predispositions to respond in certain ways$ occupy the position of a !aor

!oti7ational construct #cf; Hurray5s, +3*4, need; 1reud5s, +3), instinct; andHcDougall5s, +3*, sentient theories$. ?ne of 9llport5s early studies #9llport

?dbert, +3*$ found al!ost +4,))) words in the dictionary that could be used as

trait na!es to describe personality. >sing an idiographic approach of analysis

#9llport, +3*6$ where an indi7idual5s uni:ue personality traits were arranged into

a hierarchy fro! G!ost i!portantG at the top to Gleast i!portantG at the botto!,

9llport subse:uently di7ided the hierarchy into three separate groups of traits;

cardinal #the unco!!on, but per7asi7e and all-enco!passing characteristics that

influence !ost areas of only a few people5s li7es, such as hu!anitarianis! and

honesty$, central #specific beha7ioral tendencies that are highly characteristic of

an indi7idual, such as outgoing and a!bitious$, and secondary #the less-enduring

and transitory characteristics such as liking to hike or cycle$. 9llport e!phasi@ed

that no two people ha7e e%actly the sa!e traits, and his trait theory of personality

stressed the uni:ueness of the indi7idual. 9lthough few psychologists ha7ee!braced 9llport5s personality theory in its total for!, it has ne7ertheless been

influential and useful, especially in its restoration and purification of the ego

concept #9llport, +3*$, and 9llport hi!self was one of the few theorists who

ha7e pro7ided an effecti7e



*) 9LLP?R05& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0

bridge between acade!ic psychology and clinical-personality psychology #Fall

Lind@ey, +364$. =hile 9llport5s !ain work was on the de7elop!ent of a

co!prehensi7e personality theory, his interests were wide-ranging, including

studies on ru!or, social attitudes, religion, graphology, eidetic i!agery, radio

7oices, and preudice #9llport ernon, +3**B 9llport Cantril, +3*B 9llport

Post!an, +36B 9llport, +32, +3), +3b$. Critics of 9llport5s theoretical

orientation and work #cf; 9llport, +3$ ha7e included 'ertocci #+3)$, Coutu

#+33$, &eward #+34$, &kaggs #+32$, and &anford #+3*$. Perhaps the !ost

re!arkable aspect of 9llport5s work has been its ability to e%ert a broad influence

and sense of no7elty in psychology in spite of its pluralis! and eclecticis! #Fall

Lind@ey, +364$. &ee also 9LLP?R05& 1>(C0"?(9L 9>0?(?H

PR"(C"PLEB "D"?<R9PF"C(?H?0FE0"C L9=&B HCD?><9LL5&

F?RH"C"(&0"(C0 0FE?RD?C0R"(E.

RE1ERE(CE&9llport, 1., 9llport, <. #+3+$. Personality traits; 0heir classification and

!easure!ent. 4. Abn. /oc. sy., 0, -).HcDougall, =. #+3*$. #tline of psychology. (ew ork; &cribners.9llport, <. #+33$. 0he study of personality by the intuiti7e !ethod. 4. Abn. /oc.

sy., *, +-6.9llport, <., ernon, P., Lind@ey, <. #+3*++32+$. A st#dy of !al#es. 'oston;

Foughton Hifflin.9llport, <., ernon, P. #+3**$. /t#dies in expressi!e o!eent. (ew ork;

Hac!illan. 9llport, <., Cantril, F. #+3*$. Judging personality fro! 7oice. 4. /oc. sy., <, *622.

9llport, <., ?dbert, F. #+3*$. 0rait na!es; 9 psycho-le%ical study. sy. 3ono., E, no. ++.

9llport, <. #+3*6$. ersonality A psychological interpretation. (ew ork; Folt,

Rinehart, =inston.Hurray, F. #+3*4$. :xplorations in personality. (ew ork; ?%ford >ni7ersity

Press. 9llport, <. #+3)$. Hoti7ation in personality; Reply to Hr. 'ertocci. sy. e!., E, 2**22.

'ertocci, P. #+3)$. 9 criti:ue of <. =. 9llport5s theory of !oti7ation. sy. e!.,E, 2)+-2*.

1reud, &. #+3)$. An o#tline of psychoanalysis. (ew ork; (orton.9llport, <. #+3*$. 0he ego in conte!porary psychology. sy. e!., <2, 2+-64.&kaggs, E. #+32$. Personalistic psychology as science. sy. e!., <*, *-*4.9llport, <. #+3$. Effect; 9 secondary principle of learning. sy. e!., <9, **2-*6. Cattell, R. #+3$. 8escription and eas#reent of personality. (ew ork;=orld. 9llport, <. #+36$. &cientific !odels and hu!an !orals. sy. e!., <,+4-+3. 9llport, <., Post!an, L. #+36$. +he psychology of r#or. (ework; Folt. &eward, J. #+34$. 0he sign of a sy!bol; 9 reply to Professor9llport. sy. e!., <<,

66-3.Coutu, =. #+33$. :ergent h#an nat#re. (ew ork; Mnopf.Cattell, R. #+32$. 5actor analysis An introd#ction and an#al for psychologist

and social scientist. (ew ork; Farper.



9llport, <. #+32$. +he nat#re of preI#dice. Ca!bridge, H9; 9ddison-=esley.



9lrut@ theory. 4. :xp. sy., *9, ++-.



* 9H&EL5& FP?0FE&"&0FE?R

0ol!an, E. #+3*$. #rposi!e beha!ior in anials and en. (ew ork; 9ppleton-

Century-Crofts.

Jenkins, =. #+3)$. &tudies in ther!al sensiti7ity. Part/whole relations in seriati!

war!-!apping. 4. :xp. sy., *E, 6-4).

Jenkins, =. #+3+$. &tudies in ther!al sensiti7ity. 1urther e7idence on the effects of

sti!ulus te!perature. 4. :xp. sy., *1, +*-+3.

'oring, E. <. #+3$. /ensation and perception in the history of experiental

psychology. (ew ork; 9ppleton-Century-Crofts.


Rinehart, =inston.

9H&EL5& FP?0FE&"&0FE?R. 0he 9!erican psychologist 9bra! 9!-sel

#+324, +3, +36$ enunciated the fr#stration hypothesis concerning non-reward

and e%tinction of instru!ental beha7ior where the occurrence of nonreward at a

!o!ent when the organis! is e%pecting a reward causes the elicitation of a pri!ary Gfrustration reaction.G 0he feedback sti!ulation fro! this frustration

reaction is a7ersi7e and has short-ter!, persisting !oti7ational effects upon

subse:uent instru!ental beha7ior. 9!sel states that fractional parts of the

frustration reaction beco!e classically conditioned to sti!uli preceding its

elicitationB cues fro! GanticipatoryG frustration are connected to a7oidance

responses where the connections are !odifiable through training Earlier treat-

!ents and interpretations of the nonreward situation had 7iewed it in a passi7e

role #e.g., 0ol!an, +3*, assu!ed that nonreward ser7ed si!ply to weaken an

organis!5s e%pectancy of rewardB Full, +3*, concei7ed of nonreward trials as

allowing the buildup of inhibitory factors without being offset by corresponding

increases in habit or incenti7e !oti7ation$. ?n the other hand, 9!sel5s fr#stration

hypothesis considers the condition of nonreward as an acti7ely punishing and

a7ersi7e e7ent, rather than as a passi7e condition. 0he conse:uence of 9!-sel5s position is that !any of the effects of nonreward upon responding are 7iewed

today as analogous to the effects produced upon that sa!e beha7ior by the

application of punish!ent #cf; &pence, +3)B =agner, +3*, +3B Daly, +36$.

=hile 9!sel5s fr#stration theory is one of the do!inant conceptions of e%tinction,

it does re:uire critical analysis in light of a few failings. 1or e%a!ple, Le7y and

&eward #+33$ suggest that no frustration effect occurs if the organis! is

e%pecting different incenti7es in two goal locationsB 'ower #+3)$ obser7es that

9!sel5s extinction theory applies only to instru!ental, appetiti7e responses and

not to e%tinction in classical conditioning or instru!ental escape conditioning

situationsB Capaldi #+36$ and others ha7e produced different resistance le7els to

e%tinction by 7ariations in the se:uential pattern of reward and non-reward trials

during ac:uisition of responsesB and Robbins #+36+$ re7iews so!e studies that

suggest that e%tinction is a !ultiple-deter!inant process while 9!-sel5s fr#stration hypothesis is only one co!ponent of the total pheno!enon #'ower

Filgard, +34+$. &ee also C9P9LD"5& 0FE?RB F>LL5& LE9R("(< 0FE?RB

0?LH9(5& 0FE?R.



9(<9L5& PER&?(9L"0 0FE?R **

Full, C. #+3*$. rinciples of beha!ior. (ew ork; 9ppleton-Century-Crofts.

9!sel, 9. #+324$. 0he role of frustrati7e nonreward in noncontinuous reward situations. sy. B#ll., <<, +)-++3.

'ower, <. #+3)$. Partial and correlated reward in escape learning. 4. :xp. sy., <1, +-

+*).

&pence, M. #+3)$. 0he roles of reinforce!ent and nonreinforce!ent in si!ple learning.

"n Beha!ior theory and learning /elected papers of J. W. /pence. Englewood

Cliffs, (J; Prentice-Fall.

9!sel, 9. #+3$. 1rustrati7e nonreward in partial reinforce!ent and discri!ination

learning. sy. B#ll., 1, *)-*4.

'ower, <. #+3$. 0he influence of graded reductions in reward and prior frustrating

e7ents upon the !agnitude of the frustration effect. 4. op. hysio. sy., <<,

24-246.

=agner, 9. #+3*$. Conditioned frustration as a learned dri7e. 4. :xp. sy., , ++4.

Ross, R. #+3$. Positi7e and negati7e partial-reinforce!ent effects carried through con-

tinuous reinforce!ent, changed !oti7ation, and changed response. 4. :xp. sy.,

7, 3-2).

9!sel, 9., =ard, J. #+32$. 1rustration and persistence; Resistance to discri!ination

following prior e%perience with the discri!inanda. sy. 3ono., E1, no. 236.

=agner, 9. #+3$. 1rustration and punish!ent. "n R. Faber #Ed.$, esearch on oti&

!ation. (ew ork; Folt, Rinehart, =inston.

9!sel, 9. #+36$. Partial reinforce!ent effects on 7igor and persistence. "n M. &pence

J. &pence #Eds.$, +he psychology of learning and oti!ation. ol. +. (ew ork;

9cade!ic Press.

Capaldi, E. #+36$. 9 se:uential hypothesis of instru!ental learning. "n M. &pence J.

&pence #Eds.$, +he psychology of learning and oti!ation. ol. +. (ew ork;

9cade!ic Press.

Le7y, (., &eward, J. #+33$. 1rustration and ho!ogeneity of rewards in the double

runway. 4. :xp. sy., 70, )-*.

Robbins, D. #+36+$. Partial reinforce!ent; 9 selecti7e re7iew of the alleyway literature

since +3). sy. B#ll., E, +2-*+.

Daly, F. #+36$. Reinforcing properties of escape fro! frustration aroused in 7arious

learning situations. "n <. 'ower #Ed.$, +he psychology of learning and

oti!ation. ol. 4. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

'ower, <., Filgard, E. #+34+$. +heories of learning. Englewood Cliffs, (J; Prentice-

Fall.

Fergenhahn, '. #+34$. An introd#ction to theories of learning. Englewood Cliffs, (J;

Prentice-Fall.

9(9L?<>E 0FE?R ?1 HEH?R. &ee 1?R<E00"(<HEH?R, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

9(CE&0R9L "(FER"09(CE, L9= ?1. &ee <9L0?(5& L9=&.

9(<9L5& PER&?(9L"0 0FE?R. 0he Fungarian 9!erican 9ndras 9ngyal #+3)-

+3)$ de7eloped a theory of personality in which he described two basic types of

!oti7ational processes in hu!ans; stri7ing toward lo7e



* 9(<9L5& PER&?(9L"0 0FE?R

#Gho!ono!yG$ and stri7ing toward !astery #Gautono!yG$ #9ngyal, +3+$.

9ngyal concei7ed of personality as an interdependent syste! where tensions

arise between the person and the en7iron!ent and which is controlled by both

ho!ono!y and autono!y processes. "n 9ngyal5s for!ulation, the connection

between the parts of the syste! are subordinate to the o7erall whole where, for

e%a!ple, neurosis is one syste!, and o7erall health is another syste!. 9lso,

when the syste!s #through Gsyste! analysisG$ beco!e disturbed or disrupted, the

process of therapy is indicated and refers to the restoration of the health syste!

to its nor!ally do!inant role. "n its dyna!ics, 9ngyal5s personali ty theory !ay

be characteri@ed as organisic or holistic #9ngyal, +32B cf; 'ernard,

+4+326B =erthei!er, +3*B Mantor, +3, +3**B &!uts, +3B Coghill, +33B

<oldstein, +3*3B Hurphy, +36$. "n the genesis of his personality theory, 9ngyal

e!phasi@ed the need for a new science that was not pri!arily psychological,

physiological, or sociological in character but that 7iewed the person as a whole.

9ngyal, unlike Murt <oldstein #+3*3$, insisted that it is i!possible to

differentiate the organis! fro! the en7iron!ent #9ngyal coined the ter! bio&

spheric to indicate the holistic relationship between one indi7idual and the en-

7iron!ent$ because they interpenetrate one another in such a co!ple% fashion

that any atte!pt to distinguish the! would be artificial and tend to destroy the

natural unity of the whole #Fall Lind@ey, +364$. 9ngyal5s personali ty theory

has not had a significant i!pact on acade!ic psychology, perhaps because it was

de7eloped predo!inantly within a clinical, or nonacade!ic, conte%t #Lich -

tenstein, +33$. &ee also <?LD&0E"(5& ?R<9("&H"C 0FE?RB H>RPF5&

'"?&?C"9L 0FE?R.

RE1ERE(CE&

'ernard, C. #+4+326$. An introd#ction to the st#dy of experiental edicine. (ework; Do7er.

=erthei!er, H. #+3*$. >ntersuchungen @ur Lehre 7on der <estalt. sy. 5orsch., ,*)+-

*2).

Mantor, J. R. #+3$. rinciples of psychology. (ew ork; Mnopf.

&!uts, J. #+3$. $olis and e!ol#tion. (ew ork; Hac!illan.Coghill, <. #+33$. Anatoy and the proble of beha!ior. London; Ca!bridge>ni7er-

sity Press.

Mantor, J. R. #+3**$. 9 s#r!ey of the science of psychology. 'loo!ington, "(;Principia

Press.

<oldstein, M. #+3*3$. +he organis A holistic approach to biology deri!ed fro

path&ological data in an. (ew ork; 9!erican 'ook.

9ngyal, 9. #+3+$. 5o#ndations for a science of personality. (ew ork;Co!!onwealth

1oundation.

Hurphy, <. #+36$. ersonality A biosocial approach to origins and str#ct#re. (ew



ork; Farper.

9ngyal, 9. #+34$. 0he holistic approach in psychiatry. Aer. 4. sychiat., 02<, +64-+4.

9ngyal, 9. #+32+$. 9 theoretical !odel for personality studies. 4. ers., *2, +*+-+.



* 9(K"E0, 0FE?R"E& ?1

theory focused on the child5s fear of death as the basic cause of an%iety. Hay5stheory e!phasi@ed the creation of an%iety as a result of one5s 7alue syste! being

threatenedB &ulli7an5s theory e%a!ined the unpleasant state of tension that was

caused by disappro7al in7ol7ed in interpersonal relationshipsB and Mutash5s

anxiety&stress theory points to the dise:uilibriu! #an%iety$ that occurs when one

is not e%periencing opti!al stress le7els for one5s constitution either in a healthy

balance #e:uilibriu!$ or in an unhealthy balance #!ale:uilibriu!$, and where

an%iety can be adapti7e #when a need to change is indicated by an opti!al stress

le7el$ or !aladapti7e #when stress is either too high or too low$. earning-

beha!ioral theories of an%iety ha7e been distinguished fro! the psychoanalytic-

psychodynaic theories concerning the type of sti!uli #pro%i!al 7ersus distal$

that are in7ol7ed #'oot@in Ha%, +34)$, where pro%i!al cuessti!uli #such as

reinforce!ent in a sti!ulus/response se:uence$ are associated with learning-

beha!ioral theories, and the distal cuessti!uli #such as so!e intrapsychic con-flict$ are associated with the psychoanalytic-psychodynaic theories. 0he learn&

ing-beha!ioral anxiety theories ha7e been de7eloped based on the work of

researchers such as =atson and Rayner #+3)$, Pa7lo7 #+36$, =agner and Re

scorla #+36$, Howrer #+3) a , b$, Ferrnstein #+33$ , ' andura #+366$ , 'erger

#+3$, and Rach!an #+364$. 0his approach is characteri@ed by e!pirical con-

ditioning studies #rather than personality and clinical studies$ and atte!pts to

understand, e%plain, and treat an%iety by in7oking concepts such as reinforceent

#the increase in the fre:uency of a response caused by pleasantrewarding

conse:uences$, p#nishent #the decrease in the fre:uency of beha7iors due to

unpleasant conse:uences$, inforation processing, expectancy, efficacy expec&

tations, fear red#ction, discriinati!e or signaling !al#e of sti!uli, predicti!e

!al#e of sti!uli, a!oidance beha!ior, s#ccessi!e approxiations of desired be-

ha7ior, incopatible beha7iors, cogniti!e processes, odeling beha7iors, obser&!ational learning, and biofeedbac% #Mutash, +33$. arious antianxiety drugs

#such as the Gsedati7e-hypnoticsG na!ed aliu! and Libriu!$ ha7e been pre-

scribed by physicians for indi7iduals who e%perience the often o7erwhel!ing

effects of an%iety #0horn-<ray, +33$. &ee also 1RE>D5& 0FE?R ?1 PER-

&?(9L"0B LE9R("(< 0FE?R"E&L9=&.

RE1ERE(CE&

=atson, J. '., Rayner, R. #+3)$. Conditioned e!otional reactions. 4. :xp. sy., 9,

+-+.

1reud, &. #+3*$. +he ego and the id. (ew ork; (orton.

Pa7lo7, ". #+36$. onditioned reflexes. (ew ork; Do7er.

Mlein, H. #+3*$. +he psychoanalysis of children. London; Fogarth Press.


Hifflin.

1reud, &. #+3*$. +he proble of anxiety. (ew ork; (orton.

Hay, R. #+32)$. +he eaning of anxiety. (ew ork; Ronald Press.

Mlein, H. #+32$. ?n the theory of an%iety and guilt. "n J. Ri7iere #Ed.$,

8e!elopents

in psychoanalysis. London; Fogarth Press.



&ulli7an, F. &. #+32*$. +he interpersonal theory of psychiatry. (ew ork; (orton.



9PP9RE(0 H?EHE(0, PR"(C"PLE&0FE?R"E& ?1 *6

Howrer, ). F. #+3)a$. earning theory and beha!ior. (ew ork; =iley.

Howrer, ). F. #+3)b$. earning theory and sybolic processes. (ew ork; =iley.

'erger, &. #+3$. Conditioning through 7icarious instigation. sy. e!., 1 , 2)-.

1reud, &. #+3$. +he coplete psychological wor%s of /ig#nd 5re#d. ols. +-.

London; Fogarth Press.

Ferrnstein, R. #+33$. Hethod and theory in the study of a7oidance. sy. e!., E, 33.

=agner, 9., Rescorla, R. #+36$. "nhibition in Pa7lo7ian conditioning; 9pplications of a

theory. "n R. 'okes H. Falliday #Eds.$, 6nhibition and learning. (ew ork;

9cade!ic Press.

'andura, 9. #+366$. /ocial learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, (J; Prentice-Fall.

Rach!an, &. #+364$. 5ear and co#rage. &an 1rancisco; 1ree!an.

'oot@in, R., Ha%, D. #+34)$. Learning and beha7ioral theories. "n ". Mutash L.

&chlesinger #Eds.$, $andboo% on stress and anxiety. &an. 1rancisco; Jossey-'ass.

Mutash, ". #+34)$. Pre7ention and e:uilibriu!-dise:uilibriu! theory. "n ". Mutash L.

&chlesinger #Eds.$, $andboo% on stress and anxiety. &an 1rancisco; Jossey-'ass.

Mutash, ". #+33$. 9n%iety. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley. 0horn-<ray, '.

#+33$. 9ntian%iety drugs. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley.


9PP9RE(0 H?EHE(0, PR"(C"PLE&0FE?R"E& ?1. 0he pheno!enon of

apparent o!eent refers to the subecti7e 7isual perception of !o7e!ent in the

absence of any real or obecti7e physical !otion. Co!!on types of apparent

!o7e!ent include the phi phenoenon, the a#to%inetic effect, and the

aftereffects of seen o!eent. ?ther kinds of apparent !o7e!ent are alpha&,

beta&, delta&, epsilon&, gaa&, ind#ced&, and stroboscopic !o7e!ent #Menkel,

+3+*B =ol!an, +36*$. 0he phi phenoenon, or stroboscopic !o7e!ent, !ay be

obser7ed when two adacent sti!ulus lights are flashed in rapid succession. "f

the intersti!ulus period is too long, the lights appear to go on and off separately."f the intersti!ulus period is too short, the lights appear to flash at the sa!e

ti!e. =hen the intersti!ulus period is about *)-)) !illiseconds, howe7er, one

gets the sensation of a light !o7ing fro! one location to another location

#stroboscopic !o7e!ent is the basis for the effect of !otion seen on tele7ision

and !otion pictures$. 0he a#to%inetic effect refers to !o7e!ent that see!s to

occur when a stationary obect is 7iewed against a dark or ill-defined

background, and where the stationary obect appears to !o7e after looking at it

for a few !inutes. Aftereffects of seen o!eent !ay occur when an indi7idual

stares for a few !inutes at so!e continuous !otion of an obect in one direction

and then shifts the ga@e to a different surface #such as looking at a waterfall for a

few !inutes and then looking away to a te%tured surface where the surface now

appears to be going in the opposite, or upward, directionB Ja!es, +43), p. 43$.

6nd#ced o!eent refers to the illusion of !o7e!ent where a 7isual fra!e ofreference is actually !o7ing in one direction #such as clouds !o7ing across the

!oon$, and a stationary obect #such as the !oon$ subse:uently see!s to !o7e

in the opposite direction. Alpha o!eent occurs when there appears to



*4 9PP9RE(0 H?EHE(0, PR"(C"PLE&0FE?R"E& ?1

be a change of si@e in parts of a figure that are e%posed in succession. Betao!eent refers the illusion of !o7e!ent when differently si@ed, or positioned,

obects are e%posed in succession. 8elta o!eent refers to the apparent !o7e-

!ent of a light sti!ulus to a darker sti!ulus after successi7e e%posure when the

7ariables of sti!ulus si@e, distance, and intersti!ulus inter7al are controlled.

:psilon o!eent is the 7isual perception of !o7e!ent when a white line

7iewed against a black background is changed so that subse:uently one now

7iews a black line against a white background. Caa o!eent refers to the

apparent contraction and e%pansion of a figure that is shown suddenly #or is

withdrawn$ or a figure that is e%posed to sudden illu!ination changes. arious

theories of apparent o!eent ha7e been de7eloped and described #e.g., =ood-

worth &chlosberg, +32$ and include the inference theory #where we actually

see only the initial and ter!inal positions and infer that the obect !ust ha7e

!o7edB =erthei!er, +3+, +32$B the eye&o!eent theory #in which e!phasisis placed on the fact that the eyes obecti7ely !o7e across fro! the initial

sti!ulus position to the final position, and where eye !o7e!ent itself contrib-

utes to the sensation of !otionB cf; <uilford Felson, +33B =endt, +32$B and

the brain fieldtheory #which suggested that the retina, or the 7isual corte%, was

actually sti!ulated in the region lying between the initial and the ter!inal

positions of the sti!uliB E%ner, +462B Mohler, +3*4, +3)$. =oodworth and

&chlosberg #+32$ obser7ed that there is no generally acceptable theory of ap&

parent o!eent e%cept, perhaps, for the de7elop!ent of a no7el theory that

would regard perception as a type of response to the inco!ing sensory sti!u-

lation and that subse:uently applies the principle of sti#l#s generaliGation to

the ulti!ate e%planation of !o7e!ent. 0hus, if the sti!uli that are recei7ed are

sufficiently si!ilar to those that were recei7ed fro! real !o7e!ent, then the

perceptual response would likely be the sa!e #cf; Moffka, +3*+, +3*2B (eff,+3*B <raha!, +32+$. <raha! #+32$ suggested that new analyses and in7es-

tigations in the field of perceptualapparent !o7e!ent would lead to needed

theoretical i!pro7e!ents. &ee also M?R0E5& L9=&.

RE1ERE(CE&

E%ner, &. #+462$. E%peri!entelle >ntersuchungen der einfachsten psychischen

Processe. F" 9bhandlung; Der personlichen <leichung @weiter 0heil. fl#g.

Ar. ges. hy&sio., 00, )*-*.

ierordt, M. #+46$. Die 'ewegungse!pfindung. D. Bio., 0*, -).

9ubert, F. #+44$. Die 'ewegungse!pfindung. Ar. ges. hysio., 91, *6-

*6). Ja!es, =. #+43)$. rinciples of psychology. ol. . (ew ork; Folt.

&tern, L. #+43$. Die =ahrneh!ung 7on 'ewegungen 7er!ittelst des 9uges. D. sy.,

6, *+-*42.

Harbe, M. #+434$. Die &troboskopischen Erscheinungen. hil. /t#d., 0, *6-)+.Durr, E. #+3))$. >ber die &troboskopischen Erscheinungen. hil. /t#d., 0<, 2)+-2*.

=erthei!er, H. #+3+$. E%peri!entelle &tudien uber das &ehen 7on 'ewegung. D. sy.,

0, ++-2.



Menkel, 1. #+3+*$. >ntersuchungen uber den Ausa!!enhang @wischen Erscheinungs



9R"&0?0LE5& D?C0R"(E&0FE?R"E& *3

grosse and Erscheinungsbewegung bei einigen sogenannten optischen

0auschun-gen. D. sy., E, *24-3.=erthei!er, H. #+32$. 8rei Abhandl#ngen G#r Cestalttheorie. Erlangen; Philoso-

phischen 9kade!ie.

Figginson, <. #+3$. 0he 7isual apprehension of !o7e!ent under successi7e retinal

e%citations. Aer. 4. sy., 9E, *-++2.

<uilford, 4., @ Felson, F. #+33$. Eye-!o7e!ents and the phi pheno!enon. Aer. 4.

sy., 0, 232-).

(euhaus, =. #+3*)$. E%peri!entelle >ntersuchung der &cheinbewegung. Ar. ges.

sy., E<, *+2-24.

Moffka, M. #+3*+$. Die =ahrneh!ung 7on 'ewegung. "n 9. 'ethe #Ed.$, $andb%.

>or. ath. hysio. 'erlin; &pringer.

Moffka, M. #+3*2$. rinciples of Cestalt psychology. (ew ork; Farcourt, 'race. (eff, =. #+3*$. 9 critical in7estigation of the 7isual apprehension of !o7e!ent.

Aer. 4. sy., 7, +-.

Mohler, =. #+3*4$. +he place of !al#e in a world of facts. (ew ork; Li7eright.Mohler, =. #+3)$. 8ynaics in psychology. (ew ork; Li7eright.

'oring, E. <. #+3$. /ensation and perception in the history of experiental

psychology. (ew ork; 9ppleton-Century-Crofts.

<raha!, C. #+32+$. isual perception. "n &. &. &te7ens #Ed.$, $andb%. :xp. sy. (ew

ork; =iley.

=endt, P. #+32$. De7elop!ent of an eye ca!era for use with !otion pictures. sy.

3ono., , no. **3.

'artley, &. #+324$. rinciples of perception. (ew ork; Farper.

<raha!, C. #+3*$. ?n so!e aspects of real and apparent 7isual !o7e!ent. 4. pt.

/oc. Aer., <9, +)+3-+)2.

Molers, P. #+3*$. &o!e differences between real and apparent 7isual !o7e!ent. =is.

es., 9, +3+-).

<raha!, C. #+32$. Perception of !o7e!ent. "n C. <raha! #Ed.$, =ision and !is#al

perception. (ew ork; =iley.=oodworth, R., &chlosberg, F. #+32$. :xperiental psychology. (ew ork; Folt,

Rinehart, =inston.

=ol!an, '. #Ed.$ #+36*$. 8ictionary of beha!ioral science. (ew ork; an (ostrand

Reinhold.

9PPERCEP0"?(, D?C0R"(E ?1. &ee FER'9R05& D?C0R"(E ?1 9P-

PERCEP0"?(B =>(D05& 0FE?R"E&.

9PPR9"&9L 0FE?R"E& ?1 EH?0"?(. &ee C?<("0"E 0FE?R"E& ?1

EH?0"?(.

