Critical, Analytical and Reflective Thoughts: A Personal Role in the Field of Psychology - Essay Example

Critical, Analytical and Reflective thoughts Ali Ghandour Northcentral PSY7101 Some Critical, Analytical and Reflective Thoughts: A Personal Role in the Field of Psychology Introduction From parapsychology to hypnosis, the study of modern psychology includes many aspects giving rise to controversy. Debate among psychologists and even the general public abounds in relation to many theories, approaches, and schools of thought. (Colman, 1995) According to the eminent philosopher of the twentieth century, Karl Popper, all ideas should be exposed to criticism, close examination by all, and rigorous testing. (Colman, 1995) Popper further postulates that scientific theory must be “…highly falsifiable to start with…” (Bolles, Ed. 2000) Thus, the existence of controversial and openly debated topics in psychology, as a science, is positive, and contributes to the development of the field. Historical and current controversy The historical development of psychology has evoked many ideas that have given rise to open, and even hostile criticism. As mentioned, the study of parapsychology, for example, is an area in which much skeptical comment is made. The chief criticism of the study of paranormal experiences has traditionally been that these experiences can only be anecdotally, rather than scientifically studied. Similarly, a negative perception of hypnosis is strengthened by the media portrayal of the phenomenon as a control mechanism, imposed so that one person can gain complete control over another. But, writers such as Wagstaff argue that hypnosis can be fully explained without “…invoking any special hypnotic state …” (Colman, 1995) Hypnosis, therefore, is not some magical thing, employed by psychologists to see into people’s minds. Nonetheless, the debate and skepticism persist. Even more mainstream areas in psychological study can be considered controversial. For example, health psychology, relating to the psychological factors which promote health, prevent illness, and the connections between psychology and all forms of health (Colman, 1995) Something as widely accepted by the general public as the relationship between stress and physical health can spark controversy among psychologists. Particularly when it is proposed that a psychological disorder such as depression is related to physical and environmental factors, as well as gender, debate is sure to follow. This claim – that gender determines to some extent, susceptibility to depression – is contested despite the reliable research which has established that women are more prone to depression than men. (Colman, 1995) A feminist school of thought would most likely challenge such a contention, purely on the grounds that it isolated “female” behavior from that of men, which is surely, according to this writer, unacceptable if we are to examine “human” behavior. Certainly, gender is an area in which many controversies have historically erupted. Debate in relation to gender continues today. Since feminist thinking began to exert influence on psychological thinking in the 1970s (Colman, 1995) numerous contradictory opinions have been voiced. Emanating from these opinions, a further controversy has emerged: Some psychologists today prefer to differentiate between sex differences and gender differences. In this debate, “sex” differences are related specifically to the biological, genetically determined differences between males and females; “gender” differences are referred to as the psychological, social, and cultural differences interacting with sex differences. (Colman, 1995) As the science of psychology was developed, more fundamental controversies have emerged. At the very outset of modern psychology, a difference in views became evident between Structuralism and functionalist thinking. (thinkquest, 2010) The study of consciousness informs both schools, but structuralists studied consciousness by separating it into perceptions, sensations, and emotions. They would train subjects to systematically study their own consciousness. As opposed to this thinking, functionalism argues that knowing what consciousness is remains less important than determining the purpose of consciousness. (thinkquest, 2010) Further changes occurred as Behaviorism emerged in the United States. Among behaviorists it is suggested that external stimuli provoke conditioned behaviors. This gave rise to the explicit study of visible behavior to link such behavior to external stimuli. In contradiction of both Structuralism and Functionalism, it is believed among behaviorists that internal thoughts cannot be accurately or scientifically studied. On the European continent, an alternative school of thought came into being. Gestalt psychologists argue that psychological processes should not be studied in isolation. Rather, the complete person should be the object of study. For example, the personality should be studied as the sum of its parts, not as the parts individually. (Blair Bolles, 1991) Such ongoing controversy prevails. Among psychologists and among the general public, psychological debate is ongoing. While this may seem to present some difficulties, it is the writer’s contention that such continual testing and re-testing of theory, and the encouragement of open debate does contribute to the growth of knowledge and understanding in this field. Galileo, a character in Bertold Brecht’s play, “Galileo’s Commandment” says: “Science knows only one commandment: contribute to science.” (Blair Bolles, 2000) A personal meeting with psychology It is perhaps the most publicly well-known psychologist, Sigmund Freud, who inspired this writer’s first attraction to the discipline of psychology. While this may not be due to the theories themselves – I was really too young to understand much of what these theories entailed – the discussion among adults often included some references to Freud’s work. Freud’s psychoanalytic theory which brings the unconscious into focus was of great interest to the public and psychologists alike. Interest in his ideas continues today. At the time, he ignited much controversy – behaviorists, for example, would have objected strongly to his claims that