The Science of Psychology.pdf

1 The Science of Psychology Thinking Critically How would you define psychology? What do you hope to learn about psychology, yourself, and others after taking this course? Discuss with your class....

1 The Science of Psychology Thinking Critically How would you define psychology? What do you hope to learn about psychology, yourself, and others after taking this course? Discuss with your class. Why study psychology? Psychology not only helps you understand why people (and animals) do the things they do, but it also helps you better understand yourself and your reactions to others. Psychology can help you comprehend how your brain and body are connected, how to improve your learning abilities and memory, and how to deal with the stresses of life, both ordinary and extraordinary. In studying psychology, an understanding of the methods psychologists use is crucial because research can be flawed, and knowing how research should be done can bring those flaws to light. And finally, psychology and its research methods promote critical thinking, which can be used to evaluate not just research but also claims of all kinds, including those of advertisers and politicians. Learning Objectives 1.1 Describe the contributions of some of 1.7 Explain how researchers use the the early pioneers in psychology. correlational technique to study relationships between two or more 1.2 Summarize the basic ideas and variables. the important people behind the early approaches known as Gestalt, 1.8 Identify the steps involved in psychoanalysis, and behaviorism. designing an experiment. 1.3 Summarize the basic ideas behind 1.9 Recall two common sources of the seven modern perspectives in problems in an experiment and some psychology. ways to control for these effects. 1.4 Differentiate between the various 1.10 Identify some of the common ethical types of professionals within the field guidelines for doing research with of psychology. people. 1.5 Recall the five steps of the scientific 1.11 Explain why psychologists sometimes approach. use animals in their research. 1.6 Compare and contrast some 1.12 Recall the basic criteria for critical of the methods used to describe thinking that people can use in their behavior. everyday lives. 2 M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 2 10/12/2017 12:23:10 PM  The History of Psychology Some people believe psychology is just the study of people and what motivates their behavior. Psychologists do study people, but they study animals as well. And to better understand what motivates behavior, psychologists study not only what people and ani- mals do but also what happens in their bodies and in their brains as they do it. The study of psychology is not important only to psychologists: psychology is a hub science and findings from psychological research are cited and used in many other fields as diverse as cancer research, health, and even climate change (Cacioppo, 2013; McDonald et al., 2015; Roberto & Kawachi, 2014; Rothman et al., 2015; van der Linden et al., 2015). psychology is the scientific study of behavior and mental processes. Behavior includes all of our outward or overt actions and reactions, such as talking, facial expressions, and movement. The term mental processes refers to all the internal, covert (hidden) activity of our minds, such as thinking, feeling, and remembering. Why “scientific”? To study behavior and mental processes in both animals and humans, researchers must observe them. Whenever a human being observes anyone or anything, there’s always a possibility that the observer will see only what he or she expects to see. Psychologists don’t want to let these possible biases* cause them to make faulty observations. They want to be precise and to measure as carefully as they can—so they use a systematic** approach to study psychology scientifically. How long has psychology been around? Psychology is a relatively new field in the realm of the sciences, only about 138 years old. It’s not that no one thought about why people and animals do the things they do before then; on the contrary, there were philosophers,*** medical doctors, and physiologists**** who thought *biases: personal judgments based on beliefs rather than facts. psychology **systematic: according to a fixed, ordered plan. *** philosophers: people who seek wisdom and knowledge through thinking and discussion. scientific study of behavior and mental **** physiologists: scientists who study the physical workings of the body and its systems. processes. 3 M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 3 10/12/2017 12:23:13 PM  4  Chapter 1 about little else—particularly with regard to people. Philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, and Descartes tried to understand or explain the human mind and its connection to the physical body (Durrant, 1993; Everson, 1995; Kenny, 1968, 1994). Medical doctors and physiologists wondered about the physical connection between the body and the brain. For example, phy- sician and physicist Gustav Fechner is often credited with performing some of the first scien- tific experiments that would form a basis for experimentation in psychology with his studies of perception (Fechner, 1860), and physician Hermann von Helmholtz (von Helmholtz, 1852, 1863) performed groundbreaking experiments in visual and auditory perception. In the Beginning: Wundt, Titchener, and James 1.1 Describe the contributions of some of the early pioneers in psychology. It really all started to come together in a laboratory in Leipzig, Germany, in 1879. It was here that Wilhelm Wundt (VILL-helm Voont, 1832–1920), a physiologist, attempted to apply sci- entific principles to the study of the human mind. In his laboratory, students from around the world were taught to study the structure of the human mind. Wundt believed that con- sciousness, the state of being aware of external events, could be broken down into thoughts, experiences, emotions, and other basic elements. In order to inspect these nonphysical ele- ments, students had to learn to think objectively about their own thoughts—after all, they could hardly read someone else’s mind. Wundt called this process objective introspection, the process of objectively examining and measuring one’s own thoughts and mental activi- ties (Rieber & Robinson, 2001). For example, Wundt might place an object, such as a rock, in a student’s hand and have the student tell him everything that he was feeling as a result of having the rock in his hand—all the sensations stimulated by the rock. (Objectivity* was— and is—important because scientists need to remain unbiased. Observations need to be clear and precise but unaffected by the individual observer’s beliefs and values.) This was really the first attempt by anyone to bring objectivity and measurement to the concept of psychology. This attention