9R"&0?0LE5& D?C0R"(E&0FE?R"E&. 0he <reek philosopher 9ristotle#*4-* '.c.$ was a student of Plato5s 9cade!y in 9thens, where he was

schooled in the theory of ideas. 9ristotle argued that !an was a rational

ani!al endowed with an innate capacity for attaining knowledge fro! sense

percep tion #and G!e!oryasso ciationsG$ and that knowledge is the result of



deduction of



) 9R(?LD5& 0FE?R ?1 EH?0"?(&

uni7ersals and principles fro! perceptual infor!ation and not the reco7ering ofinnate ideas, as Plato taught. 9ristotle5s epirical !ethodology parallels his

psychological theory when he ad7ocated the use of close obser7ation and ac curate

classification of natural pheno!enaB he also for!ali@ed a syste! of deducti7e

propositional logic. 0he ter! Aristotelian is used to indicate the principle of

careful deduction of scientific or personal knowledge fro! syste!atic obser7ations

of natural e7ents. 9ristotle5s work e%erted an i!!ense influence on !edie7al

philosophy, especially through &t. 0ho!as 9:uinas, on "sla!ic phi losophy, and on

the whole =estern intellectual and scientific tradition. "n the Hiddle 9ges,

9ristotle was referred to si!ply as Gthe Philosopher,G and the uncritical and

religious acceptance of his doctrines was to ha!per the progress of science until

the scientific re7olution of the si%teenth and se7enteenth centuries. 9ristotle5s

writings represented an enor!ous encyclopedic output o7er 7irtually e7ery field of

knowledge; logic, !etaphysics, ethics, politics, rhetoric, poetry, biology, @oology, physics, and psychology #Huir, +33B Reber, +332$. &ee also 9&&?C"90"?(,

L9=&PR"(C"PLE& ?1B FED?("&H, 0FE?R L9= ?1B PLE9&>RE/

P9"(, D?C0R"(E0FE?RL9= ?1.

RE1ERE(CE&

Robertson, <. #+43$. :leents of psychology. (ew ork; &cribners.

Haher, H. #+3))$. sychology. (ew ork; Long!ans, <reen.

Foffding, F. #+3)4$. #tlines of psychology. London; Hac!illan.9ristotle. #+3+)$. hysiognoica. ?%ford; ?%ford >ni7ersity Press.

9ristotle. #+3+a$. De ani!a #?n the soul$. "n R. HcMeon #Ed.$, +he basic wor%s of

Aristotle. (ew ork; Rando! Fouse.9ristotle. #+3+b$. De !e!oria et re!iniscentia #?n !e!ory and re!iniscence$. "nR.

HcMeon #Ed.$, +he basic wor%s of Aristotle. (ew ork; Rando! Fouse.9ristotle. #+32$. Physics. "n R. Futchins #Ed.$, Creat boo%s of the Western world.

ol.

4. Chicago; Encyclopaedia 'ritannica.

Huir, F. #Ed.$ #+33$. aro#sse dictionary of scientists. (ew ork; Larousse.


9R(?LD5& 0FE?R ?1 EH?0"?(&. Hagda '. Arnold's theory of eotions

e!phasi@es the cogniti!e factors associated with e!otional beha7ior that in7ol7es a

continuous se:uence of reaction and appraisal where a series of infor!ation-

processing steps takes place #9rnold, +32, +3), +36), +34$. "n the first phase of

processing, the indi7idual typically percei!es so!e e7ent, obect, or person and is

prepared to e7aluate it in a particular way; as Ggood,G which leads to approach

beha7ior, as Gbad,G which leads to a7oidance beha7ior, or as Gindifferent,G whichleads to ignoring the e7ent. 0he ne%t phase is appraisal, where the person decides

whether what is happening will hurt, help, or ha7e no effect on hi! or her. 0he third

and fourth phases are bodily change and eotion, both of which typically occur at

al!ost the sa!e ti!e. Phase fi7e is action; so!e indi7iduals in certain situations skip

fro! the bodily changes in stage three and go directly to stage fi7e. 1or e%a!ple, if a



strange dog co!es



9&CF C?(1?RH"0 E11EC0 +

running toward you with its teeth bared, you take rapid action and run awaywithout thinking as epinephrine rushes into your syste!. =hen you reach safety,

you beco!e aware of your heart pounding, and, at that ti!e, you e%perience the

eotion of fear. Arnold's theory assu!es that the entire appraisal se:uence takes

place in an instant. 9rnold distinguishes a!ong a few basic e!otions that are

si!ple reactions to the appraisal of basic situations; dislike, lo7e #liking$,

a7ersion, despair, desire, anger, fear, hope, daring, sorrow, and oy. Fer theory

stresses that the intuiti7e, spontaneous appraisal in an e!otional episode is sup -

ple!ented by a deliberate 7alue udg!ent, especially in adults , and it funct ions

in the sa!e way that one5s sensory knowledge is co!ple!ented by cognitions.

9ccording to Arnold's cogniti!e theory, e!otions can be sociali@ed where social

attitudes and custo!s influence one5s intuiti7e appraisal of e7ents, and where

affecti!e eory preser7es one5s pre7ious encounters with intense e!otion-

arousing sti!uli #9rnold, +34$. Affecti!e eory !ay account for !any of theGinstincti7eG feelings one e%periences, such as i!!ediate dislikes or likes for

so!ething or so!eone, reactions to fearful sti!uli that later beco!e phobias,

preudice connected with unresol7ed and unpleasant si tuations fro! the past, and

e7en lo7e at first sight. &ee also C?<("0"E 0FE?R"E& ?1 EH?0"?(&B

EH?0"?(&, 0FE?R"E&L9=& ?1B L9A9R>&5 0FE?R ?1 EH?0"?(&B

&CF9CF0ER/&"(<ER5& 0FE?R ?1 EH?0"?(&.

RE1ERE(CE&

9rnold, H. #+32$. 1eelings and e!otions as dyna!ic factors in personality

integration.

"n H. 9rnold J. <asson #Eds.$, +he h#an person. (ew ork; Ronald Press.

9rnold, H. #+3)$. :otion and personality. (ew ork; Colu!bia >ni7ersity Press.

La@arus, R. #+34$. E!otions and adaptation. Conceptual and e!pirical relations. "n

=.

9rnold #Ed.$, >ebras%a /yposi# of 3oti!ation. ol. +. Lincoln;

>ni7ersity

of (ebraska Press.

9rnold, H. #+36)$. 5eelings and eotions +he oyola /yposi#. (ew ork;9cade!ic Press.

9rnold, H. #+34$. 3eory and the brain. Fillsdale, (J; Erlbau!.

&trong!an, M. #+346$. +he psychology of eotion. (ew ork; =iley.

9rnold, H. #+33$. Cogniti7e theories of e!otion. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

'au!, 9. #+33$. E!otions. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

9R?>&9L 0FE?R. &ee 9C0"90"?(9R?>&9L 0FE?R.

9R?>&9L-C?<("0"E 0FE?R"E& ?1 EH?0"?(. &ee C?<("0"E

0FE?R"E& ?1 EH?0"?(&.

9&CF C?(1?RH"0 E11EC0. 0he 9!erican social psychologist &olo!on E.

9sch #+3)6-+332$ conducted a series of e%peri!ents where 9!erican college



students were asked to !ake udg!ents about the length of 7ertical lines. &e7en !ale

students !ade these si!ple udg!ents out loud, one by one, in a group



9&CF C?(1?RH"0 E11EC0

setting, but the si%th student in the se:uence was the only true subectpartici-

pant. 0he other students were 9sch5s acco!plices #called confederates), and,

without the true subect5s knowledge, on !any trials they all deliberately !ade

the sa!e incorrect guess. 9sch5s results were interesting; e7en in this si!ple

udg!ent task, only about one-fourth of the subects co!pletely resisted the

other students5 answers and !ade no errors. ?ther subects followed the unan -

i!ous, but incorrect, opinion on e7ery trial, showing co!plete ac:uiescence to

the group5s pressure. "n later debriefing sessions, the subects greatly underes-

ti!ated their degree of confority #9sch, +322, +32$. &i!ilar e%peri!ents

with 1rench, (orwegian, 9rabian, and 'ritish students supported 9sch5s

findings with 9!erican subects. 0he Asch effect, then, refers to the powerful

influence of a unani!ous group and its decision on the beha7ior of an

indi7idual that results in confority to that group. onfority, for better or

worse, is defined as the tendency for people to adopt the beha7iors, attitudes,

and 7alues of other !e!bers of a reference group #Ai!bardo =eber, +33$.

"n subse:uent studies, group si@e and group unani!ity turned out to be key

deter!inants of confority #9sch, +32$. 0he factor of gender, howe7er, does

not see! to be a distinguishing factor in confority #Eagly Johnson, +33)B

'aron, +33$. &o!e !i%ed results ha7e appeared in recent years concerning

9sch5s paradig! and !ake the Asch effect a topic of continued interest in

current psychology #e.g., 9!ir, +34B 1riend, Rafferty, 'ra!el, +33)B Larsen,

+33)$. &ee also '&09(DER "(0ERE(0"?( E11EC0B DEC"&"?(-

H9M"(< 0FE?R"E&B DE"(D""D>90"?( 0FE?RB <R?>P0F"(M

PFE(?HE(?(.

RE1ERE(CE&

9sch, &. #+3)$. &tudies in the principles of udg!ents and attitudes. F.Deter!ination

of udg!ents by group and by ego standards. 4. /oc. sy., 0*, **-2.9sch, &. #+3$. 1or!ing i!pressions of personality. 4. Abn. /oc. sy., 0, 24-3).

9sch, &. #+32+$. Effects of group pressure upon the !odification and distortion of udg-

!ent. "n F. <uet@kow #Ed.$, Cro#ps, leadership, and en. Pittsburgh;

Carnegie. 9sch, &. #+32$. /ocial psychology. (ew ork; Prentice-Fall.

9sch, &. #+322$. ?pinions and social pressure. /ci. Aer., 019, *+-*2.Deutsch, H., <erard, F. #+322$. 9 study of nor!ati7e and infor!ational social

influences upon indi7idual udg!ent. 4. Abn. /oc. sy., <0, 3-*.

9sch, &. #+32$. &tudies of independence and confor!ity. ". 9 !inority of one

against a unani!ous !aority. sy. 3ono., E2, no. +.

Horris, =., Hiller, R. #+362$. 0he effects of consensus-breaking and consensus-

pree!pting partners on reduction of confor!ity. 4. ers. /oc. sy., 00, +2-*. Horris, =., Hiller, R., &pangenberg, &. #+366$. 0he effects of dissenter

position and

task difficulty on confor!ity and response to conflict. 4. ers., <, 2+-.

9!ir, 0. #+34$. 0he 9sch confor!ity effect; 9 study in Muwait. 4. /oc. Beh. @

ers.,



0*, +46-+3).

0anford, &., Penrod, &. #+34$. &ocial influence !odel; 9 forward integration ofre-

search on !aority and !inority influence processes. sy. B#ll., 1<, +43-2.Eagly, 9., Johnson, '. #+33)$. <ender and leadership style; 9 !eta-analysis. sy.

B#ll., 027, **-2.



9&&"H"L90"?(, L9= ?1 *

1riend, R., Rafferty, ., 'ra!el, D. #+33)$. 9 pu@@ling !isinterpretation of the

9sch Gconfor!ityG study. :#r. 4. /oc. sy., *2, 3-.Larsen, M. #+33)$. 0he 9sch confor!ity e%peri!ent; Replication and transhistorical

co!parisons. 4. /oc. Beh. @ ers., <, +*-+4.

'aron, R. #+33$. sychology. 'oston; 9llyn 'acon.


9&F'5& L9= ?1 REN>"&"0E 9R"E0. &ee "(1?RH90"?(

"(1?RH90"?(-PR?CE&&"(< 0FE?R.

9&&"H"L90"?(, L9= ?1. 0he Go7erloadG ter! assiilation appears to be

obsolete, as udged by its infre:uent use by writers of psychology te%tbooks today

#cf; Piaget, +3*$, although it does find !odern resuscitation in ter!s such as generaliGation and analogy #Reber, +332$. 0he law of assiilation states that when

an indi7idual is in a new situation, he or she will beha7e in a way that is si!ilar to

the way he or she did in si!ilar circu!stances in the past. =oodworth and

&chlosberg #+32$ consider the ter! assiilation to be under the rubric of theory

rather than of law. Fo7land #+32+$, howe7er, refers to the law of assi!ilation. Piaget

#+3*$ has e!ployed the ter! assiilation as a working descripti7e GfunctionsG ter!

in his study of the de7elop!ent of intellectual co!petence in children, where

assiilation is a functional !echanis! that preser7es cogniti7e structure and

pro!otes integration and si!ilarity between the ele!ents or content of the structure.

0he ter! assiilation itself was introduced by ). Lauenstein #+3**$, who was a

student of the <er!an-born 9!erican psychologist =olfgang Mohler. "n

psychophysical e%peri!ents on hearing, where standard sti!uli were studied against

interpolated sti!uli, Lauenstein obtained results on loudness that showed thate%peri!ental subects Gassi!ilatedG or integrated standard sti!ulus GtracesG toward

an interpolated sti!ulus in such a way that assi!ilation occurred upward toward a

loud interpolated sti!ulus but downward toward a soft one #=oodworth

&chlosberg, +32$. "n hu!an learn-ingretention conte%ts, the ter! assiilation has

been characteri@ed as a Glaw.G 0he law of assiilation, according to Can #+32$,

states that Geach new sti!ulating condition tends to elicit the response which has

been connected with si!ilar sti!ulating conditions in the past.G 0er!s related to

assiilation in a learningretention conte%t #Fo7land, +32+$ are associati!e

interference #when learning of a new association is !ade !ore difficult because of a

prior association$ and associati!e facilitation #when learning of a new association is

!ade easier due to a prior association$. Hore !odern substitutes for these latter two

ter!s in the current 7ocabulary of psychologists are negati!e transfer of training and

positi!e transfer of training, respecti7ely #cf; Reber, +332$. &ee also 9&&?C"90"?(,L9=&PR"(C"PLE& ?1B <E(ER9L"A90"?(, PR"(C"PLE ?1B P"9<E05&

0FE?R ?1 DEEL?PHE(09L &09<E&B 0R9(&1ER ?1 0R9"("(<,

0F?R(D"ME5& 0FE?R ?1.



9&&?C"90"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE& ?1

RE1ERE(CE&

Can, F. #+32$. sychology A st#dy of ental acti!i ty. (ew ork; Long!ans,

<reen. ?rata, P. #+34$. +he theory of identical eleents, being a criti#e of

+horndi%e's theory

of identical eleents and a re&interpretation of the proble of transfer oftraining.

Colu!bus; ?hio &tate >ni7ersity Press.u!, L. #+3*+$. 9n e%peri!ental test of the law of assi!ilation. 4. :xp. sy., 0, 4-

4.

'ruce, R. #+3**$. Conditions of transfer of training. 4. :xp. sy., 0, **-*+.

Lauenstein, ). #+3**$. 9nsat@ @u einer physiologischen 0heorie des ergleichs

and der Aeitfehler. sy. 5orsch., 0E, +*)-+66.

=oodworth, R. #+3*4$. :xperiental psychology. (ew ork; Folt.Fo7land, C. #+32+$. Fu!an learning and retention. "n &. &. &te7ens #Ed.$, $andb%.

:xp. sy. (ew ork; =iley.Piaget, 4. #+3*$. +he origins of intelligence in children. (ew ork; (orton.=oodworth, R., &chlosberg, F. #+32$. :xperiental psychology. (ew ork;



9&&?C"90"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE& ?1. association, doctrine of as-sociationis!. 0he ter! association referred originally to an association ofideas and was used by the early <reeks in their philosophies. 1or e%a!ple,E!ped-odes #32-*2 '.c.$ belie7ed that the process of thinking was thecreation and destruction of percepts that took place in the churning of bloodin the heart after being carried fro! the sense organs by the bloodstrea!BPlato #6-*6 '.c.$ enunciated a theory of learning based on associationwhere recollection of si!ilar ideas was e!phasi@edB 9ristotle #*4-* '.c.$obser7ed that when a person thought of so!ething, it would re!ind that person of so!ething else, where one idea led to another idea in a !anner thatthe two ideas had so!e kind of relation, connection, or association. 9ristotle proposed in his essays on !e!ory #HcMeon, +3+$ that three GrelationsGe%ist between ele!ents that lead to associations; contig#ity, siilarity, andcontrast. 0ho!as Fobbes #+244-+63$ was the first to suggest that 9ristotle5sGrelationsG could ser7e as an associationistic !odel of hu!an cognition#Reber, +332$. Later, John Locke #+*-+6)$ coined the phrase associationof ideas #Locke, +6))$ and regarded associations as interruptions to rationalways of thinking ?ther eighteenth- and nineteenth-century philosopherstransfor!ed the notion of the association of ideas into the syste!atic

7iewpoint called associationis. Chief a!ong these 'ritish e!piricists orGassociationisticG philosophers were <eorge 'erkeley #+42-+62*$, Da7idFu!e #+6++-+66$, Da7id Fartley #+6)2-+626$, Ja!es Hill #+66*+4*$,John &tuart Hill #+4)-+46*$, 9le%ander 'ain #+4+4-+3)*$, and 0ho!as'rown #+664-+4)$. Fu!e reduced the !ind to the association of ideas and!aintained that the !ind contains either perceptions or their copies #GideasG$,



and ideas were glued together by two laws of association siilarity andcontig#ity. Fartley is usually recogni@ed as the founder of psychologicalassocia&



9&&?C"90"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE& ?1 2

tionis, and he speculated on physiological laws of association between ner7e

7ibrations to e%plain the ental laws of association #Leahey, +33$. 0he principle

of associati!e learning was further refined by the Hills and 'ain, who de7eloped

a type of psychological associationis! that !ade the association of ideas the

central process of acting and thinking 1ro! this initial philosophical conte%t, the

principle of association !o7ed toward an e!pirically researchable for! as

de7eloped by 0ho!as 'rown in his secondary laws of association #=arren, +3+B

=oodworth &chlosberg, +32$; d#ration, li!eliness, fre#ency, and recency.

0hese first four of 'rown5s secondary laws perhaps ha7e the !ost 7ital

significance for associationis! #Hurphy Mo7ach, +36$. 0he other secondary

laws include the concepts of Gfewer alternati7e associates,G Gconstitutional

differences,G G7ariations in the sa!e indi7idual,G Gdi7ersities of state,G and Ghabits

of lifeG #=arren, +3+$. 'rown5s ter!inological approach per!itted casting the

general laws of GsuggestionG into a for! that contained the concepts of therelati7e recency, fre:uency, and li7eliness of particular e% periences. 'rown5s

e!phasis on e!otional and constitutional factors was also significant and

contrasted with the associationists5 usual neglect of indi7idual differences

#Hurphy Mo7ach, +36$. Har% and Filli% #+3*, p. +)3$ show that of the three

pri!ary principles-laws of association #contiguity, si!ilarity, and contrast$ the

principle of contig#ity was the !ost popular a!ong the early writers, including

9ristotle, Fobbes, Locke, 'erkeley, Fu!e, Fartley, J. Hill, J. &. Hill, 'ain, and

&pencer. 9t one ti!e, the notion of association was characteri@ed as G!ental

che!istryG #J. &. Hill$, in which si!ple ideas could be linked to for! !ore

co!ple% ideas. 0he deco!position of !ental life into ele!ents #si!ple ideas$ and

the co!pounding of these ele!ents to for! co!ple% ideas subse:uently for!ed

the core of the new scientific psychology #&chult@, +34+$. Fistorically

noteworthy, also, in the ad7ance!ent of associationis was the syste!aticresearch based on associationistic principles that was conducted by Fer!an

Ebbinghaus #+42)-+3)3$, "7an Pa7lo7 #+43-+3*$, and Edward L. 0horndike

#+46-+33$. Ebbinghaus constructed lists of Gnonsense syllablesG as learning

!aterial and used hi!self o7er !any years as subect #Gn +G$ in his !e!ory

studies #Ebbinghaus, +442$. Fe found that the !ore ti!es he repeated a list of

syllables, the better his !e!ory of it, thus supporting 'rown5s law of fre#ency.

Ebbinghaus was also able to show that !e!ory was influenced by such factors as

the nu!ber of syllables on the list and the ti!e between learning the list and

ha7ing to recall the syllables (law of recency). &uch factors are still studied today

in !e!ory research. "7an Pa7lo7, the Russian physiologist, is credited #along with

ladi!ir 'ekhtere7, +426-+36$ for shifting the kind of association studied fro!

philosophical ideas to laboratory-based sti!u-lus/response connections.

Pa7lo75s #and 'ekhtere75s$ prior research on the conditioned refle% helped toobectify psychology as well as strengthen the concept of association #Pa7lo7,

+36B 'ekhtere7, +3+*$. E. L. 0horndike #+434$ had de7eloped the !ost co!plete

account up to that ti!e of psychological pheno!ena along associationistic lines

#e.g., 0horndike5s, +3*+, connectionis),



9&&?C"90"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE& ?1

and his syste! was considered the !ost appropriate representati7e of associa&

tionis in psychology #Har% Filli%, +3*$. Hore recently, in the twentieth

century and under the influence of the beha7ioristic 7iewpoint #e.g., =atson,

+3+3$, the laws of association beca!e the laws of learning, the law of fre#ency

beca!e the gradually rising learning cur7e, the law of siilarity beca!e the

generali@ation gradient, and the law of contig#ity beca!e the te!poral relat ion-

ship between unconditioned and conditioned sti!uli. Currently, the eighteenth-

century association concepts ha7e been re7i7ed so!ewhat with the ad7ent and

de7elop!ent of the field of cogniti!e psychology, which considers !e!ory to be

an associati7e network of ideas that are e!bedded in a co!ple% infor!ation-

processing syste! #e.g., 9nderson 'ower, +36*$. "n its historical de7elop !ent,

the principle of association was challenged by 7arious psychologists, especially

by the <estalt psychologists who renounced it co!pletely #Leahey, +33$.

Fowe7er, !any associati!e laws were de7eloped during the history of thedoctrine of associationis, and these principles ha7e been used often as

hypotheses or as e%planatory concepts in psychology #Pettiohn, +34$. Perhaps

the !ost popular principle has been teporal contig#ity #where things that occur

close together in ti!e tend to beco!e associated with each other$. 0he other

sur7i7ing associati!e laws deri7ing !ainly fro! 9ristotle5s GrelationsG and

'rown5s Gsecondary lawsG are !i!idness-clearness-intensity #the !ore 7i7id,

li7ely, or intense the e%perience, the stronger the associati7e bond$B fre#ency-

repetition #things that occur repeatedly together tend to beco!e associated with

each otherB cf; 3arbe's law, which is the generali@ation that in word association

tasks the !ore fre#ently a response occurs, the !ore rapidly it tends to occur,

and where latency is in7ersely related to fre:uencyB Reber, +332B =ol!an, +36*$B

recency #associations that are for!ed recently are easiest to recall$B si&

ilarity-reseblance #aspects of ideas, sensations, or !o7e!ents that are si!ilartend to beco!e associated with each other$B and contrast #when two contrary or

opposing sensations or other !ental data are u%taposed, the contrary char-

acteristics are intensified, where gi7en the idea of one, the idea of its opposite

tends to be recalled$ #=arren, +3*$. =illia! Ja!es #+43), 7ol. +, p. 2)$ stated a

law of dissociation by !arying concoitants as follows; G=hat is associated now

with one thing and now with another tends to beco!e dissociated fro! either, and

to grow into an obect of abstract conte!plation of the !indG #cf; 0horndike,

+3)6$. 0he difficulty with the associati!e laws, e7en though they !ay be :uite

7alid generally, is that all too often they ha7e been e%pected to assu!e an

e%planatory role far beyond their capacities. 1or instance, the principle of

contig#ity has been 7aluable in the area of learning theory, but it cannot account

for all !ental e%periences and e7ents, !any of which ha7e e!otional or

!oti7ational characteristics #Pettiohn, +34$. 9lso, in recent years, the con cept ofassociationis !ay ha7e lost so!e of its e%planatory power in the fields of

cognition, perception, psycholinguistics, and de7elop!ental psychology because

of the feeling that !ost cogniti7e processes are too co!ple% to sub!it to an

analysis based si!ply on associati7e connections #Reber, +332$.



9&&?C"90"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE& ?1 6

(e7erthe less , the doctrine of the association of ideas and the concept of asso&

ciation, along with their 7arious laws and principles, ha7e shown the!sel7es to

be so!e of the !ost durable of psychological concepts, ha7ing !ainta ined an

unbroken record of influence for o7er ,))) years fro! Plato to the present #cf;

consistent citation of the association concept in introductory psychology te%t-

books for !ore than ++ yearsB Roeckelein, +33$. &ee also <>0FR"E5&

0FE?R ?1 'EF9"?RB F>LL5& LE9R("(< 0FE?RB 0F?R(D"ME5&

L9= ?1 E11EC0B 0?LH9(5& 0FE ?RB LE9R("(< 0FE?R"E&L9=&.

RE1ERE(CE&

Locke, J. #+6))$. :ssay concerning h#an #nderstanding. London; Dent.

&pencer, F. #+422$. rinciples of psychology. London; =illia!s (orgate.

Ebbinghaus, F. #+442$. ber das Cedachtnis. Leip@ig; Duncker.

Ja!es, =. #+43)$. rinciples of psychology. (ew ork; Folt.

Calkins, H. #+43$. 9ssociation. sy. e!., 9, *-3.

Robertson, <. #+43$. :leents of psychology. (ew ork; &cribners.

0horndike, E. L. #+434$. Anial intelligence. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

0itchener, E. '. #+434$. An o#tline of psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

Calkins, H. #+3)2$. An introd#ction to psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

0horndike, E. L. #+3)6$. +he eleents of psychology. (ew ork; &eiler.

'ekhtere7, . #+3+*$. bIe%ti!e sychologie oder sychoreflexologie, die ehre !on den

AssoGiationsreflexen. Leip@ig; 0eubner.

=atson, J. '. #+3+3$. sychology fro the standpoint of a beha!iorist. Philadelphia;

Lippincott.

=arren, F. #+3+$. 9 history of the association psychology. (ew ork; &cribners.

Pa7lo7, ". #+36$. onditioned reflexes. (ew ork; Do7er.

0horndike, E. L. #+3*+$. $#an learning. (ew ork; 9ppleton.

Robinson, E. #+3*$. Association theory today. (ew ork; 9ppleton-Century-Crofts.


HcMeon, R. #Ed.$ #+3+$. +he basic wor%s of Aristotle 8e ania; 8e eoria et re&

iniscentia. (ew ork; Rando! Fouse.

Har%, H., Filli%, =. #+3*$. /ystes and theories in psychology. (ew ork; Hc<raw-

Fill.


Rinehart, =inston.

Hurphy, <., Mo7ach, J. #+36$. $istorical introd#ction to odern psychology. (ew

ork; Farcourt 'race Jo7ano7ich.

9nderson, J., 'ower, <. #+36*$. $#an associati!e eory. =ashington, DC; =in-

ston.


Reinhold.

Rapaport, D. #+36$. +he history of the concept of association of ideas. (ew ork;

"nternational >ni7ersities Press.

&chult@, D. #+34+$. 9 history of odern psychology. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

Pettiohn, 0. #Ed.$ #+34$. +he encyclopedic dictionary of psychology. <uilford, C0;

Dushkin.

Leahey, 0. #+33$. 9ssociationis!. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.



900E(0"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE&0FE?R"E& ?1 3

certain portions of an e%perience so that the parts beco!e relati7ely !ore dis-

tincti7e. "n a beha!ioral conte%t #cf; beha7iorist school conte%t, where attention

was reected as a !ore traditional !entalistic conceptB =oodworth &chlos-berg,

+32$, attention is defined !ore precisely as an adust!ent of the sensory

apparatus that facilitates opti!al e%citation by a specific sti!ulus #or a co!ple%

of sti!uli$ and inhibits the action of all other details #=arren, +3*$. 9ttention

!ay be conscious, in that so!e sti!ulus ele!ents are acti7ely selected out of the

total input, e7en though there is no e%plicit awareness of the factors that cause the

indi7idual to percei7e only so!e s!all part of the total sti!ulus co!ple% #Reber,

+332$. Fistorically, <. 1. &tout #+4)-+3$ considered attention to be GconationG

#i.e., cra7ing, desire, or will$ insofar as it re:uired for its satisfaction fuller

cogni@ance of its obect #&tout, +43, +434+433$B and H. Haher #+3))$

distinguished between sensation and attention where sensation in7ol7es a passi!e

faculty, and attention is the e%ercise of an acti!ity or the application of intellectualenergy. 1or E. '. 0itchener #+46-+36$, the concept of attention was gi7en

attributi7e status where it was nothing !ore nor less than that which changes in

e%perience and where attentional shifts are due to the clarity or 7i7idness

#GattensityG$ of the sensory processes #0itchener, +3)4, +3)3$. Hany early

psychology te%tbook authors #who see!ed, generally, to use the ter! law :uite

liberally and effusi7ely in Gnonpositi7isticG ways$ referred to the laws or theories

of attention. 1or e%a!ple, 'uell #+3))$ listed si% laws of attention; intensity of

the sti!ulus, curiosity, si@e, adaptation, !oti7e, and change. &eashore #+3*$

listed + laws of attention; tension, no7elty, intensity, action change, periodicity,

ti!ing, rest, grouping, di7ision of energy, purpose, interest, effort, for!, and skill.

Ebbinghaus #+3)4$ referred to the laws of practice, eory, and attention.