human behavior could be attributed solely something not able to be observed. (thinkquest, 2010) As a younger person, I was intrigued by these almost mystical theories – mystical due to my lack of a mature understanding. Nonetheless, this may have been my first exposure to the world of psychology, and the anecdotal comments I heard through my young ears certainly stimulated my interest. Today, of course, the mystique is gone but the interest in psychology that began then continues. A rational and scientific approach to the study of psychology has more current appeal. Hence, the cognitive theories I have explored appeal to me on many levels. The interrelation of the external environment, and its stimuli, with the mind of the individual, and its ability to assimilate, organize, and manipulate meaning from these stimuli is fascinating. Language, memory, perception, learning and even mental disorders can be explored through this discipline. (thinkquest, 2010) While the general area of cognitive psychology has some appeal, it is one particular debate which I would like to explore on a deeper level and which is likely to continue to interest me. It is often subjectively stated by individuals, often those in authority, that “the harder we work, the better we do.” (writer’s quotation) Sometimes this is taken further and the evident bias of the speaker is revealed when he/she claims that “Chinese are really hard workers” or “Brazilians really know how to have fun.” (writer’s quotations) From personal experience, these kinds of generalizations are often applied to a student at school, where someone may be labeled as an over-achiever, and it is perceived by teachers or even parents that he/she is achieving far beyond his/her perceived potential. Conversely, and I think more often, a student could be seen as not meeting his/her potential due to “laziness” or the “wrong” attitude. (writer’s quotations) Achievement, particularly academic of career-related achievement, is viewed by society as a positive thing. Inherent to the perception of achievement, though, is a moral judgment. Such moral judgments influence how achievement is evaluated, what is considered achievement and even the punishment of non-achievement. Someone who does not achieve according to the rules of their society is labeled as bad, hence. This phenomenon has been studied by psychologists, and has caused some controversy. In the 1970s controversy arose over the effects of ascribing someone’s success to their ability and their failure to lack of effort. (Weiner, 1994) This, it was proposed, would allow the individual to continue to believe in his/her ability to succeed, since it was only lack of effort that caused failure. The alternative argument is that the individual only succeeds due to high effort, so that anyone, regardless of ability, can succeed, given that they work hard, consistently. (Weiner, 1994) To some degree, this debate was resolved by the mid-1980s but I believe that this aspect of behavior deserves renewed attention and study. The resolution of the debate came in the form of an explanation attributing success or failure to many psychological variables: would the individual succeed/fail in new activities due to the initial success/failure?; did the individual feel pride, happiness, shame or guilt as a consequence of success or failure?; was the individual motivated to succeed in a task by preference, or positive mood, or expectation? (Weiner, 1994) In short, it seems that the predictors of success or failure become quite well-defined but, in my opinion, not able to account for the interaction between the many variables referred to above. Surely, if the individual is able to attribute his/her success to many variables able to exert influence on achievement every time a task is performed, perpetual “excuses” for failure exist – ‘I can’t do this because…” or even “I don’t like this, so I don’t want to succeed in it.” People may have determined their failure or success by their prior beliefs about their potential, and may even not attempt a task because they believe that they are likely to fail. To return to the personal experience I have had, internal and external definitions of what failure or success are significantly influenced by the self-belief or attitudes of individuals. If external definitions of success or failure are internalized at a young age, these may have significant effects on the behavior of the individual in adulthood. Low expectations and definitions of success, for example, may cause an adult to be unmotivated. Conversely, if an individual believes that success can only be defined by being “first in class” or “making the most money” (writer’s quotations) it may become difficult for an individual to believe that self-actualization or emotional development are important. While the compromised theories of achievement and success/failure do offer some resolution, I am most interested in this area, and would like to explore it further. The phenomenon of achievement could be considered further in light of internal or external expectations, certainly, but those expectations are definitely influenced by culture, family relationships, traditions and even belief-systems. Each individual, it seems, has a unique definition of personal success. Research into the influences on particular definitions of success would perhaps allow us to predict the likely success or failure of individuals, and help us to develop particular interventions to enhance potential of success. Of interest, too, is the area of self-motivation which seems to be independent of many external influences: “…students who believe they are capable engage in more metacognition … than students who do not believe they can perform the task …” (Pintrich&De Groot, 1990) Perhaps such external influences as mentioned above do not unduly influence achievement. One factor that does influence performance is the individual student’s emphasis on achievement. Pintrich and De Groot (1990) emphasize that “…it is important for teachers to socialize students’ intrinsic value for schoolwork …” implying that such factors as culture, family relationships, traditions and belief systems do impact on achievement, at least in the academic sphere. Contrarily, however, “…motivational