Theories of Titchener and Yerkes and Watson - Essay Example

? Titchener, Yerkes, and Watson's Theories John B. Watson Watson was an American psychologist who developed the psychological thought of behaviorism. According to his behaviorist approach, he carried out research on animal behavior, advertising, and child bearing (Benjamin, 2006). His article titled, Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It details his position on behaviorist psychology. Thus according to the article, Psychologist stake on behaviorists is supposed to form part of objective experimental division of natural science. Thus, control and prediction constitutes the theoretical goal of behavior. Moreover, introspection does not comprise part of the methods used nor does the scientific significance of the data dependent on the promptness of the data for interpretation in relation to consciousness. Consequently, he does not recognize a dividing line between human beings and brute. Watson emphasizes on man’s external behavior as well as his reactions concerning certain situations instead of the internal, mental state of humanity (Weiner, 2013). Consequently, according to him, analysis of reactions and behaviors constitutes the only objective method to gain insight into human actions. Therefore, Watson’s behaviorism discarded the studying or learning of consciousness Robert Yerkes Yerkes was an American psychologist who developed on intelligence testing as well as in comparative psychology (INDIANA UNIVERSITY, 2012). He pioneered the study of primate and human intelligence. He is popular for his comparative psychology research dealing with great apes thus leading to his founding of the first laboratory in America dealing with primate research. He closely worked with John. B. Watson, which resulted in the establishment the theory of behaviorism. According to the theory, both human and animal behavior can be scientifically researched with the aim of understanding and without the need for inner mental states (Weiner, 2013). Therefore, admissible evidence is obtained through use of scientific method. Such scientific method suggests the observations need to be repeated at different times and by different people in order to be considered as evidence. Therefore, observation by an individual at a given time cannot be enough to deem as evidence that can be used in psychology. Edward Bradford Titchener Edward was an American psychologist who never recognized applied psychology, lacked interest in studying animals, abnormal behavior, children, or individual differences. According to him, psychology entails the study of experience from the perspective of the experiencing individual. Therefore, every element should remain conscious (Tracey, & Morrow, 2006). The aim of psychology was to study consciousness and mind. Thus, mind refers to the accumulated or collected experiences in a lifetime. The first element of the mind is sensations and contains elements of perceptions. The second element is affections and entails emotions. Finally, images comprise ideas. The elements of ideas, emotions, and perceptions can be disintegrated into respective properties such as quality, duration, clearness, extensity, and intensity. All the qualities were present in images and sensations while affection lacked extensity and clearness. Conversely, consciousness entails all mental experiences any given time. He advocated for the law of continuity which claims that thought of something or object tends to generate thoughts of other things experienced together with the object. According to him, physiological processes offer a continuous substratum that supports the psychological processes (Titchener, 2010). Moreover, Titchener gives marginal treatment and consideration to action, instinct, and habit. According to him, these elements do not have a significant effect on psychology since they do not constitute to scientific methods. He distinguished mental processes as possessing quality, duration, intensity, extensity, and clearness. Further, it considers introspective perspective, which refers to thoughtful or deep in thought with the aim of describing one’s memory, cognitive processes, perceptions, and motivations. He found the theory of structuralism, which argues that observable events forms science and thus, speculations of unobservable events needs no recognition within the society. 1. Yerkes and Watson are similar in the behaviorism theory in that they believe in the possibility of both animal and human behavior being scientifically researched on for the purposes of promoting understanding and without the need for inner mental states (Schultz & Schultz, 2008). Thus, according to them, admissible evidence is achieved using the scientific method involving repeated observation of components or things at varied times and by different people. Consequently, both Yerkes and Watson never recognized lines of division between human beings and other creatures. In addition, both do not recognize introspection as part of scientific methods used in psychology. Further, they discarded the studying of consciousness in psychology and never advocated for it throughout their works. However, Yerkes never subscribed to the strict behaviorism concepts and ideals advocated by Watson. They shared various ideas and collaborated on their work, but never agree wholly on some issues or principles. He never recognized Watson’s narrow view of behaviorism. Moreover, he never recognized important variations between man and other creatures (Schultz & Schultz, 2008). 2. What does Watson mean by “I am not willing to turn psychology over to Titchener and his school Watson implies that he does plan to give in to Titchener and his school of thought, which sharply contradicts his theory and believes in psychology. First, Watson has an interest and deals with animals while Titchener discards and lacks has interests in studying or working with animals, abnormal behavior, children or individual differences. Watson carried out research on animal behavior, advertising, and child bearing while Titchener dealt with human beings (Hergenhahn, 2009). Therefore, they both have differences in line of work and their areas of research interests. Secondly, Watson rejects introspection while Titchener advocates for its consideration. Watson argues that introspection does not comprise part of the methods used nor does the scientific significance of the data dependent on the promptness of the data for interpretation in relation to consciousness (Titchener, 2010). However, Titchener claims that the aim of psychology was to study consciousness and mind. Moreover, Titchener advocated for the law of continuity that claims that the thought of something or object tends to generate thoughts of other things experienced together with the object. According to him, physiological processes offer a continuous substratum that supports the psychological processes. 3. How similar and different are Titchener and Watson in theory Watson and Titchener theories are similar in that both focus on studying psychology of living things. Moreover, both theories accept the application of scientific methods in studying psychology. However, the two theories differ in that while Titchener argues that the aim of psychology was to study consciousness and mind whereas Watson discards the studying or learning of consciousness (Titchener, 2010). Consequently, Titchener’s theory of structuralism argues that observable events forms science and thus, speculations of unobservable events does not need recognition within the society. However, Watson never recognized nor subscribed to the theory. In addition, Titchener advocated for the law of continuity, which claims, that thought of something or object tends to generate thoughts of other things experienced together with the object. Thus, to him, physiological processes offer a continuous substratum that supports the psychological processes. 4. What does Watson mean by “I believe that it can be made a desirable field for work”. Watson in his letter to Yerkes believes in the possibility of transforming the field of psychology to become better since he has too much attachment to it. Therefore, there is a need to put a lot of emphasis in psychology with an aim of making it better and comprehensive through consultation with other stakeholders and mutual understanding. Moreover, according to Watson, there is the possibility of changing people’s perception concerning various forms of psychology in order to reach a consensus and encourage teamwork. Consequently, there is a need to uphold some values and principles of psychology while seeking ways to improve the ideas and principles. There is also need for consistency and modification of some perceptions and theories of psychology to ensure that it becomes a desirable field. References Benjamin, L. T. (2006). A History of Psychology in Letters. MA: Blackwell Publishing. INDIANA UNIVERSITY. (2012). Human Intelligence. Retrieved Dec 11, 2012 from http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/titchener.shtml Hergenhahn, B. R. (2009). An introduction to the history of psychology. Australia: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2008). A history of modern psychology. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth. Titchener, E. B. (2010). An outline of psychology. Alcester: Read Books. Tracey, D. H., & Morrow, L. M. (2006). Lenses on reading: An introduction to theories and models. New York: Guilford Press. Weiner, I. B. (2013). Handbook of psychology: Volume 1. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. Read More