Falleck #+432$, 'aldwin #+43$, and 0itchener #+34$ described laws of attention

Calkins #+3+$ described eight theories of attention; acti7ity theory, !otor theory,negati7e theories, ele!ent theory, 'radley5s theory, inhibition theory, Ribot5s

theory, and =undt5s theory. 'aldwin #+43$, in addition to referring to the general

law of attention, described $or&wicG's theory of attention and the spirit#al

theories of reflex attention. Foffding #+3)4$ described ondillac's theory of

attention; and =oodworth #+3+$ referred to a theory of attention, as well as to

the laws of attention. "n the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the

structuralist and functionalist schools of psychology considered the topic of

attention to be a core proble! in the field and e!phasi@ed different aspects of it.

1or instance, the structuralists 7iewed attention as a state of consciousness that

consisted of increased concentration and sensory clearnessB they studied the

conditions that !a%i!i@ed the clearness of a sensation. ?n the other hand, the

functionalists focused on the selecti7e and 7olitional nature of attentionB they

studied the !oti7ational state and acti7e functioning of the indi7idual #>rbina,+33$. Recent e%peri!ental work on attention has focused on 7ariables #or

Gproble!sG of attentionB =oodworth &chlosberg, +32, Chap. $ such as

sti!ulus intensity, distraction, shifts and fluctuations, sti!ulus duration, attention

span, attentional 7alue of sti!uli



2) 900E(0"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE&0FE?R"E& ?1

in different sensory !odalities, locations, le7els of no7elty, te!poral relations of

sti!uli as deter!iners of attentionselecti7ity of attention #e.g., 'roadbent, +326,

+324B 0reis!an, +3), +3B Deutsch Deutsch, +3*B (ielsen &ar-ason,

+34+$, and the neurophysiological basis of attention #e.g., Fernande@-Peon,

+3+$. 9ttention !ay be controlled auto!atically #e.g., a loud sound captures

one5s attention$, by instructions #e.g., Gpay attention to the red one o7er thereG$, or

by the de!ands of a particular task #e.g., when dri7ing a car, the dri7er looks out

for other cars, pedestrians, and road signs$. 9n indi7idual5s attentional !ech-

anis!s ser7e to enhance responsi7eness to certain sti!uli and to tune out irrel-

e7ant infor!ation #Carlson, +33)$. 9n interesting aspect of attention, called the

coc%tail&party phenoenon #Cherry, +32*B =ood Cowan, +332$, refers to the

ability to attend selecti7ely to a single person5s speech across a roo! and in the

!idst of the co!peting speech of !any other people #such as at a noisy cocktail

party$. 0hree possible f#nctions of attention ha7e been identified #Ai!bardo =eber, +33$; as a sensory filter #e.g., 'roadbent, +324$, as response selection

#e.g., Dri7er 0ipper, +343$, and as a gateway to consciousness #e.g., Car7er

&cheier, +34+$. Recent for!ali@ed theories of attention #<ray, +33$ include

'roadbent5s #+324$ filter theory-odel #where all sensory input is processed in

parallel, initially in an auto!atic Gpreattenti7e co!part!ent,G and then so!e of i t

is selected to enter the Gattenti7e co!part!entG for further processingB this theory

can account for a person5s ability to selecti7ely hear or see things based on

physical distinctions and for a person5s failure to register the !eanings of

unattended sti!uli$B late selection theories #e.g., &hiffrin &chneider, +366B in

this type of attention theory, the preattenti7e stage can process 7ery fa!iliar

sti!uli for !eaning, and based on such processing, the selection can pass such

sti!uli onto the attenti7e stage, where they beco!e conscious to the personB this

theory can account for one5s ability to hear one5s own na!e in an unattended

!essage or the ability to be influenced by the !eaning of a sti!ulus that is not

consciously percei7ed$B and early&selection theories #e.g., 0reis!an5s, +33, at&

tent#ation theory; these theories suggest that a great :uantity of infor!ation

passes into the attenti7e stage and is analy@ed for !eaning at any of 7arious le7els

of consciousness, but only so!e of the infor!ation is analy@ed at a le7el of

consciousness that per!its the indi7idual to describe it$. Currently, research on

the psychological, as well as the neurological, basis of attention continues

unabated, and there are pro!ising connections between the e%peri!ental work on

attention and the e7entual e%planation and understanding of 7arious psycho-

pathological disorders such as hyperacti7ity, schi@ophrenia, and !ental retar -

dation #>rbina, +33$. &ee also C?(D"LL9C5& 0FE?R ?1 900E(0"?(B

"<"L9(CE, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

RE1ERE(CE&

'aldwin, J. #+43$. $andboo% of psychology. (ew ork; Folt.

Falleck, R. #+432$. sychology and psychic c#lt#re. (ew ork; 9!erican 'ook.



900E(0"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE&0FE?R"E& ?1 2+

&tout, <. #+43$. Analytic psychology. London; &onnenschein.

&tout, <. #+434+433$. A an#al of psychology. London; Cli7e.'uell, C. #+3))$. :ssentials of psychology. 'oston; <inn.

Haher, H. #+3))$. sychology :pirical and rational. London; Long!ans,<reen. Ebbinghaus, F. #+3)4$. sychology An eleentary textboo%. 'oston;

Feath.

Foffding, F. #+3)4$. #tlines of psychology. London; Hac!illan.0itchener, E. #+3)4$. ect#res on the experiental psychology of feeling and

attention. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

0itchener, E. #+3)3$. ect#res on the experiental psychology of the tho#ght

processes. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

Calkins, H. #+3+$. An introd#ction to psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

=oodworth, R. #+3+$. sychology A st#dy of ental life. (ew ork; Folt.

&eashore, C. #+3*$. 6ntrod#ction to psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.0itchener, E. #+34$. 9 textboo% of psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

=arren, F. #Ed.$ #+3*$. 8ictionary of psychology. Ca!bridge, H9; FoughtonHifflin. Cherry, E. #+32*$. &o!e e%peri!ents on the recognition of speech, with

one and with two ears. 4. Aco#. /oc. Aer., *<, 362-363.

'roadbent, D. #+326$. 9 !echanical !odel for hu!an attention and i!!ediate

!e!ory. sy. e!., , )2-+2.

'roadbent, D. #+324$. erception and co#nication. (ew ork; Perga!on Press.

Horay, (. #+323$. 9ttention in dichotic listening; 9ffecti7e cues and the

influence of instructions. H#ar. 4. :xp. sy., 00, 2-).0reis!an, 9. #+3)$. Conte%tual cues in selecti7e listening. H#ar. 4. :xp. sy., 0*,

4.

Fernande@-Peon, R. #+3+$. Reticular !echanis!s of sensory control. "n =.

Rosenblith #Ed.$, /ensory co#nication. Ca!bridge; H"0 Press.

Deutsch, 4., @ Deutsch, D. #+3*$. 9ttention; &o!e theoretical considerations. sy.

e!., E2, 4)-3).

0reis!an, 9. #+3$. &electi7e attention in !an. Brit. 3ed. B#ll., *2, +-+.=oodworth, R., &chlosberg, F. #+32$. :xperiental psychology. (ew ork;Folt, Rinehart, =inston.

0rabasso, 0., 'ower, <. #+34$. Attention in learning +heory and research. (ew

ork; =iley.

0reis!an, 9. #+33$. &trategies and !odels of selecti7e attention. sy. e!., E, 4-

33.

HcMay, D. #+36*$. 9spects of the theory of co!prehension, !e!ory, and attention.

H#ar. 4. :xp. sy., *<, -).

Hackintosh, (. #+362$. 9 theory of attention; ariations in the associability of

sti!uli with reinforce!ent. sy. e!., 7*, 6-34.

(eisser, >., 'ecklen, R. #+362$. &electi7e looking; 9ttending to 7isually

significant e7ents. og. sy., 6,4)-3.

Rabbitt, P., Dornic, &. #Eds.$ #+362$. Attention and perforance. London;

9cade!ic Press. (or!an, D. #+366$. 3eory and attention An introd#ction to h#an inforation

processing. (ew ork; =iley.&hiffrin, R., &chneider, =. #+366$. Controlled and auto!atic infor!ation

processing. F. Perceptual learning, auto!atic attending, and a general theory.

sy. e!., 7, +6-+3).



2 900"0>DE900"0>DE CF9(<E, 0FE?R"E& ?1

Posner, H., &nyder, C., Da7idson, '. #+34)$. 9ttention and the detection of signals. 4. :xp.

sy. Cen., 021, +)-+6.

Car7er, C., &cheier, H. #+34+$. Attention and self&reg#lation A control theory approach to

h#an beha!ior. (ew ork; &pringer.

(ielsen, L., &arason, ". #+34+$. E!otion, personality, and selecti7e attention. 4. ers. /oc.

sy., 0, 32-3).

Posner, H. #+34$. Cu!ulati7e de7elop!ent of attentional theory. Aer. sy., 9E, +4+63.

'ecklen, R., Cer7one, D. #+34*$. &electi7e looking and the noticing of une%pected e7ents.

3e. @ og., 00, )+-)4.

Mahne!an, D., 0reis!an, 9. #+34$. Changing 7iews of attention and auto!aticity. "n R.

Parasura!an D. Da7ies #Eds.$, =arieties of attention. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

Dri7er, 4., @ 0ipper, &. #+343$. ?n the nonselecti7ity of Gselecti7eG seeing; Contrasts between

interference and pri!ing in selecti7e attention. 4. :xp. sy. $#. erc. @ erf., 0<,

*)-*+.

Carlson, (. #+33)$. sychology +he science of beha!ior. 'oston; 9llyn 'acon. 9yres, 4.

#+33$. &electi7e attention. "n R. 4. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley. <ray, P. #+33$.

sychology. (ew ork; =orth.

>rbina, &. #+33$. 9ttention. "n R. 4. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.


Reber, 9. #+332$. +he eng#in dictionary of psychology. (ew ork; Penguin 'ooks. =ood, (.,

Cowan, (. #+332$. 0he cocktail party pheno!enon re7isited; 9ttention and

!e!ory in the classic selecti7e listening procedure of Cherry #+32*$. 4. :xp.

sy. Cen., 0*, *-.

900"0>DE900"0>DE CF9(<E, 0FE?R"E& ?1. 0he ter! attit#de !ay be

defined as a learned predisposition #GsetG$ to e7aluate or react consistently in a

particular !anner, either positi7ely or negati7ely, to certain persons, places,

concepts, or things #=ol!an, +36*$. 0he concept of attit#de was first introduced

for!ally in the field of sociology by =. ". 0ho!as and 1. Ananiecki in +3+4 #cf;0ho!as Ananiecki, +36$ and has co!e to be a core concept in the field of social

psychology. 0he tricoponent odel of attitude states that attitudes contain three

ele!ents; affecti7ee7aluati7e, cogniti7ebelief, and beha7ioral actionconati7e. 0his

!odel assu!es both that there is a tendency within indi7iduals to !aintain

consistency a!ong the three co!ponents #9belson, 9ronson, Hc<uire, (ewco!b,

Rosenberg, 0annenbau!, +34B 'reckler, +34$ and that, once for!ed, attitudes

and the co!ponents beco!e functional by preparing the person for GunconflictedG

action. ?f the three co!ponents, the !ost pro!inent is the affecti7ee7aluati7e

#feeling$ di!ension, where !ost atte!pts at changing attitudes by persuasion are

ai!ed at changing the e7aluati7e co!ponent #9@en, +33$. Psychologists in this

field belie7e that a co!prehensi7e attit#de theory should be able to e%plain data in

the fi7e areas of the co!!unication process that in7ol7e the so#rce #i.e., who

initiates the co!!unication, and how credible is the person or institutionI$, theessage #i.e., what is the nature of the co!!unication, and does it in7ol7e fear

tacticsI$, the channel #i.e.,



900"0>DE900"0>DE CF9(<E, 0FE?R"E& ?1 2*

how is the co!!unication trans!itted; face-to-face, tele7ision, newspaper, etc.I$,

the recei!er #i.e., who is the target audience, and what is the le7el of recei7er

intelligence, e!otion, and !oti7ation of the audienceI$, and the destination #i.e.,

what are the ti!e fra!e, goal, and purpose for change of the co!!unicationI$.

>nfortunately, no single or unifying theory of attitudes is accepted by all

scientists working in the field. 0here are o7er *) distinct theoretical for!ulations

described in te%tbooks on attit#de theory #?stro!, +33$. 0here are, howe7er,

co!!on 7iews a!ong researchers concerning the notion that attitudes can be

represented as an e7aluati7e disposition on a continuu! ranging fro! agree!ent

to disagree!ent. =ithin these para!eters, four separate classes of attit#de theory

can generally be identified; e!al#ati!e disposition-#ndifferen&tiated 7iewpoint

#e.g., theories that e!ploy principles of reinforce!ent and classical conditioning$B

set of beliefs #e.g., theories that suggest an a7eraging process across a person5s

cognitions or beliefs to get an o7erall e7aluati7e disposition$B set of oti!ational forces #e.g., theories that e!phasi@e the !ore functional and enduring dispositions

based on the person5s 7alues, needs, dri7es, and !oti7es$B and attit#de

nonexistence #e.g., theories that approach the concept of attit#de as being a

Gsocial fictionG and ad7ocate, instead, the e%a!ination of the processes of Gself-

perceptionG$. 0he ideal attit#de theory should also contain accounts of both the

antecedents and the conse:uences of attitude for!ation, but !ost theoretical

efforts are li!ited and ha7e concentrated only on the antecedent conditions

#?stro!, +33$. 0he following sa!ple of four syste!atic theories of attit#de

change indicates the range of attit#de theories acknowledged by !ost social

psychologists today #'ridge, +34$; cogniti!e&consistency theories, inforation&

processing odelstheories, f#nctional theories, and percept#al theories. 0he

cogniti!e&consistency theories enco!pass the Gbalance,G Gcongruity,G

Gdissonance,G and GprobabilisticG theories because they all assu!e that the personhas an ac:uiredlearned dri7e to !aintain the opti!al consistency a!ong beliefs,

and when inconsistency a!ong beliefs #or between attitudes and o7ert beha7ior$

occurs, the person will take action to a7oid or reduce the resultant state of tension

#e.g., 1estinger, +326B Cooper 1a@io, +34$. arious concepts of the

GdissonanceG theory approach include Gpost-decisional dissonanceG #when a

person !ust choose between two attracti7e alternati7es, and after the choice is

!ade, the indi7idual rationali@es the decision by upgrading the features of the

chosen alternati7e and downgrading the reected alternati7e$, Gselecti7e e%posure

to infor!ationG #persons !ay search out infor!ation that supports their beliefs

and a7oid infor!ation that challenges the! in order to reduce dissonance$, and

Gforced co!plianceG #the see!ingly parado%ical notion of dissonance theory that

the less a person is paid to engage in a distasteful task, the !ore the task will be

enoyed$. 0he inforation&processing odels-theories suggest that successfulattitude change through persuasion in7ol7es the fi7e se:uential processes of

attention #get the target audience5s attention$, co!prehension #!ake argu!ents

and e%pected beha7iors of the audience clear$, yielding #assess target audience5s

consent$, retention #ensure that



2 900"0>DE900"0>DE CF9(<E, 0FE?R"E& ?1

audience !aintains its decision until action is re:uired$, and action #ensure that

audience is !oti7ated to act in accordance with the new attitude$ #Hc<uire,

+342$. 9ccording to this approach, if this se:uence of processes is interrupted at

any point, the e%pected attitude change will not occur. 0he f#nctional theories

#e.g., Mat@, +3)B Ferek, +34, +346B &nyder De'ono, +343$ assu!e that

indi7iduals !aintain a particular attitude because it has adapti7e 7alue and ser7es

so!e personal basic need. 0he f#nctional theories ha7e e%a!ined the Gauthor-

itarian personalityG #e.g., Christie Jahoda, +32B Rokeach, +3), +34$ and

ha7e been fa7ored by the psychoanalytically oriented theorists, who atte!pt to

e%plain negati7e attitudes and preudices in ter!s of past patterns of childhood

sociali@ation. 0he percept#al theories argue that attitudes change in conunction

with indi7iduals5 self-perceptions, their perceptions of the en7iron!ent, and their

own needs. 0his approach e!phasi@es the categories, fra!es of reference, and

labels that indi7iduals use to organi@e their social en7iron!ent #e.g., 'e!, +36B (ew!an Layton, +34$. 9 recent type of perceptualsocialcogniti7e theory

called the theory of planned beha!ior #9@en, +342, +33+$ proposes that the

conscious intention to beha7e in a particular way depends on the person5s attitude

toward the beha7ior #i.e., the desire to act in that way or not$, subecti7e nor!

#i.e., the beliefs about what others would think about the action$, and percei7ed

beha7ioral control #i.e., sensing one5s ability to carry out the action$. 0hus,

according to this theory, people !ay percei7e barriers to beha7ing according to

their attitudes #<ray, +33$. 9nother current cogniti7e theoretical approach

concerns the use of persuasion to change attitudes and is called the elaboration

li%elihood odel #Petty Cacioppo, +34$, which states that persuasion can

occur in either of two distinct ways, depending on how i!portant or rele7ant the

issues are to the indi7iduals who are the target of persuasion; 7ia a GcentralG route

#where an Gi!portantG !essage is carefully processed, and degree of attitudechange depends on the :uality of the argu!ents ad7anced$ and 7ia a GperceptualG

route #where an Guni!portantG !essage is only casually processed, and degree of

attitude change depends on the presence of persuasion cues such as the e%pertise

or status of the persuaderB cf; he#ristic theory of pers#asion; &utherland, +33$.

0he for!ulation of attit#de theories in psychology is an acti7e area in7ol7ing

practical applications and conse:uences. Fowe7er, 7arious unresol7ed issues

re!ain that are not yet well understood by attitude theorists. 9!ong these are the

lack of knowledge concerning the sudden and intense e!otional arousal that

attitudes !ay produce, the !anner in which attitudes can lead indi7iduals to !ake

great personal sacrifices for their ideals and lo7ed ones, and the dyna!ics

underlying the dra!atic attitude re7ersals that !ay occur in a person5s life #such

as lo7e at first sight, religious con7ersion, etc.$ #?stro!, +33$. "n psychology,

the study of attitudes and the theories of attitude change reflect an o7erwhel!ingdi7ersity of 7iewpoints and attitudes on the part of psychologists the!sel7es

about the rele7ant processes in7ol7ed. 9s noted by Reber #+332, p. 2$,

psychology regularly gets itself into stor!y definitional waters, no !ore so than

when a ter! like attit#de is e%plored and where the do!ain of reference turns out

to be !uch !ore co!ple% than origi-



900"0>DE900"0>DE CF9(<E, 0FE?R"E& ?1 22

nally anticipated. &ee also 900R"'>0"?( 0FE?RB C?(1L"C0, 0FE?R"E& ?1B

1E&0"(<ER5& 0FE?RB PREJ>D"CE, 0FE?R"E& ?1B RE"(1?RCEHE(0

0FE?R.

RE1ERE(CE&

0ho!as, =., Ananiecki, 1. #+36$. +he olish peasant in :#rope and Aerica. (ew ork; Mnopf.

LaPiere, R. #+3*$. 9ttitudes and actions. /ocial 5orces, 09, *)-*6.

Feider, 1. #+3$. 9ttitudes and cogniti7e organi@ation. 4. sy., *0, +)6-++.Christie, R., Jahoda, H. #Eds.$ #+32$. /t#dies in the scope and ethod of the "a#&

thoritarian personality." (ew ork; 1ree Press.1estinger, L. #+326$. 9 theory of cogniti!e dissonance. &tanford, C9; &tanford

>ni7ersity Press.Mat@, D. #+3)$. 0he functional approach to the study of attitudes. #b. pin. H#ar.,

*, +*-).

Rokeach, H. #+3)$. +he open and closed ind. (ew ork; 'asic 'ooks.Ca!pbell, D. #+3*$. &ocial attitudes and other ac:uired beha7ioral dispositions. "n&.

Moch #Ed.$, sychology A st#dy of a science. ol. . (ew ork; Hc<raw-Fill. (ewco!b, 0. #+3*$. Persistence and repression of changed attitudes; Long-range stud-

ies. 4. /oc. 6ss., 01, *-+.1le!ing, D. #+36$. 9ttitude; 0he history of a concept. erspecti!es in Aerican

$istory, 0, 46-*2.

9belson, R., 9ronson, E., Hc<uire, =., (ewco!b, 0., Rosenberg, H., 0annenbau!, P. #Eds.$ #+34$. +heories of cogniti!e consistency A

so#rceboo%. Chicago; Rand-Hc(ally.<reenwald, 9., 'rock, 0., ?stro!, 0. #Eds.$ #+34$. sychological fo#ndations of

attit#des. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

Rokeach, H. #+34$. Beliefs, attit#des, and !al#es. &an 1rancisco; Jossey-'ass.=icker, 9. #+33$. 9ttitudes 7ersus actions; 0he relationship of 7erbal and o7ert

beha7ioral responses to attitude obects. 4. /oc. 6ss., *<, +-64.'e!, D. #+36$. &elf-perception theory. "n L. 'erkowit@ #Ed.$, Ad!ances in

experiental social psychology. ol. . (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

=ol!an, '. #Ed.$ #+36*$. 8ictionary of beha!ioral science. (ew ork; an (ostrandReinhold.

1ishbein, H., 9@en, ". #+362$. Belief, attit#de, intention, and beha!ior. Reading,H9; 9ddison-=esley.

Regan, D., 1a@io, R. #+366$. ?n the consistency between attitudes and beha7ior;Look to the !ethod of attitude for!ation. 4. :xp. /oc. sy., 09, 4-2.

9@en, "., 1ishbein, H. #+34)$. nderstanding attit#des and predicting socialbeha!ior. Englewood Cliffs, (J; Prentice-Fall.

Cialdini, R., Petty, R., Cacioppo, J. #+34+$. 9ttitude and attitude change. Ann. e!.

sy., 9*, *26-).'reckler, &. #+34$. E!pirical 7alidation of affect, beha7ior, and cognition as distinctco!ponents of attitude. 4. ers. /oc. sy., E, ++3+-+)2.

Cooper, 4., @ Croyle, R. #+34$. 9ttitudes and attitude change. Ann. e!. sy., 9<,*32.

Cooper, 4., @ 1a@io, R. #+34$. 9 new look at dissonance theory. "n L. 'erkowit@#Ed.$,

Ad!ances in experiental social psychology. ol. +6. (ew ork; 9cade!ic



Crossroad.



24 900R"'>0"?( 0FE?R

actor&obser!er discrepancy the %nowledge&across&sit#ations hypothesis states

that people beco!e !ore sensiti@ed to the 7ariations in their own beha7ior

because they ha7e seen the!sel7es in !any !ore situations than they ha7e seen

others #&ande, <oethals, Radloff, +344$B the !is#al&orientation hypothesis

ste!s fro! the basic characteristic of 7isual perception that our eyes point out-

ward, and, when we watch so!eone else5s beha7ior, our eyes are fi%ed on that

person and, thereby, attribute internal causes to the person. ?n the other hand,

when we oursel7es engage in beha7iors, we see the surrounding, e%ternal en-

7iron!ent #not oursel7es$ and attribute e%ternal causes for our own beha7ior

#&tor!s, +36*$. 0he correspondent inference theory #Jones Da7is, +32$ is a

syste!atic analysis of the processes described by Feider #+324$ and describes the

situational factors that influence the appearance of e%ternal and internal at-

tributions. 0his theory states, a!ong other things, that indi7iduals obser7e actions

and effects produced by actions where such action/effect connections beco!ethe basis for inferences about others5 beha7iors and intentions. =hen GknowledgeG

and GabilityG intentions are attributed, an internal disposition is assu!ed to be the

cause of the other person5s beha7ior. "n another case, the I#st&world hypothesis in

attribution theory argues for the notion that people need to belie7e that the world

is fair and that ustice is ser7ed consistently, where bad people are punished, and

good people are rewarded #Lerner, +34)$. 9 theory related to the idea that people

attribute and infer internal dispositions concerning others5 beha7ior is the self&

perception theory #'e!, +36, +36$. 0his attribution theory proposes that

indi7iduals use the sa!e infor!ation to !ake inferences about their own

dispositional !akeup as they use to !ake inferences about others5. 0hus,

according to this approach, we obser7e our own actions and subse:uently attribute

those actions to e%ternal or internal causes, and in the absence of a reasonable

e%ternal cause for our own beha7ior, we attribute our beha7ior to an internalcause. "n this way, for e%a!ple, a person de7elops attitudes about issues and

e7ents by self-obser7ation of the opinions she or he e%presses. 9nother integrati7e

theory of attribution processes has been for!ulated by Farold F. Melley #+36+,

+36*$. Melley e!phasi@ed the idea that people often !ake causal attributions for

e7ents under conditions of uncertainty, and he de7eloped a !odel of the logic that

people !ight use to udge whether a specific beha7ior should be attributed to

internal #personality-character$ causes or to e%ternal #en7iron!ental$ causes.

9ccording to Melley5s !odel, before !aking an attribution #either internal or

e%ternal$, one would ideally ask three :uestions about an-other5s beha7ior; #+$ "s it

consistentI #$ "s it consensualnor!ati7eI #*$ "s it distincti7eI "f the answer to

#+$ is no, the attribution will probably be e%ternal. "f the answer to #+$ is yes,

either an e%ternal or internal attribution will be !ade, depending on the answers

to #$ and #*$. "f the answer to both #+$ and #$ is yes, the attribution will probably be e%ternal. "f the answers to #+$, #$, and #*$ are yes, no, yes, respecti7ely, the

attribution will probably be internal. "f the answers to #+$, #$, and #*$ are yes, no,

no, respecti7ely, the attribution will probably be a co!bination of both e%ternal

and internal factors



social perceptual effects. >npublished doctoral dissertation. >ni7ersity of

California at Los 9ngeles Library.



) 900R"'>0"?( 0FE?R

Melley, F. #+36+$. Attrib#tion in social interaction. Horristown, (J; <eneral Learning

Press.'ern, D. #+36$. &elf-perception theory. "n L. 'erkowit@ #Ed.$, Ad!ances in

experiental social psychology. ol. . (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

Hc9rthur, L. #+36$. 0he how and what of why; &o!e deter!inants and

conse:uences of causal attribution. 4. ers. /oc. sy., **, +6+-+3*.

Melley, F. #+36*$. 0he process of causal attribution. Aer. sy., *7, +)6-+4.

(isbett, R., Caputo, C., Legant, P., Harecek, J. #+36*$. 'eha7ior as seen by the

actor and as seen by the obser7er. 4. ers. /oc. sy., *E, +2-+.

&tor!s, H. #+36*$. ideotape and the attribution process; Re7ersing actors5 and

obser7ers5 points of 7iew. 4. ers. /oc. sy., *E, +2-+62.

Ross, L. #+366$. 0he intuiti7e psychologist and his shortco!ings; Distortions in the

attribution process. "n L. 'erkowit@ #Ed.$, Ad!ances in experiental social psy&

chology. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

9rkin, R., Cooper, F., Moldit@, 0. #+34)$. 9 statistical re7iew of the literature con-cerning the self-ser7ing attribution bias in interpersonal influence situations. 4.

ers., 7, *2-4.

Mruglanski, 9. #+34)$. Lay episte!ologic process and contents; 9nother look at attri -

bution theory. sy. e!., 7E, 6)-46.

Lerner, H. #+34)$. +he belief in a I#st world A f#ndaental del#sion. (ew ork; Ple-

nu!.

Jellison, 4., @ <reen, J. #+34+$. 9 self-presentation approach to the funda!ental attri-

bution error; 0he nor! of internality. 4. ers. /oc. sy., 2, *-3.

(ewco!b, 0. #+34+$. Feiderian balance as a group pheno!enon. 4. ers. /oc. sy.,

2, 4-46.

Hiso7ich, &. #+34$. 9ttribution theory. "n 0. Pettiohn #Ed.$, +he encyclopedic

dictionary of psychology. <uilford, C0; Dushkin.

=einer, '. #+34$. An attrib#tional theory of oti!ation and eotion. (ew ork;

&pringer.

&ande, <., <oethals, <., Radloff, C. #+344$. Percei7ing one5s own traits and

others5; 0he !ultifaceted self. 4. ers. /oc. sy., <, +*-).

<ilbert, D. #+343$. 0hinking lightly about others; 9uto!atic co!ponents of the

social inference process. "n J. >le!an J. 'argh #Eds.$, nintended tho#ght.

(ew ork; <uilford.

'radbury, 0., 1incha!, 1. #+33)$. 9ttributions in !arriage; Re7iew and criti:ue.

sy. B#ll., 02E, *-**.

1letcher, <., 1itness, 4., @ 'la!pied, (. #+33)$. 0he link between attributions and

happiness in close relationships; 0he roles of depression and e%planatory style.

4. /oc. lin. sy., 1, *-22.

?7erholser, 4., @ Holl, &. #+33)$. =ho5s to bla!e; 9ttributions regarding causality in

spouse abuse. Beh. /ci. @ aw, 7, +)6-+).

1iske, &., 0aylor, &. #+33+$. /ocial cognition. (ew ork; Hc<raw-Fill.Reber, 9. #+332$. +he eng#in dictionary of psychology. (ew ork; Penguin 'ooks.

Lee, 1., Fallahan, H., Fer@og, 0. #+33$. E%plaining real life e7ents; Fow

culture and do!ain shape attributions. ers. /oc. sy. B#ll., **, 6*-6+.