beliefs are not sufficient for successful academic performance; self-regulatory learning seems to be more directly implicated in performance.” (Pintrich&De Groot, 1990) Thus, my interest in and motivation to study psychology seems to rest on personal experience, from childhood: an incidental exposure to Freudian theory, and the perception that people were treated unfairly at school. A present, personal view From a more mature point of view, however, the continuing debate over the role of heredity versus the role of the environment in the shaping of individual identity does influence me to continue my study into the field of psychology. It is currently accepted that genetics and environment, and how these two interact have influence on human psychological development. This concept has great impact on my personal life. As a parent and husband, and thus jointly responsible for the psychological well-being of a child, I have to consider to what degree the life and environment we are able to create for a child will influence development and future happiness. Additionally, the element of our genetic influence on a child interests me enormously. Tied to my interest in achievement, and what constitutes success or failure, it is imperative that I increase my knowledge to perhaps benefit someone so close to me. After a superficial overview of a very currently controversial area in modern psychology – Evolutionary Psychology – on the unreliable source, Wikipedia, not used conventionally as a source. However, this overview did lead me to an entire field of writers, involved in debates within this area. don’t ever use this as a source. I hesitate to include this area of psychology and the theories proposed within it, in my discussion. But, one proposal is made by a proponent of Evolutionary Psychology, Edward H. Hagen, which attracted my interest. The proposal is that Evolutionary Psychology presents a genuine solution to the nature-nurture debate. (Hagen, 2000) In order to provide this solution, Hagen argues that it is necessary to stop the belief prevalent in modern psychology: that nature and nurture are equal partners. Rather, learning “…occurs when evolved learning adaptations are exposed to the environment … (it is) grounded in specialized adaptations that evolved …” (Hagen, 2000) The proposition is thus that human ability to learn is an evolved and evolving characteristic, in the same way as human physiology has evolved and is perhaps evolving. Thus we go right back to attributing higher innate ability to some people and lower innate ability to others. These differing abilities are dependent on the adaptation of humans to specific environments, both physiologically and, according to this discipline, psychologically. Obviously, these ideas are no more than postulations and I highlight below my hesitancy in encouraging the pursuit of this way of thinking. These thoughts have not been proven. As a scientist, you have to have more than ‘ideas’ to do, use, critique research. The evident danger here is that this theorizing may lead to conclusions about innately superior characteristics in certain races, or in women as opposed to men (or more likely, vice versa). While Hagen, among others tries to reinforce the view that Evolutionary Psychology has as its focus a common human psychology (Hagen, 2000), differing environments, geographically even, would argue that humans have psychologically evolved differently depending on the conditions of their locations and histories. Perhaps a future controversy in psychological thinking can be predicted from the words of Hagen: “As long as important political and moral views are grounded in scientific hypothesis, a true science of human cognition will be difficult and perhaps impossible, to achieve.” (Hagen, 2000) This statement really is disconcerting…He seems to imply that it is only political correctness that is preventing this theoretical framework from being universally accepted. Clearly there are limits to the kind of thinking Hagen’s writing represents – a pseudo-scientific postulation cannot be considered valuable in extending our knowledge of psychology. But indeed Hagen’s work is controversial. Conclusion Although I have identified in this essay certain areas within psychology that have, in my past, and do, presently, interest me and inspire me to commit to study in this field, there is another aspect of this academic discipline about which I am passionate. The fact that psychological theory inspires controversy, and can be debated, openly evaluated, and regularly critiqued, appeals to me. This openness and opportunity for new theorizing, and innovative and unique experimentation is the primary draw card for me. In the words of Karl Popper, science has a heroic and bold quality, with “conjectures” that take real risks “… the risk of being tested, and refuted; the risk of clashing with reality.” (Blair Bolles (Ed.) 2000) It is this boldness which inspires my passion. References American Psychological Association (1996) Task Force Examines the Knowns and Unknowns of Intelligence Retrieved February 22, 2010 from: http://www.apa.org/releasesintell.html Blair Bolles, E, (1991) Gestalt Psychology in Galileo’s Commandments Blair Bolles, Edmund (Ed) (2000) London: Abacus Colman, A.. (Ed.) (1995) Introduction: Controversies in Psychology London and New York: 1995 Hagen, E. (2000) Controversies Surrounding Psychology in The Evolutionary Psychology Handbook Buss, D. (Ed.) Berlin: Institute for Theoretical Biology Pintrich, P. & De Groot, E (1990) Motivational and Self-Regulated Learning Components of Classroom Academic Performance. Journal of Educational Psychology 82(1) 33-40 Thinkquest on-line encyclopedia (2000) History of Psychology Retrieved February 23, 2010 from: http://library.thinkquest.org/C005870/history/index.php?id=historyp1 Weiner, B. (1994) Ability Versus Effort Revisited: The Moral Determinants of Achievement Evaluation and Achievement as a Moral System in Educational Psychologist (1994) 29(3) pp 163-174 Copyright 1994, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Wikipedia (2010) Evolutionary Psychology Controversy (search term) Retrieved February 28, 2010 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology_controversy Read More