Analytical review of three chapters as editor of book on psychology - Essay Example

The authors appear well out of date in their thinking. Neither holism nor reductionism is explained in an objective, satisfactory manner. In discussing the development of psychology the authors are able to mention most of the main historical proponents. Starting with Pavlov, they mention Tolman, Thorndike, Watson, Skinner, Hull, Maslow, Rogers and so on. However, the theories they expound are treated summarily and often inaccurately. An example: ‘Tolman’s research began with animal behaviour but when he applied them to people they became more, because people are higher intellectual beings.

Tolman had to rely on Gestalt psychology in order to make sense out of his animal research etc. etc.’ (p. 20). Discussing the work of Elizabeth Loftus, the authors appear to be sidetracked into comparing cultural differences in cognition, a topic totally irrelevant to the thesis they seek to address. The paper is divided into five sub-sections with different titles, the rationale for which is unclear. The paper may be described as undigested material cribbed from other sources and written by persons with little grasp of the subtleties of the English language.

Example: ‘Reductionism is the belief that all great phenomenon’ (stet) can be unravelled by studying their parts. In other words, taking the whole and reducing it to smaller pieces to explain the big picture.’(p. . The eight schools are: psychodynamic, behavioristic, cognitive, humanistic, neuropsychology, Industrial/Organizational, evolutionary, and sociocultural psychology. From the very beginning the paper appears flawed. The very first sentence is a meaningless utterance. ‘To understand Aristotle’s four causes, a person must understand that his causes are actually derived from Aristotle’s three principals.’ (p.1).

The word ‘principal’ is used instead of the correct word ‘principle’. Although Aristotle’s causes are mentioned throughout, they are used to explain the subject matter in an arbitrary and contrived fashion. The terms are not properly explained. They are applied to the eight theories in a routine manner. Most of the main proponents of the various schools of psychology are correctly identified, but the explanations that follow leave a lot to be desired. For example: ‘The essential idea of psychoanalysis is to determine what is conscious and what is unconscious in mental life.

The conscious consists of everything a person is aware of. It is an observation of most direct and certain character. Being in a state of consciousness is a very brief state’ (p.7) The language appears to be a forced and laboured version of English except when discussing irrelevancies. The paragraphs that follow do not make sense. No argument in this paper appears to be logically developed. Although on the surface, the chapter encompasses a wide area of theoretical and applied psychology, the selection and treatment of the subject matter seems utterly idiosyncratic.

The citations are at times appropriate and the references are extensive. This is not a paper fit for publication in its present