1ernald, D. #+336$. sychology. >pper &addle Ri7er, (J; Prentice-Fall.



9>D"0"?(FE9R"(<, 0FE?R"E& ?1

one is the whole ner7e-action potential, and the other is the Gcochlear !icro-

phonic.G "t is interesting to note that if the changes in the electr ical potentials

are a!plified and fed through an ordinary telephone recei7er, one can actually

understand words spoken through it into the ani!al5s ear #Reber, +332$. 0he

hydra#lic theory of hearing #Heyer, +3)6, +34$ asserts that hearing is depen -

dent on the a!ount of basilar !e!brane in7ol7ed in the sensation of different

tones. 0he so#nd & pattern theory #Ewald, +433, +3)*$ states that the sense of

hearing is dependent on the pattern of 7ibration on the basilar !e!braneB this

theory assu!es that different patterns of 7ibrations are i!posed on the basilar

!e!brane by sti!uli of different co!ple%ities or pitches. 0he current 7iew of

audition see!s to fa7or a for! of a!alga!ation of the place theory and the

periodicity theory for sti!uli below about *,))) F@, both place and

periodicity co!bine, and for those fre:uencies abo7e this le7el, the place on

the basilar !e!brane is probably the critical factor. 0he 7ariable of loudness

see!s to be !ediated by the o7erall nu!ber of i!pulses arri7ing at the brain

#cf; :gan effect L the loudness of speech in one ear is increased if noise is

applied to the opposite earB Ausne, +346$. 0hus, in general, no one theory of

auditionhearing see!s ade:uate, perhaps because the sense of hearing is

relati7ely co!ple% #Reber, +332$. &ee also FDR9>L"C 0FE?R.

RE1ERE(CE&

Fel!holt@, F. 7on #+4*$. 8ie ehre !on den +onepfind#ngen als physiologische

Cr#n&dlage f#r die +heorie der 3#si%. 'raunschweig; =ieweg.

Rutherford, E. #+44$. 9 new theory of hearing. 4. Anat. hysio., on., *0, +-+4.

Ewald, 4. #+433$. Aur Physiologie des Labyrinths. ". Eine neue Fortheorie. Ar.

ges. hysio., E, +6-+44.

Ewald, 4. #+3)*$. Aur Physiologie des Labyrinths. "". Die Er@eugung 7on

&challbildern in der ca!er acustica. Ar. ges. hysio., 19, 42-2)).

Heyer, H. #+3)6$. 9n introduction to the !echanics of the inner ear. ni!ersity of

3isso#ri /t#dies, /cience /er!ices, *, no. +.

Heyer, H. #+34$. 0he hydraulic principles go7erning the function of the cochlea. 4.

Cen. sy., +, *3-2.=eyer, E., 'ray, C. #+3*)a$. Present possibilities for auditory theory. sy. e!., 9E,

*2-*4).

=eyer, E., 'ray, C. #+3*)b$. 0he nature of acoustic response; 0he relation between

sound fre:uency and fre:uency of i!pulses in the auditory ner7e. 4. :xp. sy.,

09, *6*-*46.

&te7ens, &. &., Da7is, F. #+3*4$. $earing 6ts psychology and physiology. (ew

ork; =iley.

=eyer, E., 'ray, C. #+3*4$. Distortion in the ear as shown by the electrical

responses of the cochlea. 4. Aco#. /oc. Aer., 1, 6-**.

'ekesy, <. 7on., Rosenblith, =. #+34$. 0he early history of hearing/

?bser7ations and theories. 4. Aco#. /oc. Aer., *2, 66-64.

=eyer, E. #+33$. +heories of hearing. (ew ork; =iley.

Da7is, F. #+32+$. Psychophysiology of hearing and deafness. "n &. &. &te7ens #Ed.$, $andb%. :xp. sy. (ew ork; =iley.



9?"D9(CE FP?0FE&"& *

'ekesy, <. 7on #+326$. 0he ear. /ci. Aer., 01E, -64.

'ekesy, <. 7on #+3)$. :xperients in hearing. (ew ork; Hc<raw-Fill.'ekesy, <. 7on #+36$. /ensory inhibition. Princeton, (J; Princeton >ni7ersity Press.

<ulick, =. #+36+$. $earing hysiology and psychophysics. (ew ork; ?%ford >ni7er-

sity Press.

0obias, J. #Ed.$ #+36$. 5o#ndations of odern a#ditory theory. (ew ork; 9cade!ic

Press.


Reinhold.

Hoore, '. #+366$. 6ntrod#ction to the psychology of hearing. 'alti!ore; >ni7ersity Park

Press.

Carterette, E., 1ried!an, H. #Eds.$ #+364$. $andboo% of perception. ol. ; $earing.

(ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

Ludel, J. #+364$. 6ntrod#ction to sensory processes. &an 1rancisco; 1ree!an.

Ausne, L. #+346$. :ponys in psychology. =estport, C0; <reenwood Press.


9>1<9'E, L9= ?1 0FE. &ee H"(DHE(09L &E0, L9= ?1.

9><HE(090"?( PR"(C"PLE. &ee 900R"'>0"?( 0FE?R.

9>0?M"(E0"C E11EC0. &ee 9PP9RE(0 H?EHE(0, PR"(C"PLE& 0FE?R"E&

?1.

9>0?H90"C"0 FP?0FE&"&. &ee 900R"'>0"?( 0FE?R.

9>0?0EL"C 0FE?R. &ee PL9, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

9?"D9(CE FP?0FE&"&. &ee P>("&FHE(0, 0FE?R"E& ?1.



B

'9ER?( '9ER5& L9=. &ee REC9P"0>L90"?(, 0FE?RL9= ?1.

'9L9(CE, PR"(C"PLE&0FE?R ?1. &ee 900R"'>0"?( 0FE?RB

1E&0"(<ER5& C?<("0"E D"&&?(9(CE 0FE?R.

'9LD="( E11EC0. 0he 9!erican de7elop!ental psychologist Ja!es Hark

'aldwin #+4+-+3*$ de7eloped a refined Darwinian genetic psychology #'ald-

win, +43b, +3)$. 'aldwin5s chief goal was to e%plain the adapti7e correspon-

dence of !ental life and thoughts to !aterial things, which he argued e7ol7ed

through the for!ation and transfor!ation of habits 7ia the interacting processes

of assi!ilation and i!itation #'aldwin, +3)-+3++$. 'aldwin held a functional

7iew of !ind as sensori!otor process and e!phasi@ed the i!portance of inten-

tional action as the !echanis! of selection in the de7elop!ent of !ental fac-

ulties. "n his approach, 'aldwin co!bined Darwinian and La!arckian ideas of

e7olution to for!ulate his own sophisticated hypothesis of organic selection,

which accounted for the course and direction of growth. 'aldwin5s notion of

organic selection ca!e to be known as the Baldwin effect #'roughton, +33$.

'aldwin also applied his !odel of intentional action to the !oral, religious, and

social aspects of hu!an beha7ior where cycles of suggestion and i!itation were

!echanis!s by which indi7iduals de7eloped socially, and where social progress

was 7iewed as social selection along with the trans!ission and conser7ation of

adapti7e 7alues. "n so!e of his writings, 'aldwin referred to nu!erous laws that

occur in psychology. 1or e%a!ple, 'aldwin #+43a$ described laws of ner7ous

acco!!odation, habit, inheritance, e7olution, !oti7es, contradictory rep-

resentation, re7ersion to type, !ental dyna!ogenesis, attention, and 7oluntaryinterest. 9lso, in another case #'aldwin, +3)$, he referred to laws of i!agination,

association, associati7e reproduction, correlation, preference in associations,

identity in udg!ent, contiguity, contradiction, partial effect, sensation,



'9(D>R95& 0FE?R 2

passi7e i!agination, sufficient reason, habit, and thought. 0hus, 'aldwin, like

!any other early psychologists who were schooled and grounded in ental

philosophy, see!ed to de!onstrate a penchant for a rather generous, liberal, and

nonrigorous use of the ter! law in describing 7arious psychological pheno!ena.

&ee also 900E(0"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE&0FE?R"E& ?1B D9R="(5&

E?L>0"?( 0FE?RB D(9H?<E(E&"&, L9= ?1.

RE1ERE(CE&

'aldwin, J. #+443-+43+$. $andboo% of psychology. 7ols. (ew ork; 9.H.&.

Press. 'aldwin, J. #+43a$. $andboo% of psychology. (ew ork; Folt.

'aldwin, J. #+43b$. 3ental de!elopent in the child and in the race. (ew ork;

Hac!illan.

'aldwin, J. #+436a$. /ocial and ethical interpretations in ental de!elopent A

st#dy in social psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

'aldwin, J. #Ed.$ #+3)+-+3)2$. 8ictionary of philosophy and psychology. 7ols. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

'aldwin, J. #+3)$. 8e!elopent and e!ol#tion. (ew ork; 9.H.&. Press.

'aldwin, J. #+3)$. $andboo% of psychology (/enses and intellect). (ew ork; Folt.

'aldwin, J. #+3)-+3++$. +ho#ght and things. * 7ols. London; &wan, &onnenschein.

'roughton, J. #+33$. Ja!es Hark 'aldwin. "n J. R. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew

ork;=iley.

'9(D>R95& 0FE?R. 0he Canadian-9!erican psychologist 9lbert 'an-dura

#+32- $ is a proponent of social-cogniti!e learning theory, which atte!pts to e%plain

hu!an beha7ior in ter!s of a reciprocal interaction between the three aspects of

beha7ior, cognitions, and en7iron!ental e7ents. =hile social learning theory had its

origins in the beha7iorally oriented writings of "7an Pa7lo7, J. '.=atson, and '. 1.&kinner #and in the work of J. Dollard and (. Hiller, M. Lewin, E. 0ol!an, <. F.

Head, and F. &. &ulli7an$, 'andura is pree!inent #along with Julian Rotter, =alter

Hischel, and 9rthur &taats$ in the for!ulation and application of social learning

theory. 9ccording to Band#ra's theory #+33, +34$, hu!ans learn to satisfy their

needs, wishes, and desires by obser7ing the outco!es of beha7iors and e7ents, where

the obser7ations lead to e%pectations about what will happen in the future and about

one5s ability to perfor! beha7iors and to e%press e!otions. "ndi7iduals co!pare their

beha7iors with those of others and !ake 7alue udg!ents about their own and others5

beha7iors. "n this way, according to social-cogniti!e theory, it is not si!ply the

e%ternal conditions alone that deter!ine beha7ior #as e%tre!e beha7iorists !ight

clai!$, but it is also the decisions one !akes based on one5s cognitions

#GknowledgeG$ about the conditions. Band#ra's theory includes se7eral key concepts

concerning the de7elop!ent of personal and social beha7iors, a!ong which arereciprocal deterinationLthe idea that the person5s beha7ior and the social learning

en7iron!ent continually influence each other in reciprocal waysB one learns beha7ior

fro! interactions with other persons, and our beha7ior influences how other persons

interact with us #'andura, +366b, +364$B



'9(D>R95& 0FE?R

sel f &efficacy L the perception that one is capable of achie7ing one 5s goals #'an-

dura, +366a, +34$B sel f &reg#lation L t he process of cognit i7e ly punishing and

reinforcing one5s own beha7ior depending on whether or not it !eets one5s

per sonal standards #'andura, +366b, +343$B odeling-obser!ational learning L a

procedure i n which an indi7idua l obser7es another per son perfor! so!e beha7 ior,

notes the conse:uences of that beha7ior, and then atte!pts to i!itate that beha7ior

#'andura Jeffrey, +3*6B 'andura, Ross, Ross, +3*B 'andura, +34, +36+,

+34$B !icario#s p#nishent L the obser7ation of the punish!ent of a !odel5s

beha7ior tha t results in the decrease of the probabilit y of that sa!e beha7ior in the

obser7erB and !icario#s reinforceent L the obser7ation of the reinforce!ent of a

!odel5s beha7ior that results in the increase of the probability of that sa!e

beha7ior in the obser7er #'andura, +32, +33, +36*$. 'andura5s essential

research and theoretical for!ulations ha7e focused on obser7ational learning, the

role of thought in establishing and !aintaining beha7ior, the ap plication of

beha7ior principles and soc ial learning to therapeutic conte%ts, and the ways in

which children learn to be aggressi7e. &ee also 9<<RE&&"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1B

'EF9"?R 0FER9PC?<("0"E 0FER9P, 0FE?R"E& ?1B R?00ER5&

&?C"9L LE9R("(< 0FE?R.

RE1ERE(CE&

'andura, 9., Jeffrey, R. #+3*6$. Role of sy!bolic coding and rehearsal processes

in obser7ational learning. 4. Abn. /oc. sy., *, +-+*).

'andura, 9., =alters, R. #+323$. Adolescent aggression. (ew ork; Ronald Press.'andura, 9. #+3+$. Psychotherapy as a learning process. sy. B#ll., <7, +*-+23.

'andura, 9., Ross, D., Ross, &. #+3*$. "!itation of fil!-!ediated aggressi7e!odels.

4. Abn. /oc. sy., , *-++.

'andura, 9., =alters, R. #+3*$. /ocial learning and personality de!elopent. (ework; Folt, Rinehart, =inston.

'andura, 9. #+32$. icarious processes; 9 case of no-trial learning. "n L. 'erkowit@

#Ed.$, Ad!ances in experiental social psychology. ol. . (ew ork; 9cade!ic

Press.

'andura, 9. #+34$. Hodeling approaches to the !odification of phobic disorders. "nR.

Porter #Ed.$, +he role of learning in psychotherapy. London; Churchill.

'andura, 9. #+33$. rinciples of beha!ior odification. (ew ork; Folt, Rinehart, =inston.

'andura, 9. #Ed.$ #+36+$. sychological odeling onflicting theories. Chicago;9ldine-9therton.

'andura, 9. #+36*$. Aggression A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, (J;

Prentice-Fall.

'andura, 9. #+36$. 'eha7ior therapy and !odels of !an. Aer. sy., *1, 423-43.'andura, 9. #+366a$. &elf-efficacy; 0oward a unifying theory of beha7ioral

change. sy. e!., 7, +3+-+2.

'andura, 9. #+366b$. /ocial learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, (J; Prentice-Fall.

'andura, 9. #+364$. 0he self-syste! in reciprocal deter!inis!. Aer. sy., 99, *-

*24. 'andura, 9. #+34$. &elf-efficacy !echanis! in hu!an agency. Aer. sy., 9E,



+-+6.



'9R(>H E11EC0 6

'andura, 9. #+34$. /ocial fo#ndations of tho#ght and action A social cogniti!e

theory. Englewood Cliffs, (J; Prentice-Fall.

'andura, 9. #+343$. Fu!an agency in social cogniti7e theory. Aer. sy., , ++62++4.

'9R(>H E11EC0. 0he Barn# effect-phenoenon, na!ed after the 9!erican

show!an, charlatan, and entrepreneur Phineas 0. 'arnu! #+4+)-+43+$, refers to

the fact that a cle7erly worded GpersonalG description based on general,

stereotyped state!ents will be readily accepted as an accurate self-description by

!ost people #1orer, +33$. 0he Barn# effect is behind the fakery of fortune-

tellers, astrologers, and !ind readers and has often conta!inated legiti!ate

study of personality assess!ent #Reber, +332$. 0he effect is consistent with

'arnu!5s often-:uoted aphoris! G0here5s a sucker born e7ery !inute.G 'arnu!,

a circus show!an, knew that the for!ula for success was to Gha7e a little

so!ething for e7erybodyG #Rathus, +33*$. 9n early study of the Barn# effect

#1orer, +33$ had a group of college students take a proecti7e test on which they

were gi7en subse:uent bogus feedback. "n fact, each student was gi7en the sae

interpretation. "n general, the students each felt that these interpretations were

accurate and fitted the! well. 0hus, the tendency to accept standard feedback of

a 7ague, uni7ersalist nature is the Barn# effect. ?ther studies also report that

when the sa!e 7ague, positi7e, and flattering state!ents are gi7en to indi7iduals

as a personali@ed horoscope, personality profile, or handwriting analysis, they

belie7e the! to be accurate descriptions of the! personally #&ny der &henkel,

+362B 1rench, 1owler, HcCarthy, Peers, +33+B cf; Layne, +363B Johnson, Cain,

1alke, Fay!an, Perillo, +342$. &o!e researchers report that people are !ore

willing to belie7e flattering state!ents about the!sel7es than state!ents that are

scientifically accurate #e.g., 0hiriart, +33+$. arious suggestions ha7e been

offered by researchers to a7oid falling prey to the Barn# effect, such as bewareof all-purpose descriptions that could apply to anyone, beware of one5s own

selecti7e perceptions, and resist undue flattery #=ade 0a7ris, +33$. &ee also

PER&?(9L"0 0FE?R"E&.

RE1ERE(CE&

1orer, '. #+33$. 0he fallacy of personal 7alidation; 9 classroo! de!onstration of gul libility.

4. Abn. /oc. sy., , ++4-+*.

Fill, =. #+36)$. sychology rinciples and probles. Philadelphia; Lippincott.

&nyder, C., &henkel, R. #+362$. 0he P. 0. 'arnu! effect. sy. +oday, 7, 2-2. Falperin, M.,

&nyder, C. #+363$. Effects of enhanced psychological test feedback on

treat!ent outco!e; 0herapeutic i!plications of the 'arnu! effect. 4. ons. @

lin. sy., E, +)-+.

Layne, C. #+363$. 0he 'arnu! effect; Rationality 7ersus gullibility. 4. ons. @ lin. sy.,

E, +3-+.

Johnson, J., Cain, L., 1alke, 0., Fay!an, J., Perillo, E. #+342$. 0he G'arnu! effectG

re7isited; Cogniti7e and !oti7ational factors in the acceptance of personality de-

scriptions. 4. ers. /oc. sy., 1, +*64-+*3+.



4 '9R0LE005& &CFEH909 0FE?R

'ECM5& C?<("0"E 0FER9P 0FE?R. &ee 'EF9"?R 0FER9P

C?<("0"E 0FER9P, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

1rench, C., 1owler, H., HcCarthy, M., Peers, D. #+33+$. 'elief in astrology; 9 test

of the 'arnu! effect. /%eptical 6n#irer, 0<, +-+6.

0hiriart, P. #+33+$. 9cceptance of personality test results. /%eptical 6n#irer, 0<,

+++2.

Rathus, &. #+33*$. sychology. (ew ork; Farcourt 'race Jo7ano7ich.

Reber, 9. #+332$. +he eng#in dictionary of psychology. (ew ork; Penguin

'ooks. =ade, C., 0a7ris, C. #+33$. sychology. (ew ork; FarperCollins.

'9R0LE005& &CFEH909 0FE?R. 0he 'ritish psychologist 1rederic C.

'artlett #+44-+363$ proposed an ad!ittedly 7ague theory/the scheata

theory of eoryLas a way of in7alidating and repudiating the classical

trace theory of eory #i.e., the hypothesi@ed !odification of neural tissue

resulting fro! any for! of sti!ulation such as learning new !aterial$.'artlett #+3*$ stressed the constructi7e, o7er the reproducti7e, aspects of

recall and adapted his scheatic theory #based on the assu!ption that

scheata are cogniti7e, !ental plans that are abstract guides for action,

structures for interpreting and retrie7ing infor!ation, and organi@ed

fra!eworks for sol7ing proble!s$ fro! Fenry Fead5s #+3)$ work on

neurology, sensation, and the cerebral corte%. >nfortunately, Bartlett' s

t heory see!ed to be too speculati7e to gain wide acceptance in the

psychological co!!uni ty #Aangwill , +33$, e7en though it led !any people

to think so!ewhat differently about the dyna!ics and nature of !e!ory

#?ldfield Aangwill, +3*B Aangwill , +36$. &ee also HEH?R,

0FE?R"E& ?1B 0R9CE 0FE?R.

RE1ERE(CE&

Fead, F. #+3)$. /t#dies in ne#rology 66. London; ?%ford >ni7ersity Press.Fead, F. #+3$. Aphasia and %indred disorders of speech. Ca!bridge, England;

Ca!bridge >ni7ersity Press.

'artlett, 1. #+3*$. eebering A st#dy in experiental and social psychology.

Ca!bridge, England; Ca!bridge >ni7ersity Press.

?ldfield, R., Aangwill, ). #+3*$. Fead5s concept of the sche!a and its application

in conte!porary 'ritish psychology; Part """. 'artlett5s theory of !e!ory.

Brit. 4. sy., 99, ++*-+3.

'artlett, 1. #+34$. Challenge to e%peri!ental psychology. "n roceedings and

apers of the 0*th 6nternational ongress of sychology at :dinb#rgh.

Edinburgh; ?li7er 'oyd.

Aangwill, ). #+36$. GRe!e!beringG re7isited. H#ar. 4. :xp. sy., *, +-+*4.

Aangwill, ). #+33$. 1rederic C. 'artlett. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew

ork; =iley.

'90E&?(5& "'R90?R 0FE?R. &ee HE(DEL5& L9=&PR"(C"-

PLE&.



6) 'EF9"?R 0FER9PC?<("0"E 0FER9P

cogniti!e therapy #'eck, +36B 'eck is called the Gfather of cogniti7e

therapyGB Reber, +332$, self& instr#ctional-stress inoc#la tion #Heichenbau!,

+366$, and co!ert odeling therapy #Cautela, +36+$. "t has been suggested

that the 7arious challenges facing beha!ior-cogniti!e therapy theories today

concerning their procedures and effecti7eness !ay best be !et by the use of

a Gtechnical eclecticis!G #La@arus, +34+$, where there is a willingness to

e!ploy appropriate techni:ues across the 7arious theoretical points of 7iew.

Fowe7er, the specific !ethods used in the 7arious different beha!ior

therapy theories all ha7e the co!!on attributes of scientific e%a!ination of

beha7ior grounded in learning theory, including the control of appropriate

7ariables, the appreciation of data-based concepts, and the high regard for

operational definit ions of ter!s and replicabi li ty of resul ts . 0he

de7elop!ent of beha!ior therapy was not !onolithic in concept, theory, or

practic e, and its roots wer e wid e and 7aried. 0hus, beha!ior therapy theory

!ay best be characteri@ed, generally, as the application of the laws of

!odern learning theory to all types of disorder, including indi7idual,

situational, and en7iron!ental #1ranks, +33$. &ee also 9'C 0FE?RB

'9(D>R95& 0FE?RB &M"((ER5& DE&CR"P0"E 'EF9-

"?R?PER9(0 C?(D"0"?("(< 0FE?RB =?LPE5& 0FE?R0ECF-

("N>E ? 1 REC"PR?C9L "( F"'"0"?(.

RE1ERE(CE&

0horndike, E. #+3*+$. $#an learning. (ew ork; 9ppleton.

Head, <. #+3*$. 3ind, self, and society 5ro the standpoint of a socialbeha!iorist. Chicago; >ni7ersity of Chicago Press.

&kinner, '. 1. #+3*4$. +he beha!ior of organiss An experiental analysis. (ew

ork; 9ppleton-Century.

&kinner, '. 1. #+34$. Walden two. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

Parsons, 0. #+33$. +he str#ct#re of social action. <lencoe, "L; 1ree Press.

Dollard, J., Hiller, (. #+32)$. ersonality and psychotherapy An analysis in

ters of learning, thin%ing, and c#lt#re. (ew ork; Hc<raw-Fill.

Eysenck, F. #+32$. 0he effects of psychotherapy; 9n e7aluation. 4. ons. sy., 0,

*+3*.

Lindsley, )., &kinner, '. 1., &olo!on, F. #+32*$. /t#dies in beha!ior therapy. =al-tha!, H9; Hetropolitan &tate Fospital.

&ulli7an, F. &. #+32*$. +he interpersonal theory of psychiatry. (ew ork; (orton.

La@arus, 9. #+324$. (ew !ethods in psychotherapy; 9 case study. /. Afr. 3ed. 4.,

99, )-.

=olpe, J. #+324$. sychotherapy by reciprocal inhibition. &tanford, C9; &tanford

>ni7ersity Press.

Eysenck, F. #+323$. Learning theory and beha7iour therapy. 4. 3ent. /ci., 01<, +-

62. Fo!ans, <. #+3+$. /ocial beha!ior 6ts eleentary fors. (ew ork;

Farcourt 'race Jo7ano7ich.

>ll!an, L., Mrasner, L. #+3*$. ase st#dies in beha!ior odification. (ew ork;


Eysenck, F. #Ed.$ #+3$. :xperients in beha!ior therapy eadings in odern



ethods of ental disorders deri!ed fro learning theory. ?%ford; Perga!on

Press.



'EF9"?R"&0 0FE?R 6+

'andura, 9. #+33$. rinciples of beha!ior odification. (ew ork; Folt, Rinehart ,

=inston.Mantor, J. R. #+33$. +he scientific e!ol#tion of psychology. Chicago; Principia Press. =olpe, J.

#+33$. +he practice of beha!ior therapy. (ew ork; Perga!on Press. Manfer, 1., Phillips, J.

#+36)$. earning fo#ndations of beha!ior therapy. (ew ork;

=iley.

'andura, 9. #Ed.$ #+36+$. sychological odeling onflicting theories. Chicago; 9ldine-

9therton.

Cautela, J. #+36+$. Co7ert conditioning. "n 9. Jacobs L. &achs #Eds.$, +he psychology of

pri!ate e!ents erspecti!es on co!ert response systes. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

Mrasner, L. #+36+$. 'eha7ior therapy. Ann. e!. sy., **, 4*-2*.

Ellis, 9. #+36*$. Rational-e!oti7e therapy. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, #rrent psychotherapies.

"tasca, "L; Peacock.

'eck, 9. #+36$. ogniti!e therapy and the eotional disorders. (ew ork; "nternational

>ni7ersities Press.

Heichenbau!, D. #+366$. ogniti!e&beha!ior odification An integrati!e approach. (ew

ork; Plenu!.

Ma@din, 9., =ilson, <. #+364$. :!al#ation of beha!ior therapy. Ca!bridge, H9; 'allinger.

Ledwidge, '. #+364$. Cogniti7e beha7ior !odification; 9 step in the wrong direction. sy.

B#ll., 7<, *2*-*62.

<ross, H. #+363$. +he psychological society. (ew ork; &i!on &chuster.

Mendall, P., Follon, &. #Eds.$ #+363$. ogniti!e beha!ioral inter!entions +heory, research,

and proced#res. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

La@arus, 9. #+34+$. 3#ltiodal theory. (ew ork; <uilford Press.

1ranks, C. #+33$. 'eha7ior therapy; Proble!s and issues. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy.

(ew ork; =iley.

Mrasner, L. #+33$. 'eha7ior therapy. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.


BEHAVIORAL CONTRAST EFFECT/PHENOMENON. &ee <E(ER9L"-

A90"?(, PR"(C"PLE ?1.

BEHAVIORIST THEORY. Beha!iorist theory #Gbeha7ioris!G$ was the !ost

significant !o7e!ent in e%peri!ental psychology fro! +3)) to about +362. "t was

launched in +3+* by John '. =atson but had its origins in the work of "7an Pa7lo7

and E. L. 0horndike. Beha!iorist theory re!ains influential today in spite of !uch

criticis! le7eled against it after about +3) #Leahey, +34), +33$. "n general,

beha!iorist theory de7eloped as an alternati7e orientation toward studying and

e%plaining an indi7idual5s conscious e%perience, and it originally reected both the

!ethods and tenets of entalis #where the proper subect !atter of psychology was

purported to be the study of !ind, fa7oring the !ethod of introspection, or Glooking

into one5s own e%perienceG$. "n John '. =atson5s #+3+*, +3+3, +32, +34$ classicalapproach, beha!iorist theory was for!ulated as a purely obecti7e e%peri!ental

branch of natural science



6 'EF9"?R"&0 0FE?R

whose goal was the prediction and control of beha7ior, whose boundaries rec-

ogni@ed no di7iding line between !an and GlowerG ani!al, and which reected

concepts such as ind, conscio#sness, and introspection. arious refor!ulations

and 7ersions of =atson5s classical beha7iorist approach, called neobeha!iorist

theory #or Gneobeha7ioris!G$, ha7e appeared in the twentieth century under the

labels of foral beha!ioris #including logical beha!ioris and p#rposi!e-

cogniti!e beha!ioris), inforal beha!ioris, and radical beha!ioris #Leahey,

+34), +33$. 5oral beha!iorist theory, under the influence of logical positi!is

#where propositions in science needed to be 7erified by e!pirical and obser7able

!eans$, atte!pted to e%plain beha7ior in ter!s of a theory that consisted of

operational definitions of concepts, processes, and e7ents both directly obser7ed

and unobser7ed. 0he logical beha7ioris! of Clark L. Full #+3*, +32$, for-

!ulated in ter!s of a hypothetico&ded#cti!e learning theory, was the !ost sys-

te!ati@ed theory of the for!al beha7iorists. 9nother 7ariation of the for!al beha7iorist theories was E. C. 0ol!an5s #+3*$ p#rposi!e-cogniti!e beha!iorist

theory, which reected the highly !echanistic approach of =atson and Full and

espoused the notion that organis!s are always acting to !o7e toward or away

fro! so!e goal where their purpose is to learn about their en7iron!ents, not

si!ply to respond to sti!uli. +olan's theory de7eloped the GinternalG concepts of

p#rpose, cognition, cogniti!e aps, and expectancies as a way of e%plaining

beha7ior. 6nforal beha!iorist theory, or liberaliGed sti#l#s&response theory,

for!ulated co7ert !ediating e7ents #called Gfractional, unobser7able responsesG$

between the initial sti!ulus and the final response in a learned beha7ior. "n this

way, the co7ert beha7iors of !e!ory, thinking, language, and proble! sol7ing

could be cast into beha!ior theory ter!s where the notion of the Gcentral

!ediating responseG was a core concept #e.g., Hiller, +323$. adical beha!iorist

theory is closest of all the neobeha7iorist 7ariations to =atson5s classical theory.

