Yerkes and Watson - Essay Example

In the 19th century, John B. Watson and Robert Yerkes came up with remarkable work in the field of comparative psychology. It was the time of the ethology, which is the study of animal behaviors, suggesting that animal behaviors can be considerably replicated (Hergenhahn, 2005). In the area of comparative psychology, Watson was one of the earliest American psychologists, one of the pioneers. He was interested in, and focused on, behaviorism and behavioristic philosophy of correlating and comparing human behaviors and animal behaviors.

Yerkes, another big name in the American history, was a contrasting figure, an author of conflicting elements of hypothesis, analysis, and perception. Watson always preferred the analysis of mind by making use of quantitative approach, since it allowed him to obtain observations which formed the basis of his logic and also helped him clarify his procedures and findings in a more persuasive manner. However, both Yerkes and Watson were supporters of the same ideology, according to which the study of animal behavior is to some extent correlated with human interpretations, perceptions, ideas, emotions, and sensations, and this understanding can be best applied to behavior intervention (Reed, 1987).

This argument was based on the idea of portrayal and representation of behaviors. Seemingly, the main hypothesis of Watson and Yerkes was based on psychological demonstration of objectivity and purposive vision. From the very beginning, Robert Yerkes emphasized accurate observance and clear demonstration. He never waited for tests or observations like Watson did to identify defects, but tried to proceed with a more precise and careful approach. Watson’s theory of behaviorism attracted budding psychologists with a newly settled heritage of response intuition study.

The highlight of the study was objectivity to sterilize defects with consequential epistemology. The major similarity is that Yerkes relied on accuracy and precision while Watson stayed loyal to subjective diversification (Thorne & Henly, 2005). In contrast with subjective psychology, Edward B. Titchener is yet another big name. He belonged to Great Britain and emerged as a successful psychologist in 1920s. It was the time when Watson and Titchener opted to work on the same projects. In the professional arena, they were in competition but both wanted to bring about something special to the field of psychology.

The essence of the competition was not to bring something peculiar but something which is good enough to be delivered to a common man (Green, 1997). Watson was firm in his philosophical conduct and wanted Yerkes to inherit the same ideology, and that is why he wanted to convince Yerkes in his letter to play a considerable role in sawing the seeds of the American psychology. Though Watson contradicted to Yerkes and Titchener at some points, he still wanted everyone to contribute to the field of psychology.

This can be considered as the basis of Watson’s theory of “comparative psychology” (Thorne & Henly, 2005). Titchener tried to focus on structuralism and correlated patterns of emotional development, while Watson emphasized his behaviorist manifesto. Titchener’s case was introspection, where patterns were analyzed in distributive mental screening. Titchener had defined “how mind works” and identified the basic elements which evoke perceptions, feelings and sensations (Thorne & Henly, 2005).

Being a pioneer, Watson had a vision of an American psychologist who wanted to see psychology as a growing field in the future. He was of the