0his approach proposed that whate7er cannot be obser7ed and !easured does not

e%istB it also reected the Gfu@@yG and ill-defined concepts in psychology such as

ind, free will, personality, self, and feelings, e7en though it allowed an

organis!5s Gpri7ate worldG to be studied scientifically #&kinner, +3*4, +32), +32*,

+3*, +36B Mantor, +324$. 0he theoretical approach of the radical beha7iorists is

the only type of beha!iorist theory that is e%erting a serious influence on

!ainstrea! psychology today, while the other beha7iorist 7ariations ha7e passed

into history. "t is possible that present-day cogniti7e psychology is a new for! of

beha!iorist theory with historical roots in 0ol!an5s purposi7ecogniti7e

psychology and Full5s logical beha7ioris!, and a new ter! #such as

beha!ioralis; cf; "ons, +366$ !ay be needed to co!bine the beha!iorist position

with the cogniti!ist position, both of which co!!only reect the notion oftraditional !entalis! #Leahey, +33B cf; Hiller, <alanter, Pribra!, +3)$. &ee

also F>LL5& LE9R("(< 0FE?RB &M"((ER5& 'EF9"?R

0FE?R?PER9(0 C?(D"0"?("(< 0FE?RB 0?LH9(5& 0FE?R.



'ELL-H9<E(D"E L9= 6*

RE1ERE(CE&

LaHettrie, J. #+64+3+$. 3an as achine. La&alle, "L; ?pen Court.

=atson, J. '. #+3+*$. Psychology as the beha7iorist 7iews it. sy. e!., *2, +24-+66.

=atson, J. '. #+3+3$. sychology fro the standpoint of a beha!iorist. Philadelphia;

Lippincott.

=atson, J. '. #+32$. Beha!ioris. (ew ork; (orton.

=atson, J. '. #+34$. +he ways of beha!ioris. (ew ork; (orton.

=atson, J. '., HcDougall, =. #+33$. +he battle of beha!ioris. (ew ork; (orton.

0ol!an, E. C. #+3*$. #rposi!e beha!ior. (ew ork; 9ppleton-Century.

&kinner, '. 1. #+3*4$. +he beha!ior of organiss An experiental analysis. (ew ork;

9ppleton-Century.

Full, C. L. #+3*$. rinciples of beha!ior. (ew ork; 9ppleton-Century-Crofts.

&kinner, '. 1. #+32)$. 9re theories of learning necessaryI sy. e!., <E, +3*-+.

Full, C. L. #+32$. A beha!ior syste An introd#ction to beha!ior theory concerning

the indi!id#al organis. (ew Fa7en, C0; ale >ni7ersity Press.&kinner, '. 1. #+32*$. /cience and h#an beha!ior. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

Mantor, J. R. #+324$. 6nterbeha!ioral psychology. 'loo!ington, "(; Principia Press.

Hiller, (. #+323$. Liberali@ation of basic &-R concepts; E%tensions to conflict beha7ior,

!oti7ation, and social learning. "n &. Moch #Ed.$, sychology A st#dy of a sci&

ence. ol. . (ew ork; Hc<raw-Fill.

Hiller, <., <alanter, E., Pribra!, M. #+3)$. lans and the str#ct#re of beha!ior. (ew

ork; Folt, Rinehart, =inston.

&kinner, '. 1. #+3*$. 'eha7ioris! at fifty. /cience, 02, 32+-324.

&kinner, '. 1. #+36$. Abo#t beha!ioris. (ew ork; Mnopf.

"ons, E. #+366$. Against beha!ioralis. ?%ford, England; 'lackwell.

Leahey, 0. #+34)$. A history of psychology 3ain c#rrents in psychological tho#ght.

Englewood Cliffs, (J; Prentice-Fall.

Mrasner, L. #+33$. 'eha7ioris!; Fistory. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley.Leahey, 0. #+33$. 'eha7ioris!. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

'EME&5& 0FE?R. &ee 9>D"0"?(FE9R"(<, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

'ELL-H9<E(D"E L9=. 0his generali@ed principle initially described by the

&cottish anato!ist, surgeon, and neurophysiological pioneer &ir Charles 'ell #+66-

+4$ in +4++ was subse:uently restated independently #in +4+4$ by the 1rench

physiologist 1rancois Hagendie #+64*-+422$. 0he BellL3agendie law states that the

7entral roots of the spinal ner7es ha7e !otor functions, while the dorsal roots of the

spinal ner7es ha7e sensory functions. 'ell5s work in physiology was considered in

his own ti!e as the !ost i!portant since =illia! Far7ey5s #+264-+26$ disco7ery of

the circulation of the blood in +4. 0he differentiation of the sensory and !otor

ner7e functions had been known by the early <reek physician <alen #c. +*)-))$, but this knowledge was lost by later physiologists who belie7ed that the ner7es

functioned nondifferentially in trans!itting both sensory and !otor i!pulses. 'ell5s

e%plorations of the sensori!otor



6 'EL?(<"(<(E&&, L9=PR"(C"PLE ?1

functions of the spinal ner7es triggered a bitter and prolonged priority dispute

#i.e., who disco7ered the principle firstI$ with Hagendie. 9pparently, Hagendie

did not know of 'ell5s disco7ery, which was published pri7ately in +4++ as a

!onograph of only +)) copies. 0oday, both scientists are gi7en credit for the

disco7ery known as the BellL3agendie law #'oring, +326B Lundin, +33B Huir,

+33$. 0he disco7ery of the distinction between sensory and !otor ner7es in the

BellL3agendie law pro7ided the basis for Harshall Fall5s #+63)-+426$ work in

physiology on the refle% arc and refle% functions. 'ell5s e%peri!enta l work led to

the disco7ery of the long thoracic ner7e in the body na!ed Bell's ner!e. "n

addition, the ter! Bell's palsy refers to 'ell5s de!onstration that lesions of the

se7enth cranial ner7e could create facial paralysis. Hagendie5s work, on the other

hand, was concerned with wide-ranging and co!prehensi7e studies in

e%peri!ental physiology e%tending fro! the relationships between sensations

and the ner7ous syste! to the relationships between intellect and the nu!ber ofcon7olutions in the brains of ani!als on different le7els of the phylogenetic

scale. 0he BellL3agendie law was elaborated by later workers in physiology

into the principle that conduction fro! cell to cell within the central ner7ous

syste! occurs only in the direction fro! receptor to effector #=arren, +3*$. &ee

also (E>R?((E>R9L(ERE 0FE?R.

RE1ERE(CE&

'ell, C. #+4++$. 6dea of a new anatoy of the brain. London; &trahan Preston.

Fall, H. #+4**$. ?n the refle% action of the !edulla oblongata and !edulla spinalis.

hil. +rans. oy. /oc. on., 0*9, *2-2.


Hifflin. 'oring, E. <. #+326$. A history of experiental psychology. (ew ork;

9ppleton-Century-Crofts.

Lundin, R. #+33$. &ir Charles 'ell. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley. Huir, F. #Ed.$ #+33$. aro#sse dictionary of scientists. (ew ork; Larousse.

'EL?(<"(<(E&&, L9=PR"(C"PLE ?1. 0his is one of E. L. 0horndike5s #+3*,

+3*2$ accessory or secondary laws to his !ain law of effect, whereby the properties

of one ite!, when closely related to the properties of another ite!, cause a bond to

be for!ed easily between the two ite!s. 0his principle i!plicitly acknowledges the

contributions !ade by the Cestalt theory and <estalt school in psychology #Moffka,

+3*2B Mohler, +3)$, especially when considering the <estaltists5 laws of percept#al

organiGation, whereby so!e kinds of sti!uli see! to go together !ore naturally than

others. 1or e%a!ple, first and last na!es presented together !ay be perceptually

grouped or learned better than a set of first na!es only or a set of last na!es only.

0he principle of belongingness has been reacti7ated in recent work on learning,where the basic principles of classical and operant conditioning are inco!plete

without so!e recognition of the relationship that e%ists between the ite!s to be

associated and the specific properties of the organis! undergoing the learning

e%perience #Re-



'ERMELE5& 0FE?R ?1 "&>9L &P9CE PERCEP0"?( 62

ber, +332$. &ee also 9&&?C"90"E &F"10"(<, L9= ?1B E11EC0, L9= ?1B

<E&09L0 0FE?RL9=&B PERCEP0>9L ?R<9("A90"?(, L9=& ?1B

RE"(1?RCEHE(0, 0F?R(D"ME5& 0FE?R ?1.

RE1ERE(CE&

0ho!dike, E. L. #+3*$. +he f#ndaentals of learning. (ew ork; 0eachers College,

Colu!bia >ni7ersity.

Moffka, M. #+3*2$. +he principles of Cestalt psychology. (ew ork; Farcourt 'race

Jo7ano7ich.

0ho!dike, E. L. #+3*2$. +he psychology of wants, interests, and attit#des. (ew ork;

9ppleton.

Cole, L. #+3*3$. Ceneral psychology. (ew ork; Hc<raw-Fill.Mohler, =. #+3)$. 8ynaics in psychology. (ew ork; Li7eright.


BEM'S SELF-PERCEPTION THEORY. &ee 900R"'>0"?( 0FE?R.

BENEKE'S DOCTRINE OF TRACES. &ee <E&09L0 0FE?RL9=&.

BERKELEY'S THEORY OF VISUAL SPACE PERCEPTION. "n +6)3, the

"rish philosopher and theologian 'ishop <eorge 'erkeley #+42-+62*$ argued for

an epiricist #e%perience$ position of 7ision and against a nati!ist #inborn$ ability

of indi7iduals to udge distance #cf; <ibson =alk, +3)B =alk, +3$.

'erkeley5s position on perceptual distance was that 7arious cues #such as the si@e

of obects encountered in one5s e%perience$ were learned pre7iously and that

indi7iduals !ade the association between particular distances and the sensations

that arose fro! their eye !uscle !o7e!ents and positions. 0hus, Ber%eley'stheory posited that the perception of distance was an act of udg!ent that was

grounded in e%perience, and he described the e:ui7alents of what today are the

secondary criteria or factors for appreciating 7isual space perception #such as

aerial perspecti7e, interposition, and relati7e si@e$. 'erkeley also listed three

priary criteria for the appraisal of distance; #+$ the physical space between the

pupils, which is changed by turning one5s eyes as an obect approaches or re cedes

#today this is called the cue of con!ergence); #$ the GblurringG of obects when

they are too close to the eye #this factor is probably not 7alid today as a distance

cue$B and #*$ the GstrainingG of the eye #the cue that today !ay be called

accoodation, in7ol7ing the adust!ent of the shape of the lens of the eye to

co!pensate for the distance of the obect of focus fro! the retina$. 'oring #+326$

suggests that one !ust not be decei7ed about the e%tent of 'erkeley5s knowledge

of 7isual space perception because he only 7aguely understood the !echanis! ofthe perception of distance. 'erkeley was correct essentially in two of his three

priary criteria, but he was a long way off fro! knowing about the physiology of

con7ergence, corresponding points and the horopter theory #<raha!, +32$, and

$elholtG's theory of the physiology of acco!!odation.



6 'ER(E5& &CR"P0 0FE?R

9ccording to 'oring #+326$, 'erkeley !ade the :uestion of the perception of

distance a !atter of sensation or idea when he e%e!plified the introspectionist5s

context theory of the 7isual perception of distance, and, in so doing, 'erkeley

generally anticipated the ideas of !odern associationis!. 'erkeley5s Gsubecti7e

idealis!G #'oring, +326$ was influential in the historical de7elop!ent of the role of

association in psychology as well as in ad7ancing argu!ents for e%periential factors

in perception and against innate factors as the basis for 7ision #cf; $ailton's

hypothesis of space; &pencer, +43$. &ee also 9&&?C"90"?(, L9=&PR"(C"PLE&

?1B EHHER05& L9=B PERCEP0"?( #". <E(ER9L$, 0FE?R"E& ?1B

PERCEP0"?( #"". C?HP9R90"E 9PPR9"&9L$, 0FE?R"E& ?1B ="0M"(&5

PERCEP0"?( 0FE?R.

RE1ERE(CE&

'erkeley, <. #+6)3+34$. Essay toward a new theory of 7ision. "n 9. Luce 0. Jessop

#Eds.$, +he wor%s of Ceorge Ber%eley, bishop of loyne. 0oronto; (elson.

'erkeley, <. #+6+)+32)$. A treatise concerning the principles of h#an %nowledge.

La&alle, "L; ?pen Court.

1raser, 9. #Ed.$ #+6+3)+$. +he wor%s of Ceorge Ber%eley. ?%ford; Clarendon Press.

Ja!es, =. #+43)$. rinciples of psychology. ol. . (ew ork; Folt.

&pencer, F. #+43$. +he principles of psychology. (ew ork; 9ppleton.

Ladd, <. #+434$. #tlines of descripti!e psychology. (ew ork; &cribners.

Haher, H. #+3))$. sychology. (ew ork; Long!ans, <reen.

&!ith, (. #+3)2$. Halebranche5s theory of the perception of distance and !agnitude.

Brit. 4. sy., +, +3+-).

'oring, E. <. #+326$. A history of experiental psychology. (ew ork; 9ppleton-

Century-Crofts.

<ibson, E., =alk, R. #+3)$. 0he 7isual cliff. /ci. Aer., *2*, 6-6+.

<raha!, C. #+32$. isual space perception. "n C. <raha! #Ed.$, =ision and !is#al perception. (ew ork; =iley.

Fochberg, J. #+32$. erception. Englewood Cliffs, (J; Prentice-Fall.

=alk, R. #+3$. 0he de7elop!ent of depth perception in ani!als and infants. hild

8e!. 3ono., 90, no. 2.

BERNE'S SCRIPT THEORY. 0he Canadian-born 9!erican psychologist

psychiatris t Eric L. 'erne #+3+)-+36)$ for!ulated his script theory concerning

personality #ego$ de7elop!ent and relationships between indi7iduals #cf; 9d-

ler5s, +36, +3*6, concept of lifestyle), which states that each person creates a

life script early in life as a way of !eeting one5s needs, and it is usually carried

out unknowingly. Berne's theory assu!es that indi7iduals de7elop one of four

life positions; G"5! ?M, you5re ?M,G G"5! ?M, you5re not ?M,G G"5! not ?M,

you5re ?M,G and G"5! not ?M, you5re not ?M,G and persons engage in ga!es to play out their l ife script in order to obtain GstrokingG #i.e., the atten tion and ti!e

of other people$. 0he life position of G"5! not ?M, you5re ?MG #or the Gkick !eG

life script$ indicates a !aladapti7e person who !ost likely suffers fro!

depression. 0reating !aladapti7e indi7iduals in7ol7es e%planation of



'EA?LD/'R>CME E11EC0PFE(?HE(?(F>E &F"10 66

the roles #Gga!esG$ people play and how they treat other people in those

roles, and where interpersonal transactions are analy@ed #in transactionalanalysis; 'erne, +3+$ concerning parent #P$, ad#lt #9$, and child #C$ roles.

9ccording to this once-popular approach #'erne, +3, +3$, when a person5s P9C roles are positioned opposite another person5s P9C roles, and

the lines of co!!unication or interaction between the! are crossed, thetransaction is considered to be unhealthy. ?n the other hand, when the lines

of co!!unication between two sets of aligned P9C roles are parallel, theinterpersonal transaction is considered to be healthy. 9n e%a!ple of an

unhealthy transaction is a patient5s G9G personality #or Gego stateG$ saying toa nurse5s G9G personality; G" think working in a hospital would bechallenging,G but ha7ing the nurse5s GPG personality reply to the patient5sGCG personality by saying, Gou5re sick because you can5t cope with your proble!sG #a crossed interchange fro! GPG to GC,G crossing the G9G to G9Gco!!unication line$. Berne's theory and the GP9CG concepts containob7ious si!ilarities to &ig!und 1reud5s #+3), +3**$ tripartite personalitytheory concepts of id, ego, and s#perego, an accusation that 'erne denied#Peyser, +33$. &ee also 9DLER5& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0B1RE>D5& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0.

RE1ERE(CE&

1reud, &. #+3)$. A general introd#ction to psychoanalysis. (ew ork; Pocket

'ooks. 9dler, 9. #+36$. ractice and theory of indi!id#al psychology. (ew

ork; Fu!anities Press.

1reud, &. #+3**$. >ew introd#ctory lect#res on psychoanalysis. "n J. &trachey #0rans.

Ed.$, +he standard edition of the coplete psychological wor%s of /ig#nd

5re#d. ol. ). London; Fogarth Press.

9dler, 9. #+3*6$. Position in fa!ily constellation influences life style. 6nter. 4. 6ndi!. sy., 9, ++-6.

'erne, E. #+33$. 0he nature of intuition. sychiat. H#ar., *9, )*-.'erne, E. #+3+$. +ransactional analysis in psychotherapy A systeatic indi!id#al

and social psychiatry. (ew ork; <ro7e Press.

'erne, E. #+3$. Caes people play +he psychology of h#an relationships. (ew

ork; <ro7e Press.

'erne, E. #+3$. rinciples of gro#p treatent. (ew ork; ?%ford >ni7ersity

Press. 'erne, E. #+36$. What do yo# say after yo# say hello? (ew ork; <ro7e

Press. Peyser, C. #+33$. Eric L. 'erne. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley.

'EA?LD/'R>CME E11EC0PFE(?HE(?(F>E &F"10. 0his phe-

no!enon is credited to the <er!an physicist Johann 'e@old #+4*6-+3)6$ andthe <er!an physiologist Ernst 'rucke #+4+3-+43$, who found that the hue ofspectral colors of obects changes with the le7el of illu!ination. 0he effectapplies to bluish reds and bluish greens, where the reds and greens are percei7ed as bluer with increased illu!ination, and to yellowish reds andyellowish greens, where the reds and greens are percei7ed as yellower with



increased illu!ination. Fowe7er, the BeGoldLBr#c%e effect does not occurwith the GpurerG reds,



64 '"CF90, L9= ?1

=ol!an, '. #Ed.$ #+343$. 8ictionary of beha!ioral science. &an Diego; 9cade!ic Press.Huir, F. #Ed.$ #+33$. aro#sse dictionary of scientists. (ew ork; Larousse.

greens, blues, and yellows. 0he pheno!enon is usually obtained as an aspect of the

negati7e afteri!age produced by retinal adaptation. &ee also 9D9P090"?(,

PR"(C"PLE&L9=& ?1B 910ER-"H9<E L9=B C?L?R "&"?(,

0FE?R"E&L9=& ?1.

RE1ERE(CE&

'rucke, E. #+42+$. >ntersuchungen uber subecti7e 1arben. ogg. Ann. hys. he.,

7, +4-2.

'rucke, E. #+44$. =orles#ngen #ber hysiologie. ol. . ienna; 'rau!ueller. Huller,

<. E. #+3*)$. >ber die 1arben e!pfindungen. D. sy., 0E&07, , 2)4. 0roland, L.

#+3*)$. rinciples of psychophysiology. ol. . (ew ork; an (ostrand. Purdy, D.

#+3*+$. ?n the saturations and chro!atic thresholds of the spectral colours.

Brit. 4. sy., *0, 4*.Judd, D. #+32+$. 'asic correlates of the 7isual syste!. "n &. &. &te7ens #Ed.$,


<raha!, C. #+32$. Color; Data and theories. "n C. <raha! #Ed.$, =ision and !is#al

perception. (ew ork; =iley.

&ha7er, M., 0arpy, R. #+33*$. sychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

'"CF90, L9= ?1. 0he 1rench physician, pathologist, and anato!ist Harie 1rancois

Ka7ier 'ichat #+66+-+4)$ proposed the principle that there are two !ain body

syste!s, which are in in7erse relationship, called the !egetati!e and the anial, with

the 7egetati7e syste! pro7iding for assi!ilation and aug!entation of !ass and the

ani!al syste! pro7iding for the transfor!ation of energy #=ol!an, +343$. 'ichat5s

!ain contribution to !edicine and physiology was his perception that the di7erseorgans of the body contain particular tissues or ebranes, and he described + such

!e!branes, including connecti7e, !uscle, and ner7e tissues. 'ichat !aintained that

in the case of disease in an organ, generally not the whole organ but only certain

tissues are affected. 'ichat did not use the !icroscope, which he distrusted, so his

tissue analysis did not include any acknowledg!ent of their cellular structure. 'ichat

established the significance and centrality of the study of tissues #GhistologyG$, and

his lasting i!portance lay in si!plifying anato!y and physiology by showing how

the co!ple% structures of organs could be ascertained in ter!s of their ele!entary

tissues #Huir, +33$. 'ichat5s work, done with great intensity during the last years of

his short life #he perfor!ed o7er )) post!orte!s$, had !uch influence in !edical

science, and he for!ed a bridge between the earlier organ pathology of <io7anni

'attista Horgagni #+4-+66+$ and the later cell pathology of Rudolf Ludwig Carl

irchow #+4+-+3)$ #Hillar, Hillar, Hillar, Hillar, +33$. &ee also <E(ER9L&&0EH& 0FE?R.

RE1ERE(CE&



'"R0F ?RDER 0FE?R 63

Hillar, D., Hillar, "., Hillar, J., Hillar, H. #+33$. +he abridge dictionary of

scientists. (ew ork; Ca!bridge >ni7ersity Press.

BIEDERMAN'S RECOGNITION BY COMPONENTS THEORY. &ee

P900ER(?'JEC0 REC?<("0"?( 0FE?R.

BIG FIVE MODEL/THEORY OF PERSONALITY. &ee PER&?(9L"0

0FE?R"E&.

BIOCHEMICAL THEORIES OF PERSONALITY. &ee P&CF?P90F?L?<,

0FE?R"E& ?1.

BIOCHEMICAL/NEUROLOGICAL THEORIES OF SCHIZOPHRENIA. &ee

&CF"A?PFRE("9, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

BIOFEEDBACK, PRINCIPLE OF. &ee C?(0R?L&&0EH& 0FE?R.

BIOGENETIC RECAPITULATION THEORY. &ee REC9P"0>L90"?(,

0FE?RL9= ?1.

BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION, DOCTRINE OF. &ee D9R="(5& E?L>0"?(

0FE?R.

BIRTH ORDER THEORY. =hile there has been a wealth of e!pirical research on

birth order and its influence on personality #e.g., &a!pson, +32B 1orer, +366B

Driscoll Eckstein, +34$, !ost of the results are restricted to isolated pheno!ena

and inco!plete e%planations because of an absence of an underlying andco!prehensi7e theory of birth order #Driscoll Eckstein, +33$. Fowe7er, one of

9lfred 9dler5s !ost significant contributions to psychology has been his for!ulation

of the relationship between birth order and personality de7elop!ent. 9dler #+36,

+3*6$ hypothesi@ed that the child5s position in the fa!ily creates specific proble!s

that are handled by fa!ilies generally in the sa!e way, and such birth order

e%periences !ay re7eal a characteristic personality pattern for each ordinal birth

position. 9ccording to 9dler, as the fa!ily group de7elops, different de!ands arise,

and need-fulfill!ent is assigned to each child in order of birth. 0he style of coping is

ne7er the sa!e for any two children as the situation changes. 9dler belie7ed that the

needs that influence a specific lifestyle correspond to the child5s percei!ed birth

order, where it isn5t the child5s nu!ber in order of successi7e births that influences

her or his character, but the sit#ation into which she or he is born and the way in

which it is interpreted. 0hus, according to 9dler and others #&hul!an Hosak,+366$, Gpsychological positioningG is the !ost i!portant factor, where an indi7idual5s

own s#bIecti!e psychological birth order perception is superordinate to !ere

biological birth order. Research has indicated that personality differences e!erge in

children,



4) '"R0F ?RDER 0FE?R

within a specific birth order group, relati7e to factors of absence or presence ofa sibling, se% of the sibling, aspects of the parents5 relationship, age, fa!ily

si@e, e%ceptional status, a7ailable roles, and relationships with the e%tended

fa!ily #Eckstein, +34$. "n distinguishing between idiographic and noothetic

laws as related to 9dler5s theory of birth order, Dink!eyer, Pew, and Dink!eyer

#+363$ state that one !ay !ake general guesses about an indi7idual5s

personality based upon ordinal position, where the guesses are based on

noothetic laws #such as youngest children tend to be. . . . , oldest children tend

to be. . . . , etc.$, but the actual, specific case !ay be different depending on

how the indi7idual percei7es the situation and what that person does about it

#which are called idiographic laws). 0hus, noothetic laws concerning the

fa!ily constellation help in understanding the person5s idiographic laws or

Glifestyle.G 0he !aor re7iews of the literature concerning the influence of birth

order on personality ha7e shown the rubrics of Gfirstborn,G G!iddle-born,GGyoungest,G and Gonly childrenG to be the !ost co!!on and fre:uently used

di7isions #e.g., =elch, +366B cf; &hul!an Hosak, +366$. 0he assu!ption of

birth order theory that birth order causes the different personality traits is false,

and it would be erroneous to o7ergenerali@e or typecast a person on that basis

#Driscoll Eckstein, +33$. 9dler5s approach, which e!phasi@ed the social

deter!inants of personality and the predisposition of early influences to a faulty

Glifestyle,G see!s to ha7e !erit for so!e psychologists where they belie7e that

no two people de7elop in e%actly the sa!e way. &o!e persons stri7e for

Gsuperiority,G so!e atte!pt to cope with Gbasic inferiority,G and one5s fa!ily

constellation !ay intensify or !odify the child5s feelings in either case. 0he

proble!s of birth order theory are nu!erous, and psychologists generally !ay

be pessi!istic #e.g., &chooler, +36$ or opti!istic #e.g., Driscoll Eckstein,

+33$ concerning its long-range de7elop!ent and i!portance in e%plaining personality. &ee also 9D-LER5& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0B

"D"?<R9PF"C(?H?0FE0"C L9=&.

RE1ERE(CE&

9dler, 9. #+36$. ractice and theory of indi!id#al psychology. (ew ork;Fu!anities Press.

9dler, 9. #+3*6$. Position in fa!ily constellation influences life style. 6nter. 4. 6ndi!.

sy., 9, ++-6.

&a!pson, E. #+32$. 0he study of ordinal position; 9ntecedents and conditions. "n '.

Haher #Ed.$, rogress in experiental personality research. (ew ork; 9ca-

de!ic Press.

HacDonald, 9. #+36+$. 'irth order and personality. 4. ons. @ lin. sy., 9, +6+-

+6. &chooler, C. #+36$. 'irth order effects; (ot here not now sy. B#ll., E7, ++-

+62. Mo, . #+36*$. 'irth order and psychological needs. Acta sy. +ai., 0<, 4-4).

ockell, E., 1elker, D., Hiley, C. #+36*$. 'irth order literature +36-+36. 4. 6ndi!.

sy., *1, *3-2*.

Rosenblatt, P., &koogberg, <. #+36$. 'irth order in cross-cultural perspecti7e. 8e!. sy., 02, 4-2.



'L?CM"(<, PFE(?HE(?(E11EC0 ?1 4+

1orer, L. #+366$. 'ibliography of birth order literature in the 6)5s. 4. 6ndi!. sy., 99,

+-++.&hul!an, '., Hosak, F. #+366$. 'irth order and ordinal position; 0wo 9dlerian

7iews. 4. 6ndi!. sy., 99, ++-++.

=elch, '. #+366$. 9 psychological study of only children. >npublished Ph.D.

dissertation. >ni7ersity of (orth Carolina Library.

Dink!eyer, D., Pew, =., Dink!eyer, D. #+363$. Adlerian co#nseling and psycho&

therapy. Honterey, C9; 'rooksCole.

Driscoll, R., Eckstein, D. #+34$. E!pirical studies of the relationship between

birth order and personality. "n D. Eckstein #Ed.$, ife style What it is and

how to do it. Dubu:ue, "9; MendallFunt.

Eckstein, D. #+34$. ife style What it is and how to do it. Dubu:ue, "9; MendallFunt.

Driscoll, R., Eckstein, D. #+33$. 'irth order and personality. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$,

:ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

BLENDING, LAW OF. &ee &M"((ER5& DE&CR"P0"E 'EF9"?R ?PER9(0

C?(D"0"?("(< 0FE?R.

BLOCH'S LAW. &ee '>(&E(/R?&C?E L9=.

BLOCKING, PHENOMENON/EFFECT OF. 0he pheno!enon of bloc%ing is

an e%a!ple in the psychology of learning and conditioning that the te!poral

contiguity alone between e7ents is not sufficient for an association to be for!ed

between the!. 9lthough the bloc%ing effect was at one ti!e clai!ed by selecti!e

attention theories #0rabasso 'ower, +34$, Leon J. Ma!in #+34, +33$ first

described the bloc%ing e%peri!ent where two groups of subects are used. ?ne

group is presented with a co!pound sti!ulus #called G9KG$ that is paired with an

unconditioned sti!ulus #>C&$, such as a no%ious puff of air to the eye. 9 secondgroup, before recei7ing an identical treat!ent, is gi7en pretraining during which

the G9G co!ponent of the co!pound sti!ulus is paired with the >C& #air puff$.

1ollowing the G9K/>C&G pairing, the portion GKG of the co!pound sti!ulus is

tested alone. "t is found that GKG is !ore likely to elicit a conditioned response

#CR$, such as the eye blink, when the subect did not ha7e prior training with the

G9G co!ponent alone. 0he sti!ulus portion GKG of the co!pound sti!ulus was

paired with the >C& #and, therefore, with the unconditioned response, >CR$ the

sa!e nu!ber of ti!es in both groups. Contiguity between sti!ulus and response

was established e:ually in both groups, and yet learning was not e:ual. 0he

bloc%ing phenoenon-effect indicates that there !ust be so!ething !ore to

conditioning and learning than !ere sti!ulus/response contiguity. 0hat is, if

sti!ulus/response contiguity was a sufficient condition for learning to occur,

then GKG should ha7e beco!e an e:ually effecti7e C& in both groups, which it didnot #'ower Filgard, +34+B Fouston, +34+$. 0hus, bloc%ing occurs when

conditioning to a sti!ulus is attenuated, or Gblocked,G because that sti!ulus

signals an outco!e that was pre7iously predicted by another sti!ulus or cue.

Ma!in5s #+34, +33$ interpretation of the bloc%ing effect



'R>CE E11EC0 4*

Fouston, J. #+34+$. 5#ndaentals of learning and eory. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

Rickert, E. #+33$. 'locking. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

'?FR5& C?HPLEHE(09R"0 PR"(C"PLE. &ee "&"?(&"<F0, 0FE?R"E&

?1.

'?00?H->P PR?CE&&"(< 0FE?R"E&. Botto&#p theories is a general ter!

referring to the direction of processing of infor!ation in any gi7en aspect of

percept#al or cogniti!e theory. 1or e%a!ple, in obIect perception theory, the analysis

of obects into parts is called botto&#p processing because processing starts with

basic units, and one5s perception is then built on the foundation laid by these units

#<oldstein, +33$. ?bect perception is influenced not only by the nature of the units

that !ake up obects but also by the obser7er5s knowledge of the world #cf; top&down

processing). "n cogniti!e theory, si!ilarly, botto&#p processing refers to the

deter!ination of a process pri!arily by the physical sti!ulus. 0he notion is that

obser7ers deal with the infor!ation in a gi7en situation by beginning with the GrawG

sti!ulus and then Gwork their way upG to the !ore abstract, cogniti7e operations

#Reber, +332$. 0hus, taking sensory data into the perceptual syste! first by the

receptors and then sending it upward for e%traction and analysis of rele7ant

infor!ation is called botto&#p processing or data&dri!en processing. &ensations of

7isual features and perceptions of organi@ed obects are largely the result of botto&

#p processes #Ai!bardo =eber, +33$. &ee also

"(1?RH90"?("(1?RH90"?(-PR?CE&&"(< 0FE?RB P900ER(?'JEC0

REC?<("0"?( 0FE?RB PERCEP0"?( #". <E(ER9L$, 0FE?R"E& ?1B

PERCEP0"?( #"". C?HP9R90"E 9PPR9"&9L$, 0FE?R"E& ?1B 0?P-D?=(

PR?CE&&"(<0FE?R"E&.

RE1ERE(CE&


Reber, 9. #+332$. +he eng#in dictionary of psychology. (ew ork; Penguin

'ooks. <oldstein, E. #+33$. /ensation and perception. Pacific <ro7e, C9;

'rooksCole.

'?=D"0CF5& L9=. &ee H>LLER5& D?C0R"(E ?1 &PEC"1"C (ERE

E(ER<"E&.

'R9"(-1"ELD 0FE?R. &ee 9PP9RE(0 H?EHE(0, PR"(C"PLE& ?1.

'R?9D'E(05& 1"L0ER H?DEL. &ee 900E(0"?(, L9=&0FE?R"E& ?1.

'R>CE E11EC0. 0his pheno!enon describes the influence of social odor

co!!unication fro! one organis! to another, where a fe!ale !ouse that has !ated

with one !ale will display a blockage of pregnancy #called the Br#ce effect) if she is

e%posed to a strange !ale, or the odor of a strange !ale, a few



4 '&09(DER "(0ERE(0"?( E11EC0

terpret the happening as an e!ergency e7entB #*$ the bystander !ust decide that

she or he has a responsibility to beco!e in7ol7edB #$ the bystander !ust decide

on the for! of assistance to gi7e the G7icti!GB and #2$ the bystander !ust !ake a

decision as to how to i!ple!ent the pre7ious decision. Research findings fro!

the laboratory and field settings indicate the i!portance that social factors play

in the bystander effect where the actions of others in the situation #such as

passi7ity 7ersus acti7ity on the part of other onlookers$ !ay ser7e as cues to the

bystander 5s in7ol7e!ent. 0he bystander effect concerning Galtruis!,G Gpro-social

beha7ior,G or Ghelping beha7iorG refers to the finding that the !ore people who

are present when help is needed, the less likely any one of the! is to pro7ide

assistance. E7en when a bystander interprets the e7ent to be an e!ergency, the

presence of other people !ay help to Gdiffuse responsibilityG for taking any

action. 1actors that relate to the bystander5s personality and de!ographic

characteristics ha7e been found to pro7ide a poorer prediction of bystander

beha7ior than do the particular features of the Ge!ergencyG situation #<reenberg,

+33$. &ee also 9LLP?R05& C?(1?RH"0 FP?0FE&"&B DEC"&"?(-

H9M"(< 0FE?R"E&B DE"(D""D>90"?( 0FE?R.

RE1ERE(CE&

Latane, '., Darley, J. #+34$. <roup inhibition of bystander inter7ention in e!ergencies. 4.

ers. /oc. sy., 02, +2-+.

Latane, '., Darley, J. #+36)$. +he #nresponsi!e bystander Why doesn't he help? (ew ork;


'ar-0al, D. #+36$. rosocial beha!ior +heory and research. (ew ork; Falsted. Eisenberg-

'erg, (. #+34$. 8e!elopent of prosocial beha!ior. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

Do7idio, J. #+34$. Felping beha7ior and altruis!; 9n e!pirical and conceptual o7er7iew. "n

L. 'erkowit@ #Ed.$, Ad!ances in experiental social psychology. ol. +6. (ew ork;

9cade!ic Press.'ar-0al, D. #+33$. Felping beha7ior. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

<reenberg, H. #+33$. 'ystander in7ol7e!ent. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley.




C

C9(9L"A90"?( FP?0FE&"&. &ee H>RPF5& '"?&?C"9L 0FE?R.

C9((?(C9((?(-'9RD 0FE?R. 0he 9!erican physiologist =alter '.

Cannon #+46+-+32$ is gi7en the !aor initial credit for this theory, and the

9!erican psychologist Philip 'ard #+434-+366$ is gi7en partial recognition for his

research support in its de7elop!ent and refine!ent #Cannon, +3+2, +34, +3*B

'ard, +3*a, b, +32)$. 9nother na!e for this theory is the thalaic theory of

e!otion #Cannon, +3*+$. 0he annonLBard theory proposes that the integration of

e!otional e%pressi7eness is controlled and directed by the thala!us, which sends

rele7ant e%citation patterns to the corte% at the sa!e ti!e that the hypothala!us

controls the beha7ior, and e!phasi@es the si!ultaneous arousal of both the central

and autono!ic ner7ous syste!s. Cannon argued that the function of the autono!icner7ous syste! arousal was to prepare the organis! to deal with the i!!ediate e7ent

/ to fight or to flee, for e%a!ple. 9n e7ent that !ight cause har! generates arousal

#an Ge!ergency responseG$, which prepares the indi7idual to cope with the e7ent.

?ther alternati7e na!es for the annonLBard theory, therefore, ha7e been the fight

or flight theory and the eergency theory. 0he annonLBard theory was based on

e7olutionary sur7i7al 7alue for the organis! where increased heart rate, respiration,

and so on per!itted it to respond !ore :uickly and strongly and, thereby, increased

its chances of sur7i7al. 0he annonLBard theory was a predo!inant opponent to

the earlier 4aesLange theory and argued that e!otionality results fro! a re!o7al

of the inhibition that is nor!ally e%erted by the neocorte% upon the thala!us. 0he

neocorte%, according to the Cannon/'ard approach, ordinarily suppresses the

acti7ity of the thala!us, but if e!otion-eliciting sti!uli reach the corte%, i!pulses

are sent downward and act to release the inhibitory influences. &ubse:uently, thethala!us signals the neocorte% to initiate the e!otional e%perience while it also

signals the rest of the body to begin the pattern of beha7ior



44 C9((?(C9((?(-'9RD 0FE?R

associated with the specific e!otion. 0he annon L Bard theory would predict

that the re!o7al of an ani!al5s thala!us in a laboratory procedure called Gde-

corticationG would reduce its e!otional hyperreacti7ity, but research showed

this not to be the case. 0hus, the research findings did not confir! a key

feature of the theory. Fowe7er, the annon L Bard theory has been i!portant

historically for two reasons; #+$ it focused attention on possible central ner7ous

syste! structures that !ay handle e!otionalityB and #$ it focused attention on

the possible ways the neocorte% !ay interact with structures in the lower brain

regions. 0oday, the Cannon/'ard idea of cortical-subcortical interaction and

in7ol7e!ent in e!otionality is reflected in !odern e!otion theories. 0he diffi -

culty with the annon L Bard theory was that it concentrated too hea7ily on the

thala!us rather than the hypothala!us, and other physiological-beha7ioral re-

search showed that the hypothala!us see!s to do!inate e!otional beha7ior

#Le7inthal, +34*$. &ee also EH?0"?(, 0FE?R"E&L9=& ?1B J9HE&-

L9(<EL9(<E-J9HE& 0FE?R ?1 EH?0"?(&.

RE1ERE(CE&

Cannon, =. #+3+2$. Bodily changes in pain, h#nger, fear, and rage An acco#nt of

recent researches into the f#nction of eotional exciteent. (ew ork;


Cannon, =. #+34$. 0he !echanis! of e!otional disturbance of bodily functions.

>ew :ng. 4. 3ed., 017, 466-44.Cannon, =. #+3*+$. 9gain the Ja!es-Lange and the thala!ic theories of e!otion.

sy. e!., 97, 4+-32.

Cannon, =. #+3*$. +he wisdo of the body. (ew ork; (orton.

'ard, P. #+3*a$. E!otion; ". 0he neuro-hu!oral basis of e!otional reactions. "n C.Hurchison #Ed.$, $andb%. Cen. :xp. sy. =orcester, H9; Clark >ni7ersity

Press. 'ard, P. #+3*b$. ?n e!otional e%pression after decortication with so!ere!arks on

certain theoretical 7iews. sy. e!., 0, *)3-*3,d ""+3.Cannon, =. #+3*$. <ray5s obecti7e theory of e!otion. sy. e!., 9, +))-+).

Cannon, =., Rosenblueth, 9. #+3*6$. A#tonoic ne#ro&effector systes. (ew

ork; Hac!illan.

Lashley, M. #+3*4$. 0he thala!us and e!otion. sy. e!., <, -+.9rnold, H. #+32$. Physiological differentiation of e!otional states. sy. e!., <*,

*24.

Duffy, E. #+34$. Leeper5s G!oti7ational theory of e!otions.G sy. e!., <<, *-*4.

Leeper, R. #+34$. 9 !oti7ational theory of e!otion to replace Ge!otion as

disorgani@ed response.G sy. e!., <<, 2-+.

=ebb, =. #+34$. 9 !oti7ational theory of e!otion. sy. e!., <<, *3-**2.Cannon, =., Rosenblueth, 9. #+33$. +he s#persensiti!ity of dener!ated

str#ct#res A law of dener!ation. (ew ork; Hac!illan.oung, P. 0. #+33$. E!otion as disorgani@ed response/9 reply to Professor Leeper.

sy. e!., <, +4-+3+.'ard, P. #+32)$. Central ner7ous !echanis!s for the e%pression of anger. "n H.

Rey!ert #Ed.$, +he second international syposi# on feelings and eotions. (ew ork; Hc<raw-Fill.



C9P9LD"5& 0FE?R 43

Le7inthal, C. #+34*$. 6ntrod#ction to physiological psychology. Englewood Cliffs,

(J; Prentice-Fall.

C9P9LD"5& 0FE?R. =ith the de7elop!ent in the conte!porary conception of

reinforceent and the law of effect in the last ) years #e.g., Pre!ack, +32B

0i!berlake 9llison, +36B 0i!berlake, +34)$, there ha7e also been changes in

the interpretation of the concepts of extinction and nonreward where a nu!ber of

new hypotheses ha7e been proposed. 1or e%a!ple, E. J. Capaldi5s #+3, +36$

se#ential patterning theory of nonreward and the partial reinforceent extinction

effect are refine!ents of two earlier hypotheses; the discriination- generaliGation

hypothesis, which supposes that subects will persist in responding as long as they

cannot discri!inate the e%tinction series fro! a run of nonreinforce!ents

e!bedded within the training series, and the sti#l#s aftereffects hypothesis, which

supposes that reward and nonreward e7ents on one trial set up distincti7e sti!ulustraces that persist o7er the intertrial inter7al and are part of the sti!ulus co!ple% at

the ti!e the ne%t response occurs #&heffield, +33$. 0he sti#l#s aftereffects

hypothesis assu!es that during partial reinforce!ent training, persisting sti!ulus

traces fro! nonreinforced trials beco!e conditioned to the ne%t response because

of fre:uent reinforced trials following a nonreinforced trial, and lead to sti!uli

arising during e%tinction which !aintains responding #'ower Filgard, +34+$.

apaldi's theory de7iates fro! the older aftereffects hypothesis concerning the

ti!e decay of infor!ation about the reinforcing e7ent of the prior trial. 0he

aftereffects hypothesis suggested that reward and nonreward e7ents set up

relati7ely short-ter! sti!ulus traces that decay after a few !inutes, but this

approach has no way to e%plain the partial reinforceent effects that ha7e been

obtained with widely spaced trials #such as one trial e7ery hours$. apaldi's

theory, on the other hand, assu!es that a trace of the prior reward or nonrewarde7ent persists indefinitely until it is !odified or replaced by the ne%t e7ent to

happen in the goal bo% of this situation. 1or Capaldi, the prior reward or nonreward

sti!uli are now a7ailable in so!ething like a G!e!ory,G which is reacti7ated when

the ani!al is placed back in the sti!ulus or testing situation. 0his G!e!oryG

interpretation is so!ewhat !ore heuristic than the sti!ulus trace interpretation

#'ower Filgard, +34+$. Capaldi #+36$ uses his hypothesis to e%plain a wide

range of different scheduling pheno!ena such as the accelerated e%tinction and

relearning that occur in !ultiple blocks of e%tinction and ac:uisition trials, the

effects of patterned schedules and their discri!ination, the effects of reward delay,

the contrast effects in shifts of reward !agnitude, the effects of different intertrial

inter7als, hu!an probability learning, and application to statistical learning theory

#Mo-teskey, +36$. 0here is current consensus a!ong researchers that apaldi's se&

#ential theory is the best one a7ailable for predicting e%tinction resistance produced by !ost reinforce!ent schedules. Fowe7er, a theoretical proble! that

re!ains to be sol7ed is the co!bination of the se#ential hypothesis with the

concepts of frustrati7e reward and inhibition in order to produce a !ore general



3) C9REER 0FE?R"E&

theory of e%tinction and nonreinforce!ent #'ower Filgard, +34+$. &ee also

9H&EL5& FP?0FE&"&0FE?RB PREH9CM5& PR"(C"PLEL9=B 0?L-

H9(5& 0FE?R.

RE1ERE(CE&

&heffield, . #+33$. E%tinction as a function of partial reinforce!ent and distribution

of practice. 4. :xp., sy., 91, 2++-2.

Heehl, P. #+32)$. ?n the circularity of the law of effect. sy. B#ll., 6,2-62.&heffield, . #+32)$. Resistance to e%tinction as a function of the distribution of

e%tinction trials. 4. :xp. sy., 2, *)2-*+*.

Pre!ack, D. #+32$. Reinforce!ent theory. "n H. Jones #Ed.$, >ebras%a syposi#

on oti!ation. Lincoln; >ni7ersity of (ebraska Press.

Capaldi, E. J. #+3$. Partial reinforce!ent; 9n hypothesis of se:uential effects. sy. e!., E9, 23-66.

Capaldi, E. J. #+36$. 9 se:uential hypothesis of instru!ental learning. "n M. &pence J. &pence #Eds.$, +he psychology of learning and oti!ation Ad!ances in

research and theory. ol. +. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.

Leonard, D. #+33$. 9!ount and se:uence of reward in partial and continuous

reinforce!ent. 4. op. hysio. sy., E, )-++.

Capaldi, E. 4., @ Capaldi, E. D. #+36)$. Hagnitude of partial reward, irregular

reward schedules, and a /hour "0"; 9 test of se7eral hypotheses. 4. op.

hysio. sy., E*, )*-)3.

Moteskey, R. #+36$. 9 sti!ulus sa!pling !odel of the partial reinforce!ent effect. sy. e!., E1, ++-+6+.

0i!berlake, =., 9llison, J. #+36$. Response depri7ation; 9n e!pirical approach

to instru!ental perfor!ance. sy. e!., 70, +-+.

0i!berlake, =. #+34)$. 9 !olar e:uilibriu! theory of learned perfor!ance. "n <.

'ower #Ed.$, +he psychology of learning and oti!ation. ol. +. (ew ork;

9cade!ic Press.'ower, <., Filgard, E. #+34+$. +heories of learning. Englewood Cliffs, (J;

Prentice-Fall.

C9REER 0FE?R"E&. &ee =?RMC9REER?CC>P90"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

C90ECF?L9H"(E FP?0FE&"&0FE?R ?1 DEPRE&&"?(. &ee

DEPRE&&"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

C900ELL5& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0. 0he 'ritish-born 9!erican

psychologist Ray!ond 'ernard Cattell #+3)2/ $ de7eloped a co!prehensi7e

theory of personality based on the statistical procedure of factor analysis intro-

duced by Charles &pear!an #+3), +36$ and e%panded by L. L. 0hurstone

#+3*+, +34$ in the for!ulation of !ultiple factor analysis. 0he factor analyticapproach typically begins with a large nu!ber of scores deri7ed fro! tests,

then applies a statistical techni:ue to such s#rface scores to deter!ine the

underlying basic factors whose operation theoretically accounts for the

7ariation in the large



C900ELL5& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0 3+

nu!ber of initial scores. ?nce the basic factors are identified, the theorist can

then de7elop ways of !easuring the factors in a !ore efficient !anner. 0hus,

factor analysis is a procedure in which 7ariables !ay be for!ulated to account for

the di7erse co!ple%ity of s#rface beha7iors #e.g., Far!an, +36$. Personality is

defined by Cattell as Gthat which per!its a prediction of what a person will do in

a gi7en situationG #Cattell, +32), p. $ and is considered to be a co!ple% and

differentiated structure of traits #G!ental structuresG inferred fro! obser7ed

beha7ior$. Cattell distinguishes between the concepts of s#rface traits Lcl#sters

of o7ert 7ariables that ha7e co!!on aspects, such as a syndro!e of beha7iors/

and so#rce traits /underlying 7ariables that deter!ine surface 7ariables, such as

physiological and te!pera!ental factorsB between en!ironental&old traits /

traits resulting fro! e%ternal en7iron!ental conditions/and constit#tional traits

/traits result ing fro! internalhereditary conditionsB and between dynaic traits

Lwhich set the person into action toward so!e goalLability traits L effecti!eness of the person in reaching a goal / and teperaent traits /

constitutional response aspects such as energy, speed, and e!otional reacti7ity.

Cattell identified + bipolar personality factors #i.e., source traits of the core

personality) that are deri7ed fro! testing protocols such as a person5s life record

and self-rating :uestionnaires; outgoing-reser7ed, !ore intelligent-less intelligent,

stable-e!otional, asserti7e-hu!ble, happy-go-lucky/sober, conscientious-

e%pedient, 7entureso!e-shy, tender-!inded/tough-!inded, suspicious-trusting,

i!aginati7e-practical, shrewd-forthright, apprehensi7e-placid, conser7ati7e-

e%peri!enting, group-dependent/self-sufficient, uncontrolled-controlled, and

rela%ed-tense #Cattell, +3B Cattell, Eber, 0atsuoka, +364B Cattell, +33)$.

'ased on the pre!ise that personality !ay be described in ter!s of ability,

te!pera!ent, and other types of traits, Cattell de7eloped a specification e#ation

that i!plies a !ultidi!ensional representation of the indi7idual within a gi7en psychological situation to yield a predicted response. &uch specif ication e:ua tions

ha7e practical applications in settings such as e!ploy!ent screening situations

and in acade!ic achie7e!ent conte%ts #Cattell, +326$. 0he i!portant dynaic

traits in attell's theory are GattitudesG #obser7able or !easurable e%pression of

one5s dyna!ic structure$B GergsG #biologically based dri7esB cf; HcDougall, +3)4$B

and Gsenti!entsG #en7iron!ental-!old, ac:uired attitude structures$. 9 dynaic

lattice is Cattell5s #pictorial$ representation of the interrelationships a!ong the

dynaic traits and for!s a pattern of GsubsidiationG where, generally, attitudes are

subsidiary to senti!ents, senti!ents are subsidiary to ergs, and ergs are the basic

dri7ing forces in the personality. ?ne of the !ost i!portant of Cattell5s

Gsenti!entsG is the G!asterG senti!ent of self&sentient, which is si!ilar to

1reud5s concepts of ego and s#perego and <. 9llport5s concept of ego and has the

crucial role of integrating the different aspects of the personality #Cattell, +3$.Cattell has proposed that a useful way of assessing the degree of conflict that a

person !ay ha7e in a specific situation is to state the specification e#ation that

e%presses the in7ol7e!ent of the person5s ergs and senti!ents in a gi7en course of

action. arious other concepts in at&



3 C900ELL5& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0

tell 's theory #e.g., sta tes , roles, sets) ha7e been described #Cattell, +3*a$

and ha7e been in7estigated, also, by the factor analytic techni:ue. Cattell

de7eloped an interesting !ethod for assessing the relati7e weight of genetic

and en7iron!ental factors in traits called #ltiple abstract !ariance analyses

(3A=A) #Cat-tell, +3)$ where initial results showed negati7e correlations

between heredity and en7 iron!ental factors. Cat tel l interpreted this result as

e7idence for a law of coercion to the biosocial ean, which refers to the

tendency for en7iron!ental influences to oppose the syste!atic e%pression of

genetic 7ariation #e.g., when parents re:uire that their two different children

beh a7e in the sa!e way, e7en though one child is outgo ing , and the other one

is bashful$. Cattell has e%tended his concepts of traits fro! his per sonality

theory to descriptions of group beha7ior #called synta lity; Cattell, +34$,

including the beha7ior of nations #Cattell, +33B Cattell <orsuch, +32$.

E7aluations and re7iews of Cattell5s work ha7e indicated a !i%ture of both

ad!iration and uneasiness #cf; &ells, +323B 'ecker, +3)B <ordon, +3$.

attell's personality theory !ay not be popular in the sense that &. 1reud5s,

C. Rogers5, F. &. &ulli7an5s, <. 9llport5s, or F. Hurray5s theories ha7e been

popular, but it has att racted an act i7e band of adherents, !any of who!

appreciate the widespread e!pirical grounding and econo!y of factor

analytic for!ulations that his theory contains #Fall Lind-@ey, +364$. &ee

also PER&?(9L"0 0FE?R"E&.

RE1ERE(CE&

&pear!an, C. #+3)$. G<eneral intelligenceG obecti7ely deter!ined and !easured. Aer. 4. sy., 0<, )+-3*.

HcDougall, =. #+3)4$. An introd#ction to social psychology. 'oston; Luce.

&pear!an, C. #+36$. Abilities of an. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

0hurstone, L. #+3*+$. Hultiple factor analysis. sy. e!., 97, )-6.Cattell, R., Luborsky, L. #+36$. Personality factors in response to hu!or. 4. Abn./oc.

sy., *, )-+.

Cattell, R. #+34$. Concepts and !ethods in the !easure!ent of group syntality. sy.

e!., <<, 4-*.

0hurstone, L. #+34$. Psychological i!plications of factor analysis. Aer. sy., 9,)-

)4.

Cattell, R. #+33$. 0he di!ensions of culture patterns by factori@ation of nationalchar-

acter. 4. Abn. /oc. sy., , *-3.

Cattell, R. #+32)$. ersonality A systeatic, theoretical, and fact#al st#dy. (ework;

Hc<raw-Fill.Cattell, R., &tice, <. #+32$. 1our for!ulae for selecting leaders on the basis of

per-sonality. $#. el., 6,3*-2)6.

Cattell, R. #+326$. ersonality and oti!ation /tr#ct#re and eas#reent. (ew



ork;

Farcourt 'race Jo7ano7ich.

&ells, &. #+323$. &tructured !easure!ent of personality and !oti7ation; 9 re7iew of

contributions of Ray!ond '. Cattell. 4. lin. sy., 0<, *-+.'ecker, =. #+3)$. 0he !atching of beha7ior rating and :uestionnaire personalityfactors.

sy. B#ll., <E, )+-+.



CF?H&M5& P&CF?L"(<>"&0"C 0FE?R 3*

Cattell, R. #+3)$. 0he !ultiple abstract 7ariance analysis e:uations and solutions; 1or

nature-nurture research on continuous 7ariables. sy. e!., E, *2*-*6. Cattell, R.#+3*a$. Personality, role, !ood, and situation-perception; 9 unifying theory

of !odulators. sy. e!., E2, +-+4.

Cattell, R. #+3*b$. 0heory of fluid and crystalli@ed intelligence; 9 critical e%peri!ent. 4.

:d. sy., <, +-.

Cattell, R. #+3$. ersonality and social psychology. &an Diego; Mnapp.

Cattell, R., <orsuch, R. #+32$. 0he definition and !easure!ent of national !orale and

!orality. 4. /oc. sy., E, 66-3.

Cattell, R. #+3$. +he scientific analysis of personality. Chicago; 9ldine.

Cattell, R., 0atro, D. #+3$. 0he personality factors, obecti7ely !easured, which

distinguish psychotics fro! nor!als. Beh. es. +her., , *3-2+.

<ordon, 4. #+3$. 9rchetypical, <er!anic, factorial, brilliant and contradictory. on&

tep. sy., 00, *-*4.

Far!an, F. #+36$. 3odern factor analysis. Chicago; >ni7ersity of Chicago Press.

Cattell, R. #+36+$. Abilities +heir str#ct#re, growth, and action. 'oston; Foughton

Hifflin.

Cattell, R., Eber, F., 0atsuoka, H. #+364$. $andboo% for the /ixteen ersonality

5actor H#estionnaire (05). Cha!paign, "L; "nstitute for Personality and 9bility

0esting.


Cattell, R. #+363-+34)$. ersonality and learning theory. (ew ork; &pringer.

Cattell, R. #+33)$. 9d7ances in Cattellian personality theory. "n L. Per7in #Ed.$, $and&

boo% of personality +heory and research. (ew ork; <uilford Press.

CELL ASSEMBLY THEORY. &ee PERCEP0"?( #"". C?HP9R90"E 9PPR9"&9L$,

0FE?R"E& ?1.

CHAINING, LAW OF. &ee &M"((ER5& DE&CR"P0"E 'EF9"?R 0FE?R.

CHANCE, LAWS OF. &ee PR?'9'"L"0 0FE?RL9=&.

CHARPENTIER'S LAW. &ee "&"?(&"<F0, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

CHEMICAL PROFILE THEORY. &ee F>(<ER, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

CHOICE, THEORY OF. &ee DEH'ER-E9RL 0FE?R ?1 CF?"CE

PRE1ERE(CE.

CHOMSKY'S PSYCHOLINGUISTIC THEORY. 0he 9!erican psychologist,

linguist, and philosopher (oa! 97ra! Cho!sky #+34/ $ for!ulated a theory

of psycholing#istics that 7iews language as genetically deter!ined where itde7elops in ways si!ilar to other bodily organs #Cho!sky, +326, +3, +32,

+3, +34, +36, +34)$. 9ccording to Cho!sky5s pro!inent theory, the hu!an



3 CF?H&M5& P&CF?L"(<>"&0"C 0FE?R

brain is preprogra!!ed by a cogniti7e !echanis! called the lang#age ac#i&

sition de!ice (A8), which allows indi7iduals to generate gra!!atically correct

sentences in a uni7ersal or culture-free !anner. Cho!sky belie7es that hu!ans

ha7e an innate capacity for understanding and e!itting language beha7iors. ?nly

hu!ans ha7e language ac:uisition capabilities #a Gspecies-specificG feature$, and

all hu!an languages share a co!!on logical structure #a Gspecies-unifor!G

feature$. Cho!sky5s conceptuali@ation of a transforational generati!e gra&

ar (+CC) is an i!portant ad7ance!ent o7er the older 7iewpoint of language

ac:uisition known as phase&str#ct#re graars #i.e., a for!al syste! for ana-

ly@ing the structure of a sentence by assigning labels, such as noun, noun phrase,

7erb, etc. to parts of the sentence$. 0ransfor!ational gra!!ar is grounded in the

hypothesi@ation of se7eral necessary co!ponents #Reber, +332$; seantics /the

rules for G!eaningGB deep str#ct#reLthe representation of underlying G!eaningGB

transforational de!iationLthe rules for !apping deep structures on a s#rface str#ct#re #i.e., consistency of the se:uence of ele!ents, such as phone!es,

syllables, words, phrases, and sentences that constitute a written or spoken

!essage$B and phonologicalLthe rules for pro7iding the appropriate sound

patterns, or phonetic sounds, of the language. 0hus, based on his intro duction of

the i!portant distinction between deep and s#rface structure #Cho!-sky, +326,

+32$ into psycholinguistics, Cho!sky5s +CC is a syste! that integrates both the

deep #logical$ and the surface #phonetic$ structure of lan guage. hos%y's theory

of lang#age ac#isition has been challenged !ost notably by proponents of

beha7ioris! #e g , &kinner, +326$ and the beha7ioristic 7iewpoint concerning

7erbal learning #cf; 'ower Filgard, +34+$. 9ccording to the beha7ioristic

approach, children learn to talk through the processes of classical and operant

conditioning. 0his approach helps to e%plain why one child !ay be !ore skilled

in the use of language than another child. Cho!sky5s cogniti7ist approach, on theother hand, helps to e%plain why children all o7er the world follow si!ilar or

in7ariant se:uences of language de7elop!ent #cf; Cho!sky, +323$. =hile both

the beha7iorist and the cogniti7ist 7iewpoints can account for so!e of the data of

language ac:uisition, a third perspecti7e e!phasi@es the GinteractionG between

infant and caregi7er, between one person and another, and between the person

and the en7iron!ent as the heart of language learning #'runer, +366B 'erger,

+33B cf; ne#roling#istic theory, La!en-della, +363B Faynie, +33B and seiotic

theory, Percy, +3+B Nuagliano, +33$. Cho!sky5s notions concerning

transfor!ational gra!!ar, although they re7o lutioni@ed the field of linguistics,

ha7e not pro7ided all the answers to the !any proble!s of language ac:uisition.

Psychologists, while !aintaining !any of Cho!sky5s ideas, ha7e !o7ed on to

new concerns #Fouston, +34+$. &ee also &M"((ER5& DE&CR"P0"E

'EF9"?R?PER9(0 C?(D"0"?("(< 0FE?RB =F?R1/&9P"RFP?0FE&"&0FE?R.



CLEER F9(& E11EC0PFE(?HE(?( 32

RE1ERE(CE&

Cho!sky, (. #+326$. /yntactic str#ct#res. 0he Fague; Houton.

&kinner, '. 1. #+326$. =erbal beha!ior. (ew ork; 9ppleton-Century-Crofts. Cho!sky, (.

#+323$. 9 re7iew of &kinner5s Gerbal 'eha7ior,G ang#age, 9<, -24. Percy, =.

#+3+$. 0he sy!bolic structure of interpersonal processes. sychiatry, *, *32.

ygotsky, L. #+3$. +ho#ght and lang#age. Ca!bridge; H.".0. Press.

Cho!sky, (. #+3$. #rrent iss#es in ling#istic theory. 0he Fague; Houton. Cho!sky,

(. #+32$. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Ca!bridge; H.".0. Press. Cho!sky, (. #+3$.

+opics in the theory of generati!e graar. 0he Fague; Houton. &!ith, 1., Hiller, <.

#Eds.$ #+3$. +he genesis of lang#age A psycholing#istic ap&

proach. Ca!bridge; H.".0. Press.

Cho!sky, (. #+34$. ang#age and the ind. (ew ork; Farcourt, 'race, =orld.

Hc(eill, D. #+36)$. +he ac#isition of lang#age +he st#dy of de!elopental

psycholin&g#istics. (ew ork; Farper Row.

Cho!sky, (. #+36$. /t#dies on seantics in generati!e graar. 0he Fague; Houton.Dale, P. #+36$. ang#age de!elopent /tr#ct#re and f#nction. (ew ork; Folt.

'runer, J. #+366$. Early social interaction and language ac:uisition. "n F. &chaffer

#Ed.$, /t#dies in otherLinfant interaction. London; 9cade!ic Press.

Deilliers, J., Deilliers, P. #+364$. ang#age ac#isition. Ca!bridge; Far7ard >ni-

7ersity Press.

La!endella, J. #+363$. (eurolinguistics. Ann. e!. Anthro., 7, *6*-*3+.

Cho!sky, (. #+34)$. #les and representations. (ew ork; Colu!bia >ni7ersity Press.

'ower, <., Filgard, E. #+34+$. +heories of learning. Englewood Cliffs, (J; Prentice-

Fall.


'erger, M. #+33$. Language de7elop!ent. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley.

Faynie, (. #+33$. (eurolinguistics. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

Nuagliano, 9. #+33$. &igns and sy!bols. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;=iley.

&iguan, H. #+33$. Psycholinguistics. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.


CL9&&"C9L C?(D"0"?("(<, L9=& ?1. &ee P9L?"9( C?(D"0"?("(<

PR"(C"PLE&L9=&0FE?R"E&.

CL9&&"C9L &0RE(<0F 0FE?R. &ee DEC"&"?(-H9M"(< 0FE?R"E&.

CL9&&"C9L 0FE?R ?1 &E(&?R D"&CR"H"(90"?(. &ee (E>R9L N>9(0>H

0FE?R.

CLEER F9(& E11EC0PFE(?HE(?(. Fans was the na!e of a GtalentedG horse,a!ong the world-fa!ous Elberfeld horses of <er!any, that was trained by =ilhel! 7on

?sten of 'erlin #'lock, +3)B Pfungst, +3++B =arren,



3 CL?&>RE, PR"(C"PLE ?1

+3*B Rosenthal, +32$. Fans5 talent was his ability to perfor! so!e ratherre!arkable !ental tasks such as addition, subtraction, di7ision, !ultiplication,

obtaining s:uare roots, and spelling 7arious words. 9fter !any people were

thoroughly !ystified by Fans5 abilities, the <er!an psychologist ?skar Pfungst

tested Fans and ulti!ately disco7ered that the horse was actually perfor!ing and

sol7ing his !athe!atical and !ental proble!s by responding to subtle and

totally unintentional, 7ery tiny 7isual cues that were pro7ided by 7on ?sten

#such as the :uestioner5s bending forward slightly after presenting the horse with

a proble! and bending backward and upward slightly when the correct tap of the

hoof was reached$. 0hat is, the horse5s !ethod was to Gcount upG to the answer of

a proble! by sta!ping his hoof the re:uired nu!ber of ti!es. Fans GknewG

when to stop sta!ping by taking his cues fro! the hu!ans around hi! who

unconsciously responded with changes in breathing patterns and bodily

positions. 0hus, Fans was si!ply responding to 7isual cues that were, to hi!, theGstartG and GstopG signals for hoof tapping. 0he ter! le!er $ans effectK

phenoenon has co!e to stand for co!!unication that is trans!itted through

slight, unintentional, non7erbal cues. Prior to Pfungst5s #+3++$ work, such cues

had not been reported in the scientificresearch literature, yet today they are

recogni@ed as unconscious signals in posture, gesture, and 7ocal tone e!itted by

indi7iduals e7en as they speak their language #9!bady Rosenthal, +33,

+33*B &cheflen, +3$. 0he le!er $ans effect !ay be an i!portant concern in

psychological e%peri!ents where the e%peri!enter5s e%pectations, hopes, habits ,

and personal characteristics can influence, unwittingly, the outco!e of a research

in7estigation #Rosenthal, +36$. &uch conditions of unintentional cuing are also

called experienter effects, experienter bias, osenthal effect, or 8er Jl#ge

$ans #Reber, +332$. &ee also EKPER"HE(0ER E11EC0&.

RE1ERE(CE&

'lock, P. #+3)$. Der Mluge Fans. Berliner +ageblatt, 9ugust +2, p. +.

Pfungst, ). #+3++$. +he horse of 3r. !on sten. C. Rahn #0rans.$. (ew ork; Folt.

=arren, F. #Ed.$ #+3*$. 8ictionary of psychology Ca!bridge, H9; Foughton

Hifflin. &cheflen, 9. #+3$. 0he significance of posture in co!!unication

syste!s. sychiatry, *E, *+-**+.

Rosenthal, R. #Ed.$ #+32$. le!er $ans +he horse of 3r. !on sten. (ew ork;


Rosenthal, R. #+36$. :xperienter effects in beha!ioral research. (ew ork;9ppleton-Century-Crofts.

9!bady, (., Rosenthal, R. #+33$. 0hin slices of e%pressi7e beha7ior as predictors

of interpersonal conse:uences; 9 !eta-analysis. sy. B#ll., 000, 2-6.

9!bady, (., Rosenthal, R. #+33*$. Falf a !inute; Predicting teacher e7aluations

fro! thin slices of non7erbal beha7ior and physical attracti7eness. 4. ers./oc. sy., , *+-+.


CL?&>RE, PR"(C"PLE ?1. &ee <E&09L0 0FE?RL9=&.



C?D"(< 0FE?R"E& 36

C?CM09"L-P9R0 PFE(?HE(?(. &ee 900E(0"?(, L9=&PR"(-

C"PLE&0FE?R"E& ?1.

C?D"(< 0FE?R"E&. "n general, a code is a syste! of sy!bols or signals

representing infor!ation. E%a!ples of codes are se!aphore signals, !agnetic

fields on a recording tape, spoken English, written <er!an, and the electrical

@eroes and ones in a co!puter5s !e!ory chip. 9s long as one knows the rules of

a code, a !essage can be con7erted fro! one !ediu! to another without losing

any infor!ation. 9lthough the precise rules that sensory syste!s use to trans!it

infor!ation to the brain are not known, it is known that they take two for!s

#Carlson, +33)$; anatoical coding #acti7ity of particular neurons$ and

teporal coding #ti!e or rate of neuron firing$. 0he ter! coding is used in

!any content areas of psychology when e%a!ining and describing 7arious

aspects of sti!uli and responses. "n sensation, the sensory organs collecten7iron!ental physical energies as input and prepare the sti!uli for the ne%t

process, called transd#ction of the sti!ulus energy into neural i!pulse for!,

after which coding occurs at higher neural centers. "n this way, sti!ulus

infor!ation is translated or coded into the different aspects of sensation that are

e%periences. &o!e of the coded infor!ation concerns the factors of sti!ulus

intensity #e.g., a loud 7ersus a :uiet sound$ and sti!ulus :uality #e.g., a high

pitch 7ersus a low pitch sound$. Coding occurs in the processing of certain

kinds of 7isual infor!ation, but indi7iduals also ha7e a 7erbal GchannelG for

processing infor!ation contained in words and ideas. Pai7io #+34, +33+$ refers

to the process of coding infor!ation by both 7isual and 7erbal !eans as a d#al&

coding syste or theory. Coding is used also in the area of cogniti7e psychology

to describe the !echanis!s of !e!ory where concepts such as Gencoding,G

Grecoding,G Gdecoding,G Gchunks,G Gsubecti7e units,G Gfunctional sti!uli,G andGcoding responsesG are described, and where coding processes and responses

need not be conscious or reportable #e.g., Helton Hartin, +36$. "n one case,

the encoding specificity hypothesis-principle refers to the generali@ation that the

initial encoding #i.e., the process of choosing the infor!ation to be retained and

transfor!ing that infor!ation into a for! that can be sa7ed$ of learned !aterial

will reflect the influence of the conte%t in which the learning took place

#0ul7ing 0ho!son, +36*B 'ower Filgard, +34+B Reber, +332$. "n ter!s of

ter!inological analysis and e%peri!ental !ethodology, the pheno!enon of

coding is a construct that is defined by con!erging operations #<arner, Fake,

Eriksen, +32$ where it is 7iewed as a syste! for representing thoughts of any

type, including sche!ata, propositions, concepts, percepts, ideas, i!ages,

seg!ents, features, and GknowingG responses. 0hus, there are !any attributes to

sti!uli, and not all of the! are in7ol7ed in e7ery !e!ory, action, or thought, but cortical regions pro7ide the neural coding processes necessary to register

one5s e%periences #9nderson, +33$. &ee also (E>R?((E>R9L(ERE

0FE?RB "(-1?RH90"?("(1?RH90"?(-PR?CE&&"(< 0FE?RB

HEH?R, 0FE?R"E& ?1.



34 C?<("0"E 9L<E'R9 0FE?R

RE1ERE(CE&

<arner, =., Fake, F., Eriksen, C. #+32$. ?perationis! and the concept of perception. sy.

e!., 9, +3-+23.

&ternberg, &. #+3$. Figh speed scanning in hu!an !e!ory. /cience, 0<9, 2-2. =ickens,

D. #+36)$. Encoding categories of words; 9n e!pirical approach to !eaning. sy. e!.,

66,+-+2.

Helton, 9., Hartin, E. #Eds.$ #+36$. oding processes in h#an eory. =ashington, DC;

=inston.

0ul7ing, E., 0ho!son, D. #+36*$. Encoding specificity and retrie7al processes in episodic

!e!ory. sy. e!., 72, *2-*6*.

>ttal, =. #+36*$. +he psychology of sensory coding. (ew ork; Farper Row. 9nderson, J.,

'ower, <. #+36$. 9 propositional theory of recognition !e!ory. 3e. @ og., *, )-

+.

Dealois, R., Dealois, M. #+362$. (eural coding of color. "n E. Carterette H.

1ried!an #Eds.$, $andboo% of perception. ol. 2. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.9nderson, (. #+34+$. 5o#ndations of inforation integration theory. (ew ork; 9ca-

de!ic Press.

'ower, <., Filgard, E. #+34+$. +heories of learning. Englewood Cliffs, (J; Prentice-Fall.

Pai7io, 9. #+34$. 0he e!pirical case for dual coding. "n J. uille #Ed.$, 6agery, cognition,

and eory. Fillsdale, (J; Erlbau!.

Carlson, (. #+33)$. sychology +he science of beha!ior. 'oston; 9llyn 'acon. Pai7io, 9.

#+33+$. Dual coding theory; Retrospect and current status. an. 4. sy., <, 22-46.

9nderson, (. #+33$. Coding. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley. Reber, 9.

#+332$. +he eng#in dictionary of psychology. (ew ork; Penguin 'ooks. <oldstein, E.

#+33$. /ensation and perception. Pacific <ro7e, C9; 'rooksCole.

C?<("0"E 9L<E'R9 0FE?R. &ee "HPRE&&"?( 1?RH90"?(, 0FE?R"E&

?1.

C?<("0"E 9PPR9"&9L 0FE?R. &ee C?<("0"E 0FE?R"E& ?1

EH?0"?(.

C?<("0"E &0LE H?DEL&. Magan, Hoss, and &igel #+3*$ define the construct

of cogniti!e learning style as the relati7ely stable indi7idual preferences for

perceptual and conceptual organi@ation and categori@ation of the e%ternal

en7iron!ent #cf; the early laws-principles of abstraction; Hoore, +3+)B 0itchener,

+3+2B 1ree!an, +3*3$. 0he ter! cogniti!e style has been introduced and reintroduced

into the psychological literature o7er a period of ti!e e%tending back to the <er!an

psychologists at the turn of the century #Faynie, +33$. 'ecause cogniti!e style deals

with :ualitati7e, rather than :uantitati7e, differences and di!ensions and is

concerned with beha7ior and preference, it is 7alue-free and resists !oral udg!ents.9 nu!ber of cogniti!e style odels #or learning styles) on a di!ensionalcontinuu!

basis ha7e been for!ulated and



C?<("0"E &0LE H?DEL& 33

include the following factors #Roeckelein, +34)B Faynie, +33$; field independ-ence 7ersus field dependenceB scanning 7ersus focusingB broad 7ersus narrow

categori@ingB le7eling 7ersus sharpeningB constricted 7ersus fle%ible controlB

tolerance 7ersus intolerance for incongruityB i!pulsi7e 7ersus reflecti7e

respondingB analytic 7ersus nonanalytic conceptuali@ing stylesB risk-taking

7ersus cautiousB percepti7e 7ersus recepti7eB syste!atic 7ersus intuiti7eB and

cogniti7e co!ple%ity 7ersus si!plicity. "n general, a person5s cogniti!e style

!ay be deter!ined by the way she or he assesses her or his surroundings, seeks

out !eanings, and beco!es infor!ed. "n particular, a battery of tests concerning

preferences for different ways of learning !ay be gi7en to indi7iduals, and

results can be interpreted to produce a G!apG of the !any ways each person

seeks !eaning, such as preferences for theoretical sy!bolic input, :ualitati7e

code input, !odalities of inference, and cultural deter!inants 0hus, a cogniti!e

ap describes each person5s cogniti!e style by relating score results on abouttwo do@en ele!ents where the resultant !ap indicates a preferred or opti!al

learning en7iron!ent. ogniti!e style apping is a diagnostic testing progra!

useful for educational planning and !ay be used to identify and !a%i!i@e an

indi7idual5s strengths in a learning setting #Fill, +36*$. ogniti!e style is rep-

resented in obser7able beha7iors where inconsistencies !ay occur in the choice

of particular beha7iors to be e%a!ined arious researchers ha7e de7eloped

!easuring instru!ents to elicit specific beha7iors for analy@ing a person5s cog&

niti!e style, but it has been found that so!e !easures of cogniti!e style do not

correlate highly with other !easures #Coop &igel, +36+$. 0he philosophy

behind cogniti!e style odels and cogniti!e style apping is that indi7iduals

learn in di7erse and uni:ue ways, and no single educational !ethod can ser7e

e7eryone in an e:ual or opti!al fashion #1erguson, +34)$. &ee also MELL5&

PER&?(9L C?(&0R>C0 0FE?RB P"9<E05& 0FE?R ?1 DEEL?P-HE(09L &09<E&.

RE1ERE(CE&

Hoore, 0. #+3+)$. 0he process of abstraction. ni!. alif. #b. sy., +, 6*-

+36. 0itchener, E. #+3+2$. A beginner's psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

1ree!an, E. #+3*3$. rinciples of general psychology. (ew ork; Folt.

'ieri, J. #+322$. Cogniti7e co!ple%ity-si!plicity and predicti7e beha7iors. 4. Abn.

/oc. sy., <0, *-4.

Magan, J., Hoss, F., &igel, ". #+3*$. 0he psychological significance of styles of

conceptuali@ation. "n 4. =right 4. Magan #Eds.$, Basic cogniti!e processes

in children. 3onograph of the /ociety for esearch in hild 8e!elopent. (o.

4, 6*-++.

'runer, 4. #+3$. 0he course of cogniti7e thought. Aer. sy., 01, +-+2.

Crockett, =. #+32$. Cogniti7e co!ple%ity and i!pression for!ation. "n '. Haher

#Ed.$, rogress in experiental personality research. ol. . (ew ork;

9cade!ic Press.

Hiller, 9. #+33$. 9!ount of infor!ation and sti!ulus 7alence as deter!inants of

cogniti7e co!ple%ity. 4. ers., 9E, ++-+26.



C?<("0"E 0FE?R"E& ?1 EH?0"?(& +)+

the +3)s and the +32)s, the topic of e!otion see!s to ha7e been abandoned in

psychology, e7en as a chapter heading. 'y the +32)s and +3)s, howe7er,

theorists #e.g., Melly, +322B Polanyi, +3$ began to return to the intuiti7e idea

that a situation !ust be interpreted in so!e way before it can instigate an e!o -

tion. 9rnold #+32$ introduced the concept of appraisal into acade!ic psychology

where e!otion was defined as a felt action tendency toward things that are

intuiti7ely appraised as good for oneself or away fro! things that are appraised as

bad, and where a pattern of physiological changes is organi@ed around particular

types of approach or withdrawal. 9rnold #+3)$ suggested that e!otions depend

not only on intuiti7e appraisals of things as Ggood or bad for !eG but also on the

appraisal of potential actions as suitable or unsuitable. "t is interesting to note how

so!e of the early writers in psychology anticipated the !odern notion of

cogniti!e theory in e!otions. 1or instance, Pillsbury #+3+4, p. 6$ states that Gall

e!otions ha7e an instincti7e basisB !o7e!ents in e!otional e%pression are theoutco!e of instinct. &o true is this, that the e!otion is defined as the conscio#s

side of instinctG #italics added$. "n a later edition of the sa!e book, Pillsbury

#+3, p. *)2$ ascribes this idea of e!otion as the conscio#s side of instinct to

both John Dewey and =illia! HcDougall . 9s used today, the cogniti!e theory of

eotions is regarded often as a single theory #e.g., Le7enthal 0o!arken, +34B

1rida, +344B La@arus, +33+$, e7en though a nu!ber of different in7estigators o7er

!any years ha7e contributed 7arious aspects and refine!ents to the theory. 1or

e%a!ple, 9rnold #+3)$, Ellis #+3$, and &chachter and &inger #+3$ ha7e been

pro!inent in the de7elop!ent of the cogniti!e theory of eotions and collecti7ely

propose, in general, that there are two steps in the process of cognit i7e

interpretation of an e!otional episode;

#+$ the interpretation and appraisal of sti!uli fro! the e%ternal en7iron!ent

and#$ the interpretation and appraisal of sti!uli fro! the internal autono!ic

arousal syste!. &ee also 9'C 0FE?RB 9C0"90"?(9R?>&9L

0FE?RB 9DLER5& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0B 9R(?LD5&

0FE?R ?1 EH?0"?(&B EH?0"?(&, 0FE?R"E&L9=& ?1B

1RE>D5& 0FE?R ?1 PER&?(9L"0B J9HE&/L9(<EL9(<E/

J9HE& 0FE?R ?1 EH?0"?(&B J>(<5& 0FE?R ?1

PER&?(9L"0B MELL5& PER&?(9L C?(&0R>C0 0FE?RB

L9A9R>&5 0FE?R ?1 EH?0"?(&B &CF9CF0ER-&"(<ER5&

0FE?R ?1 EH?0"?(&B A9J?(C5& 9R?>&9L 9(D C?(1L>E(CE

0FE?R"E&.

RE1ERE(CE&

Descartes, R. #+2)$. es passions de l'ae. Paris; Loyson.

Darwin, C. #+46$. +he expression of the eotions in an and anials. Chicago;

>ni-7ersity of Chicago Press.

Ja!es, =. #+43)$. rinciples of psychology. (ew ork; Folt.



Pillsbury, =. #+3+4$. +he essentials of psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

=atson, J. #+3+3$. sychology fro the standpoint of a beha!iorist. Philadelphia;Lip-

pincott.



+) C?<("0"E 0FER9P, 0FE?R"E& ?1

Jung, C. #+3+$. sychological types. Princeton, (J; Princeton >ni7ersity Press.

Pillsbury, =. #+3$. +he essentials of psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

9dler, 9. #+36$. ractice and theory of indi!id#al psychology. (ew ork; Fu!anit ies

Press.

1reud, &. #+3**$. (ew introductory lectures on psychoanalysis. "n +he standard edition of

the coplete psychological wor%s of /ig#nd 5re#d. ol. . London; Fogarth

Press.

9ristotle. #+3+$. De ani!a #?n the soul$. "n R. HcMeon #Ed.$, +he basic wor%s of Aristotle.

(ew ork; Rando! Fouse.

0ho!as 9:uinas. #+32+$. oentary of /t. +hoas A#inas. (ew Fa7en, C0; ale

>ni7ersity Press.

9rnold, H. #+32$. 1eelings and e!otions as dyna!ic factors in personality integration.

"n H. 9rnold J. <asson #Eds.$, +he h#an person. (ew ork; Ronald Press. Melly,

<. #+322$. +he psychology of personal constr#cts. (ew ork; (orton. 9rnold, H. #+3)$.

:otion and personality. (ew ork; Colu!bia >ni7ersity Press. Ellis, 9. #+3$. eason and

eotion in psychotherapy. (ew ork; Lyle &tuart. &chachter, &., &inger, J. #+3$.

Cogniti7e, social, and physiological deter!inants of

e!otional state. sy. e!., 1, *63-*33.

Polanyi, H. #+3$. ersonal %nowledge. (ew ork; Farper Row.

La@arus, R. #+34$. ?n the pri!acy of cognition. Aer. sy., 91, ++6-+*.

Le7enthal, F., 0o!arken, 9. #+34$. E!otion; 0oday5s proble!. Ann. e!. sy, 9E, 22-+).

1rida, (. #+344$. 0he laws of e!otion. Aer. sy., 9, *3-*26.

La@arus, R. #+33+$. :otion and adaptation. (ew ork; ?%ford >ni7ersity Press. 9rnold, H.

#+33$. Cogniti7e theories of e!otion. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

C?<("0"E 0FER9P, 0FE?R"E& ?1. &ee 'EF9"?R 0FER9P

C?<("0"E 0FER9P, 0FE?R"E& ?1.

C?L?R H"K"(<, PR"(C"PLE& ?1. &ee C?L?R H"K0>RE, L9=&0FE-?R ?1.

C?L?R H"K0>RE, L9=&0FE?R ?1. additi7e color !i%ture, principles

of. subtracti7e color !i%ture, principles of. color !i%ing, principles of. 0he

colors of obects in the en7iron!ent are deter!ined by pig!ents that are

che!icals on the obects5 surface that absorb so!e wa7elengths of light and,

conse:uently, pre7ent those wa7elengths of light fro! being reflected. 9lso, dif-

ferent pig!ents per!it different wa7elengths to be reflected. 1or e%a!ple, a pig-

!ent that absorbs short and !ediu! wa7elengths of light appears to be GredG

because only long #GredG$ wa7elengths are reflectedB a pig!ent that per!its only

short wa7elengths to be reflected appears to be GblueGB and a pig!ent that

per!its only !ediu! wa7elengths to be reflected appears to be GyellowG or

Ggreen.G =hen all wa7elengths are reflected e:ually by a pig!ent, one gets thee%perience of Gwhite,G Ggray,G or Gblack,G depending on whether the relati7e

a!ount of light reflected is high #GwhiteG$, !ediu! #GgrayG$, or low



C?L?R H"K0>RE, L9=&0FE?R ?1 +)*

#GblackG$. 0he ter! additi!e color ixing refers to the !i%ture of colored lights,

while the ter! s#btracti!e color ixing refers to the !i%ture of pigents #such as

paints$. /#btracti!e color ixing occurs when pig!ents create the perception of

color by GsubtractingG #i.e., absorbing$ so!e of the light wa7es that would

otherwise be reflected to the eye. 1or instance, if a blue pig!ent #which absorbs

long wa7elengths of light$ is !i%ed with a yellow pig!ent #which absorbs short

wa7elengths of light$, only the !ediu!-length wa7es will be reflected, and the

resultant !i%ture will be percei7ed as Ggreen.G 9!ateur painters, working with

pig!ents, e%perience s#btracti!e color ixing when they !i% all of the paints on

the palette together, with the result of a !uddy GbrownG or GblackG color. "n this

case, the painter Gsubtracts outG all of the wa7elengths by !i%ing all of the

pig!ents together. Additi!e color ixing, on the other hand, describes the results

of !i%ing colored lights together. 1or e%a!ple, shining a blue light together with

red and green-yellow lights on the sa!e spot on a white screen reflects the !i%edlights back and gi7es the perception of a GwhiteG light. 0wo general laws of ad&

diti!e color ixing, known to scientists as early as the eighteenth century #e.g.,

(ewton, +6)$, are called the three&priaries law and the law of copleentar&

ity. 0he three priaries law states that three different wa7elengths of light #the

Gpri!ariesG$ can be used to !atch any color that the eye can see, if they are !i%ed

in the proper proportions. 0he Gpri!ariesG can be any three wa7elengths as long

as each one is taken fro! the three types of wa7elengths; one fro! the long-wa7e

end #GredG$ of the spectru!, one fro! the !ediu!-wa7e #Ggreen,G Ggreen-

yellowG$ end, and one fro! the short-wa7e #Gblue,G G7ioletG$ end of the 7isible

spectru!. 0he law of copleentarity states that pairs #Gco!ple!entsG$ of

wa7elengths of light can be reflected so that, when they are added together, they

gi7e the 7isual sensation of a GwhiteG light. 9n i!portant subfield in the area of

color 7ision and color !i%ture is called colorietry, which is the science that ai!sat specifying and reproducing colors as a result of !easure!ent. Colori!eters

!ay be of three types; #+$ color filter sa!ples for e!pirical co!parisonB #$

!onochro!atic colori!eters that !atch colors with a !i%ture of !onochro!atic

and white lightsB and #*$ trichro!atic colori!eters in which a !atch is effected by

a !i%ture of three colors #"llingworth, +33+$. &ee also 9'-(E5& L9=B C?L?R

"&"?(, 0FE?R"E&L9=& ?1B <R9&&H9((5& L9=&B (E=0?(5&

L9=PR"(C"PLE& ?1 C?L?R H"K0>REB "&"?( &"<F0,

0FE?R"E&L9=& ?1.

RE1ERE(CE&

(ewton, ". #+6)$. ptic%s. London; &!ith.

<rass!ann, F. #+42*$. Aur 0heorie der 1arben!ischung. ogg. Ann. hysi%., 71, 3.

Judd, C. #+3)6$. sychology Ceneral introd#ction. (ew ork; &cribners.Mulpe, ). #+3)3$. #tlines of psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

0itchener, E. #+34$. A textboo% of psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

?&9 Co!!ittee on Colori!etry. #+3*$. 0he concept of color. 4. pt. /oc. Aer.,

99,



2.



+) C?L?R "&"?(, 0FE?R"E&L9=& ?1

?&9 Co!!ittee on Colori!etry. #+3$. 0he psychophysics of color. 4. pt. /oc.

Aer., 9, , 2-22.Judd, D. #+32+$. 'asic correlates of the 7isual sti!ulus. "n &. &. &te7ens #Ed.$,


Hueller, C. #+32$. /ensory psychology. Englewood Cliffs, (J; Prentice-Fall.

=oodworth, R., &chlosberg, F. #+32$. :xperiental psychology. (ew ork;


Carlson, (. #+33)$. sychology +he science of beha!ior. 'oston; 9llyn 'acon.

"llingworth, . #Ed.$ #+33+$. +he eng#in dictionary of physics. (ew ork;

Penguin 'ooks.

COLOR VISION, THEORIES/LAWS OF. 0he concept of color is a psycho-

logical #subecti7e$ e%perience or sensation that is associated with the presence of

a physical light source and depends on three aspects of the actual physical energy;intensity #GbrightnessG$, wa7elength #GhueG$, and purity #GsaturationG$. Host

hu!ans see the shorter 7isible wa7elengths #GhuesG$ of the electro!agnetic

radiation spectru! as GbluishG #about 4) nano!eters, or n); the !ediu!

wa7elengths as GgreenishG #about 2+) n) and GyellowishG #about 24) n); and

the longer wa7elengths as GreddishG #about 6)) n). 0he ter! chroatic refers to

sti!uli that ha7e all three of these aspects #and ha7e color), while the ter!

achroatic refers to sti!uli that ha7e only the GbrightnessG aspect #and are

Gwhite-gray-blackG$. 0ypically, the better theories of color !ision can account for

se7eral pheno!ena; #+$ the priary colors #Guni:ue huesG$ of Gblue,G Ggreen,G

Gyellow,G and GredGB #$ the copleentary colors #i.e., any of the colors that are

opposite to each other on the color wheel and when additi7ely !i%ed produce an

achro!atic gray$ and their influence in afteri!ages and contrast effectsB #*$ the

laws of color ixt#re; and #$ the different sy!pto!s of 7arious types of colorblindness #e.g., protanopes, deuteranopes, tritan-opesB cf; $orner's law, which is

the genetic principle that the !ost co!!on for! of color blindness, red-green, is

trans!itted fro! !ale to !ale through unaffected fe!alesB Reber, +332B cf;

Jonig's theory, +436B Calkins, +3)2$. =heeler #+33$ described a nu!ber of

!inor theories of color !ision, such as those by enable, &chan@, and 1orbes.

9nother early writer #Reid, +3*4$ listed the laws #cf; theories) of color !ision as

adapting, color !i%ture, contrast, and induction. Jirschann's law of contrast

#+43+$ is the principle that the contrast is proportional to the logarith! of the

saturation of the contrast-inducing color #<raha! 'rown, +32$. Judd #+32+$

su!!ari@ed a few of the better-known 7isual theories, citing their funda!ental

colors and their chief li!itations; Fo#ngL$elholtG three coponents theory

#red, green, 7iolet$ /fails to e%plain dichro!atic 7ision and color perceptions of

protanopes #red-color deficiency$ and deuteranopes #green-color deficiency$Bdoinator&od#lator theory #Glate-MonigG theoryB red, green, 7iolet$ /fails to

e%plain color perceptions of protan-opes and deuteranopesB addL5ran%lin three

coponents theory #Gearly MonigG theoryB red, green, blue$/i!plies that the blue

function has a negati7e lu!i-



C?L?R "&"?(, 0FE?R"E&L9=& ?1 +)2

Mirsch!ann, 9. #+43+$. >ber die :uantitati7en erhaltnisse des si!ultanen

Felligkeits-und 1arben-Contrastes. hil. /t#d., , +6-3+.

nosity for nor!als and deuteranopes and a positi7e lu!inosity for protanopesB

$ering opponent colors theory #red-green, yellow-blue, white-black$ / fails to

gi7e an account of protanopia and tritanopia #blue-light deficiency$B !on Jries&

/chrodinger Gone theory #red, green blueB and green-red, blue-yellow, white-

black$ /i!plies that the blue function has a negati7e lu!inosity for nor!als and

deuteranopes and a positi7e lu!inosity for protanopes, and fails to account for

tritanopiaB Adas Gone theory #red, green, 7ioletB red, green, blueB red-green,

blue-yellow, white-black$ / e%planations of protanopia and tritanopia are based

on other Ge%traG or GsubsidiaryG assu!ptionsB 3#ller Gone theory #red, green,

7ioletB red-green, yellow-blue, white-black$/i!plausible e%planation of protan-

opic lu!inosity. "t is a well-accepted fact that the cones and rods of the retina are

the i!!ediate organs of 7ision and that they contain substances, or !i%tures of

substances, that absorb radiant energy falling on these receptors. "n turn, the

receptors respond by initiating ner7e i!pulses that go to the fibers of the optic

ner7e. "t is also well established that the response of the rods is due to a pho-

toche!ical substance called rhodopsin #Fecht =illia!s, +3$, but the sub-

stances gi7ing the cones their precise spectral characteristics are still being

researched, as well as the co!binations of cone responses that produce i!pulses

in the optic ner7e. Recent theories of the underlying !echanis!s !ediating color

7ision feature a !erger of two accounts that were initially considered to be in

conflict #1obes, +33$. ?ne approach, the trichroatic theory of 0ho!as oung

and Fer!ann 7on Fel!holt@, stressed the relati7e acti7ity of cones that are

!a%i!ally sensiti7e to red, blue, or green. 0he other approach, the opponent&

process theory of Ewald Fering, Leo Fur7ich, and Dorothea Ja!eson, consid-

ered red-green as well as blue-yellow to be antagonistic processes. 0hese twoaccounts ha7e been reconciled now so that the trichroatic theory describes

acti7ity at the GlowerG receptor le7el, and the opponent&process theory describes

integration e7ents at the GhigherG le7el of neural organi@ation. 9 current theory

of color !ision, the retinex theory, for!ulated by the 9!erican sensory psy-

chologist Edwin Ferbert Land #+3)3/ $, !aintains the e%istence of three sep-

arate 7isual syste!s #Gretine%esG$ where one is responsi7e pri!arily to long-

wa7elength light, one to !oderate-wa7elength light, and the third to short-

wa7elength light. Each syste! is represented as an analog to a black-and-white

picture taken through a part icular filter with each one producing !a%i!u!

acti7ity in response to red, green, and blue light for the long-, !oderate-, and

short-wa7elength retine%es respecti7ely #Land, +323B <raha! 'rown, +32B

Reber, +332$. &ee also C?L?R H"K0>RE, L9=&0FE?R ?1B FECF05&

C?L?R "&"?( 0FE?RB FER"(</F>R"CF-J9HE&?( C?L?R " -&"?( 0FE?RB L9DD-1R9(ML"(1R9(ML"( C?L?R "&"?( 0FE?RB

?>(</FELHF?L0A C?L?R "&"?( 0FE?R.



RE1ERE(CE&



+) C?HH>("C90"?( 0FE?R

Monig, 9. #+436$. >ber 'laublindheit. /itG#ngsberichte A%adeie der Wissenschaffen,

Berlin.

Calkins, H. #+3)2$. An introd#ction to psychology. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

Fecht, &., =illia!s, R. #+3$. 0he 7isibility of !onochro!atic radiation and the

absorption spectru! of 7isual purple. 4. Cen. hysio., <, +.

=heeler, R. #+33$. +he science of psychology An introd#ctory st#dy. (ew ork; Crow-

ell.

Reid, 9. #+3*4$. :leents of psychology. (ew ork; Prentice-Fall.

Judd, D. #+32+$. 'asic correlates of the 7isual syste!. "n &. &. &te7ens #Ed.$, $andb%.

:xp. sy. (ew ork; =iley.

Dartnall, F. #+326$. +he !is#al pigents. (ew ork; =iley.

Land, E. #+323$. Color 7ision and the natural i!age. roc. >at. Acad. /ci., <, ++2-+3B

*-.

Rushton, =. #+3$. =is#al pigents in an. London; Li7erpool >ni7ersity Press.

Hac(ichol, E. #+3$. Retinal !echanis!s of color 7ision. =is. es., , ++3-+**. <raha!,

C. #+32$. Color; Data and theories. "n C. <raha! #Ed.$, =ision and !is#al

perception. (ew ork; =iley.

<raha!, C., 'rown, J. #+32$. Color contrast and color appearances; 'rightness con-

stancy and color constancy. "n C. <raha! #Ed.$, =ision and !is#al perception. (ew

ork; =iley.

=ys@ecki, <., &tiles, =. #+36$. olor science oncepts and ethods, #antitati!e

data and for#las. (ew ork; =iley.

Hichael, C. #+33$. Retinal processing of 7isual i!ages. /ci. Aer., **2, +)-++.

&y!posiu! on (ew De7elop!ents in the &tudy of Color ision #+33$. roc. >at.

Acad. /ci., <, 43-++2.

'oynton, R. #+36+$. Color 7ision. "n J. Mling L. Riggs #Eds.$, Woodworth and /chlos&

berg's experiental psychology. (ew ork; Folt, Rinehart, =inston. <eldard, 1.

#+36$. +he h#an senses. (ew ork; =iley.

(athans, J., 0ho!as, P., Diantandia, R., Eddy, 0., &hows, D., Fogness, D. #+34$.

Holecular genetics of inherited 7ariations in hu!an color 7ision. /cience, *9*,

)*-+).

1obes, J. #+33$. Color 7ision. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley.


C?HH>("C90"?( 0FE?R. "n broad ter!s, co#nication refers to the trans!ission

of so!ething fro! one location to another where the GthingG that is trans!itted !ay be a

!essage, a signal, a !eaning, and so on, and where both the trans!itter and the recei7er

!ust share a co!!on code so that the !eaning of infor!ation contained in the !essage

!ay be interpreted without error #Reber, +332$. o#nication theory is the process

whereby one syste! influences another syste! by regulation of the trans!itted signals

#=ol!an, +36*$. "n psychology, co#nication theory has pro7en useful in de7eloping

!odels of interpersonal interaction, !e!ory processes, language, and physiologicalfunctions. 0he general co#nication process consists of fi7e steps #&hannon =ea7er,

+33$; #+$ the sourceB #$ the trans!itterB #*$ the channelB #$ the source of potential noiseB

and #2$ the recei7er #cf; the social psychological



C?HH>("C90"?( 0FE?R +)6

analysis of persuasion in7ol7ing the basic ele!ents of source, !essage, and

audienceB Fo7land, Janis, Melley, +32*$. 0he channel !ay alter a certain

a!ount and type of data where the translation of data into a for! acceptable to the

channel #coding$ and the re7erse process for use by the recei7er #decoding$ are

critical proble!s in the analysis and design of co!!unication syste!s. 0he

concept of noise is defined as the origin of errors in trans!ission where the signal

recei7ed by the recei7er is a function of the original signal plus noise #cf; the

concept of noise in signal detection theory; <reen &wets, +3$. 0he

co#nication odel proposed by &hannon and =ea7er #+33$ in7ites !ath-

e!atical analysis and :uantitati7e !easure!ents of the concepts of infor!ation,

channel capacity, error reduction, redundancy, and efficiency of coding syste!s.

0his approach allows analyses to be !ade of co!!unication processes in dif-

ferent areas of in7estigation fro! !olecular genetics to literary criticis! #'ack,

+33$. Co!!unication in the social sciences !ay be di7ided into interpersonal7ersus !ass co!!unication categories. "n interpersonal co!!unication, the re -

cei7er can respond i!!ediately and create a network of se7eral co!!unication

chains, while in !ass co!!unication each trans!ission link is largely separated.

0he theoretical approaches in the study of interpersonal co!!unication are de-

pendent on particular !ethods of research, e%peri!ents, obser7ation, or field

study. 0wo !odelstheories that e!phasi@e the type of !essage in the co!-

!unication process are those of 'ales #+32)$ and Chapple #+33$. 'ales #+32)$

de7eloped + for!al categories for describing the co!!unicationinteraction

process occurring a!ong !e!bers in s!all groups. 'y co!bining so!e of the +

categories in certain ways, 'ales was able to define and elaborate 7arious subsets

of co!!unicationinteraction Gcli!ates,G as well as to identify proble!s of

co!!unication, e7aluation, control, decision !aking, tension reduction, and

reintegration. Chapple5s #+33$ !odel is !ore abstract than 'ales5 syste! and!easures only the a!ount of talking, o7erlap, and lengths of contradiction. 'oth

'ales5 and Chapple5s approaches a7oid any !ention of co!!unication content per

se. "n other theoretical approaches, howe7er, such as the e%peri!ental approach to

!easuring co!!unication, the actual co!!unication processes are inferred fro!

!easure!ent of the conditions and the effect of the process #e.g., 'a7elas, +32+B

Lea7itt, +32+$. &o!e e%peri!ental approaches !ay control infor!al social

co!!unication processes by instruction and inputs by the e%peri!enter with

outco!es !easured 7ia :uestionnaires or oint actions by the group !e!bers

#e.g., 1estinger, +32)B 1estinger, &chachter, 'ack, +32)B cf; GactualG

co!!unication se:uences, <ri!shaw, +34+$. 0heories and studies of

interpersonal co!!unication ha7e focused also on the practical aspects of

co!!unication, such as inti!acy and co!!unication #e.g., <ott!an Mrokoff,

+343B Long 9ndrews, +33)$, and on effecti7e co!!unication #e.g., <oldstein <illia!, +33)B Fartgro7e-1reile, +33)$. "t has been recogni@ed that the !ethod

of field obser7ation and analysis of interpersonal co!!unication is a relati7ely

weak approach/without a good theory to guide data collection/due to the

paucity of results relati7e to the large technical apparatus necessary to



Press.



C?HPLEHE(09R (EED&, 0FE?R ?1 +)3

Lea7itt, F. #+32+$. &o!e effects of certain co!!unication patterns on group perfor!-

ance. 4. Abn. /oc. sy., , *4-2).

Fo7land, C., Janis, "., Melley, F. #+32*$. o#nication and pers#asion sycholog&

ical st#dies of opinion changes. (ew Fa7en, C0; ale >ni7ersity Press. Mat@, E.,

La@arsfeld, P. #+322$. ersonal infl#ence +he part played by people in the

flow of ass co#nications. <lencoe, "L; 1ree Press.

Lerner, D. #+324$. +he passing of traditional society. <lencoe, "L; 1ree Press. HcLuan,

H. #+3$. +he C#tenberg galaxy. 0oronto; >ni7ersity of 0oronto Press. <reen, D.,

&wets, J. #+3$. /ignal detection theory and psychophysics. (ew ork;

=iley.

'orden, <. #+36+$. An introd#ction to h#an co#nication theory. Dubu:ue, "9;

'rown.

Lin, (. #+36*$. +he st#dy of h#an co#nication. (ew ork; 'obbs-Herrill.

Hiller, <. #Ed.$ #+36*$. o#nication, lang#age, and eaning sychological per&

specti!es. (ew ork; 'asic 'ooks.


Reinhold.

1isher, '. #+364$. erspecti!es on h#an co#nication. (ew ork; Hac!illan. Mlapp,

). #+364$. pening and closing. Ca!bridge, England; Ca!bridge >ni7ersity Press.

<ri!shaw, 9. #+34+$. 0alk and social control. "n H. Rosenberg R. 0urner #Eds.$, /ocial

psychology. (ew ork; 'asic 'ooks.

<ott!an, J., Mrokoff, L. #+343$. Harital interaction and satisfaction; 9 longitudinal

7iew. 4. ons. lin. sy., <E, 6-2.

<oldstein, "., <illia!, P. #+33)$. 0raining syste! issues in the year ))). Aer. sy.,

<, +*-+*.

Fartgro7e-1reile, J. #+33)$. rganiGations, co#nication, and c#lt#re. &t. Paul, H(;

=est.

Long, E., 9ndrews, D. #+33)$. Perspecti7e taking as a predictor of !arital adust!ent.

4. ers. /oc. sy., <1, +-+*+.

'ack, M. #+33$. Co!!unication processes. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley.

'aron, 9. #+33$. Co!!unication theory. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley.


C?HP9R90"E J>D<HE(0, L9= ?1. &ee 0F>R&0?(E5& L9= ?1

C?HP9R90"E J>D<HE(0.

C?HP90"'"L"0, L9= ?1. &ee &M"((ER5& DE&CR"P0"E 'EF9-"?R?PER9(0

C?(D"0"?("(< 0FE?R.

C?HPE(&90?R 0FE?R ?1 DRE9H"(<. &ee DRE9 H 0FE?R.

C?HPE0E(CE 0FE?R. &ee PL9, 0FE? R"E& ?1.

C?HPLEHE(09R (EED&, 0FE? R ?1. &ee L? E, 0FE?R"E& ?1.



C?(CEP0 LE9R("(<C?(CEP0 1?RH90"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1 +++

'ridg!an, P. #+36$. +he logic of odern physics. (ew ork; Hac!illan.

Carnap, R., Horris, C. #Eds.$ #+34$. 6nternational encyclopedia of #nified science. Chicago; >ni7ersity of Chicago Press.

'oring, E. <. #+326$. A history of experiental psychology. (ew ork; 9ppleton-Century-Crofts.

'ridg!an, P. #+323$. +he way things are. Ca!bridge; Far7ard >ni7ersity Press.

&uppe, 1. #+36$. +he str#ct#re of scientific theories. >rbana; >ni7ersity of "llinois

Press. Leahey, 0. #+34)$. 0he !yth of operationis!. 4. 3ind @ Beh., 0, +6-+*.

Carlson, (. #+33*$. sychology +he science of beha!ior. 'oston; 9llyn 'acon.

Leahey, 0. #+33a$. ?perationalis!. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley. Leahey, 0. #+33b$. Positi7is!. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork;

=iley. Lundin, R. #+33$. 9uguste Co!te. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew

ork; =iley. Roeckelein, J. #+336$. Psychology a!ong the sciences; Co!parisons of

nu!bers of the-

ories and laws cited in te%tbooks. sy. ep., 72, +*+-++.

C?(CEP0 LE9R("(<C?(CEP0 1?RH90"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1. 9 concept

!ay be defined as a sy!bol or group of sy!bols that stands for a class of obects

or e7ents that possess co!!on properties. 0hus, tree is a concept because it is a

sy!bol that stands for a larger group of obects, all of which possess co!!on

characteristics #e.g., a trunk, branches, lea7es, etc.$. Host words, with the

e%ception of proper nouns that refer to only a single obect, are concepts.

Concepts !ay be non7erbal as well as 7erbalB for instance, infants can ha7e a

concept of other long before they ha7e achie7ed language skills. 0he power of

using concepts is that they help indi7iduals to think efficiently because they free

one fro! ha7ing to create a uni:ue label for each new instance of an obect or

e7ent. 0he ter! concept foration refers to the proble!-sol7ing process one goes

through to ac:uire concepts. Learning psychologists are interested particularly inunderstanding how indi7iduals, both hu!an and nonhu!an, learn to identify

obects or e7ents as e%a!ples of specific concepts #Fouston, +34+$. 0he ter!s

concept foration and concept learning are often used synony!ously to refer to

the process of abstraction of a :uality, property, or set of features that can be

taken to represent a conceptB howe7er, there is considerable latitude in actual

usage. 0he literature in cogniti!e psychology abounds with synony!ous ter!s that

ha7e been introduced to refer to these processes; concept ac:uisition, concept

de7elop!ent, concept disco7ery, concept identification, concept use, concept

attain!ent, concept construction, and concept induction. 0here see!s to be little

agree!ent about ter!inology in this area of concept learning-concept foration,

and the !ost useful counsel is careful reading and critical reflection #Reber,

+332$. &e7eral theories ha7e atte!pted to account for the processes operating in

concept learning-concept foration. 0he beha!iorist, or sti#l#sLresponse,theory of concept learning was supported by Clark Full #+3)$. 9lthough !any of

the subects in Full5s e%peri!ents on concept learning were able to learn the

tasks, none of the! were able to e%plain GhowG they were classifying sy!bols and

obects into different categories. Full was i!pressed by subects5 inabilities to

describe their perfor!ance and e!phasi@ed the i!por-



++ C?(CEP0 LE9R("(<C?(CEP0 1?RH90"?(, 0FE?R"E& ?1

tance of analy@ing indi7iduals5 beha7ior and not their introspecti7e accounts of

beha7ior. 0hus, the beha7iorist 7iewpoint was ad7anced by Full5s work. "ntro-

spection was dee!ed unscientific, and speculations about what goes on Ginside

one5s headG during concept learning were a7oided. ?ther theories are based on

!ore cogniti!e notions, howe7er, such as the assu!ption that people try to

Gsol7eG concepts by !aking up hypotheses or tentati7e guesses and then testing

these hypotheses #'ourne, Do!inowski, Loftus, +363B Hatlin, +33$. 'runer,

<oodnow, and 9ustin #+32$ proposed that people use strategies in order to learn

concepts, where strategy was defined as an orderly !ethod for !aking decisions

that allows people to sol7e the concept accurately and :uickly without ta%ing

their reasoning skills or !e!ories. Le7ine #+362$ for!ulated a concept learning

theory that suggested subects begin a concept for!ation task with a subset of

hypotheses, one of which is the GworkingG hypothesisB if their feedback on the

tasks is consistent with the working hypothesis, subects retained that hypothesis,and if the feedback was inconsistent, they shifted their e!phasis to a different

working hypothesis that was selected fro! the original subset. 9nother

theoretical approach is offered by 'ower and 0rabasso #+3$ and 0rabasso and

'ower #+34$, who argue that concept learning occurs in an all&or&none fashion,

and is contrasted with the increental posit ion, which argues that learning takes

place gradually o7er a series of trials. 9ccording to the find ings of 'ower and

0rabasso, it appears that concept learning !ay at least so!eti!es occur in a

fashion rese!bling an all-or-none process, but a final answer with respect to the

ade:uacy of the all-or-none conception !ust wait for further e%peri!entation

#Fouston, +34+$. ?ther approaches in e%plaining concept learning in7ol7e the

use of ter!s and procedures such as decision trees #e.g., Funt, Harin, &tone,

+3$, prototype ac#isition #e.g., Posner, +36*B Rosch Lloyd, +364$, anials'

concept foration #e.g., Fulse, 1owler, Fonig, +364$, r#le learning andcoplexity #e.g., 9nglin, +366B 1odor, +362$, inforation&processing theories

#e.g., Funt, +3$, #antitati!e-atheatical theories #e.g., 'ourne Restle,

+323$, abstracting ability #e.g., ?sgood, +32*$, and edia&tional theories and

c#e&selection odels #e.g., Mling Riggs, +36+$. &ee also

"(1?RH90"?("(1?RH90"?(-PR?CE&&"(< 0FE?RB LE9R("(<

0FE?R"E&L9=&.

RE1ERE(CE&

Full, C. #+3)$. Nuantitati7e aspects of the e7olution of concepts. sy. 3ono., *7,

no. +*.

Fo7land, C. #+32$. 9 Gco!!unication analysisG of concept learning. sy. e!., <1,

+-6.

?sgood, C. #+32*$. 3ethod and theory in experiental psychology. (ew ork;

?%ford >ni7ersity Press.

'runer, J., <oodnow, J., 9ustin, <. #+32$. A st#dy of thin%ing. (ew ork; =iley.

'ourne, L., Restle, 1. #+323$. Hathe!atical theory of concept identification.

sy. e!., , 64-3.



C?(D"LL9C5& 0FE?R ?1 900E(0"?( ++*

Funt, E. #+3$. oncept learning An inforation&processing proble. (ew ork; =iley.

'ower, <., 0rabasso, 0. #+3$. Concept identification. "n R. 9tkinson #Ed.$, /t#diesin atheatical psychology. &tanford, C9; &tanford >ni7ersity Press. Funt, E., Hann,

J., &tone, P. #+3$. :xperients in ind#ction. (ew ork; 9cade!ic

Press.

Mlaus!eier, F., Farris, C. #Eds.$ #+3$. Analyses of concept learning. (ew ork; 9cade!ic

Press.

0rabasso, 0., 'ower, <. #+34$. Attention in learning. (ew ork; =iley.

Piaget, J. #+36)$. Piaget5s theory. "n P. Hussen #Ed.$, arichael's an#al of child psychology.

(ew ork; =iley.

Mling, J., Riggs, L. #Eds.$ #+36+$. Woodworth and /chlosberg's experiental psychology.

(ew ork; Folt, Rinehart, =inston.

Posner, H. #+36*$. ognition An introd#ction. <len7iew, "L; &cott, 1ores!an. 1odor,

J. #+362$. +he lang#age of tho#ght. (ew ork; Crowell.

Le7ine, H. #+362$. A cogniti!e theory of learning. Fillsdale, (J; Erlbau!.

9nglin, J. #+366$. Word, obIect, and concept#al de!elopent. (ew ork; (orton. Fulse, &.,

1owler, F., Fonig, =. #+364$. ogniti!e processes in anial beha!ior. Fillsdale, (J;

Erlbau!.

Rosch, E., Lloyd, '. #Eds.$ #+364$. ognition and categoriGation. Fillsdale, (J; Erl-bau!.

'ourne, L., Do!inowski, R., Loftus, E. #+363$. ogniti!e processes. Englewood Cliffs, (J;

Prentice-Fall.

Mlaus!eier, F. #+34)$. earning and teaching process concepts A strategy for testing

applications of theory. (ew ork; 9cade!ic Press.


Mlaus!eier, F. #+33$. Conceptual learning and de7elop!ent. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy.

sy. (ew ork; =iley.

Hatlin, H. #+33$. Concept learning. "n R. J. Corsini #Ed.$, :ncy. sy. (ew ork; =iley. Reber,

9. #+332$. +he eng#in dictionary of psychology. (ew ork; Penguin 'ooks.

C?(D"LL9C5& 0FE?R ?1 900E(0"?(. 0he 1rench philosopher Etienne

'onnot de Condillac #+6+2-+64)$ successfully transported John Locke5s !ethod and

theory of e!piricis! fro! England to 1rance. 0he theory of e!piricis! states that

all knowledge co!es fro! e%perience, while the ethod of e!piricis! ad7ocates the

collection and e7aluation of data where e%peri!entation is e!phasi@ed, and

induction 7ia obser7ation is ad7ocated o7er deduction fro! theoretical constructs

#Reber, +332$. Condillac reacted against Descartes5 theory of innate ideas,

Halebranche5s fac#lties, and Leibnit@5s theory of the onad #'oring, +326$. "n +62,

Condillac presented his fa!ous analogy or parable of the sentient stat#e to

e!phasi@e that the whole of !ental life can be deri7ed in e%perience fro! sensation

alone. ?ne is asked to i!agine a statue that is endowed with only a single sense, such

as the si!ple sense of s!ell. 0he statue s!ells a rose #where the statue is a rose for

the ti!e being because there is nothing else to its e%istence than this odor$ and is,thereby, said to be attending to the odor. 0hus, one !ay see how attention co!es into

!ental life; the first



'EF9"?R?PER9(0 C?(D"0"?("(< 0FE?R.



C?(1L"C0, 0FE?R"E& ?1 ++2

C?(1L"C0, 0FE?R"E& ?1. 0he ter! conflict is an e%tre!ely broad concept used

to refer to any situation where there are !utually antagonistic e7ents, !o ti7es,

beha7iors, i!pulses, or purposes #Reber, +332$. "n the area of learning and

!oti7ation psychology, Hiller #+3$, Hiller and Hurray #+32$, and Hiller

#+323$ de7eloped a precise for!ulation of conflict theory based on so!e preli!-

inary ideas of Lewin #+3*2$. 9ccording to Lewin #+3*+$ and Hiller #+3$, there

are four !aor types of conflicts in7ol7ing GapproachG and Ga7oidanceG beha7ioral

tendencies; approach&approachLsit#ation in which the person !ust choose

between two positi7e goals of the sa!e 7alueB a!oidance&a!oidance / the person

!ust choose between two negati7e outco!es of appro%i!ately e:ual 7alueB

approach&a!oidanceLcirc#stanceswhere achie7ing a positi7e goal will produce

a negati7e outco!e as wellB and do#ble-#ltiple approach&a!oidance /the person

is re:uired to choose between two or !ore alternati7es, each of which contains

both positi7e and negati7e conse:uences. 0he concept of abi!alence #i.e., !i%ed positi7e and negati7e feelings concerning obects, people, or e7ents$ is a central

characteristic of approach&a!oidance conflicts and is usually translated into

Gpartial approachG #Hiller, +3$. =ithin Hiller5s #+3$ conflict paradig!,

Epstein 1en@ #+32$ and Epstein #+34$ ha7e de!onstrated the stressfulness of

[jon roeckelein] dictionary of theories, laws, and(bookza.org)

Documents