to objectivity, together with the establishment of the first true experimental laboratory in psychology, is why Wundt is known as the father of psychology. Titchener and Structuralism in America One of Wundt’s students was Edward Titchener (1867–1927), an Englishman who eventually took Wundt’s ideas to Cornell Uni- versity in Ithaca, New York. Titchener expanded on Wundt’s original ideas, calling his new viewpoint structuralism because the focus of study was the structure of the mind. He believed that every experience could be broken down into its individual emotions and sensations (Brennan, 2002). Although Titchener agreed with Wundt that conscious- ness could be broken down into its basic elements, Titchener also believed that objective introspection could be used on thoughts as well as on physical sensations. For example, Titchener might have asked his students to introspect about things that are blue rather than actually giving them a blue object and asking for reactions to it. Such an exercise might have led to something like the following: “What is blue? There are blue things, like objective introspection the sky or a bird’s feathers. Blue is cool and restful, blue is calm …” and so on. the process of examining and In 1894, one of Titchener ’s students at Cornell University became famous for ­measuring one’s own thoughts and becoming the first woman to receive a Ph.D. in psychology (Goodman, 1980; Guthrie, mental activities. 2004). Her name was Margaret F. Washburn, and she was Titchener’s only graduate stu- dent for that year. In 1908 she published a book on animal behavior that was considered structuralism an important work in that era of psychology, The Animal Mind (Washburn, 1908). early perspective in psychology Structuralism was a dominant force in the early days of psychology, but it eventu- associated with Wilhelm Wundt and ally died out in the early 1900s, as the structuralists were busily fighting among them- Edward Titchener, in which the focus selves over just which key elements of experience were the most important. A competing of study is the structure or basic view arose not long after Wundt’s laboratory was established, shortly before structural- ­elements of the mind. ism came to America. *objectivity: expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as they really are without allowing the influence of personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 4 10/12/2017 12:23:13 PM  The Science of Psychology   5 William James and Functionalism Harvard University was the first school in ­ merica to offer classes in psychology in the late 1870s. These classes were taught by one A of Harvard’s most illustrious instructors, William James (1842–1910). James began teaching anatomy and physiology, but as his interest in psychology developed, he began teaching it almost exclusively (Brennan, 2002). His comprehensive textbook on the subject, Principles of Psychology, is so brilliantly written that copies are still in print (James, 1890, 2015). Unlike Wundt and Titchener, James was more interested in the importance of con- sciousness to everyday life than just its analysis. He believed that the scientific study of consciousness itself was not yet possible. Conscious ideas are constantly flowing in an ever-changing stream, and once you start thinking about what you were just thinking about, what you were thinking about is no longer what you were thinking about—it’s what you are thinking about—and … excuse me, I’m a little dizzy. I think you get the picture, anyway. Instead, James focused on how the mind allows people to function in the real world—how people work, play, and adapt to their surroundings, a viewpoint he called functionalism. (He was heavily influenced by Charles Darwin’s ideas about natural ­selection, in which physical traits that help an animal adapt to its environment and survive are passed on to its offspring.) If physical traits could aid in survival, why couldn’t behav- ioral traits do the same? Animals and people whose behavior helped them to survive would pass those traits on to their offspring, perhaps by teaching or even by some mech- anism of heredity.* (Remember that this was early in the days of trying to understand how heredity worked.) For example, a behavior such as avoiding the eyes of others in an elevator can be seen as a way of protecting one’s personal space—a kind of territorial protection that may have its roots in the primitive need to protect one’s home and source of food and water from intruders (Manusov & Patterson, 2006) or as a way of avoiding what might seem like a challenge to another person (Brown et al., 2005; Jehn et al., 1999). It is interesting to note that one of James’s early students was Mary Whiton ­Calkins, who completed every course and requirement for earning a Ph.D. but was denied that degree by Harvard University because she was a woman. She was allowed to take those classes as a guest only. Calkins eventually established a psychological laboratory at Wellesley College. Her work was some of the earliest research in the area of human memory and the psychol- ogy of the self. In 1905, she became the first female president of the American Psychological Association (Furumoto, 1979, 1991; Zedler, 1995). Unlike Washburn, Calkins never earned the elusive Ph.D. degree despite a successful career as a professor and researcher (Guthrie, 2004). Women were not the only minority to make contributions in the early days of psy- chology. In 1920, for example, Francis Cecil Sumner became the first African American to earn a Ph.D. in psychology at Clark University. He eventually became the chair of the psychology department at Howard University and is assumed by many to be the father of African American psychology (Guthrie, 2004). Kenneth and Mamie Clark worked to show the negative effects of school segregation on African American children (Lal, 2002). In the 1940s, Hispanic psychologist George (Jorge) Sanchez conducted research in the area of intelligence testing, focusing on the cultural biases in such tests (Tevis, 1994). Other names of noted minorities include Dr. Charles Henry Thompson, the first African American to receive a doctorate in educational psychology in 1925, Dr. Albert Sidney Beckham, senior assistant psychologist at the National Committee for Mental Hygiene at the Illinois Institute for Juvenile Research in the early 1930s; Dr. Robert Prentiss Daniel, who became president of Shaw University in North Carolina and finally the president of Virginia State College; Dr. Inez Beverly Prosser (1897–1934), who was the first African functionalism American woman to earn a Ph.D. in educational psychology; Dr. Howard Hale Long, early perspective in psychology associ- who became dean of administration at Wilberforce State College in Ohio; and Dr. Ruth ated with William James, in which the Howard, who was the first African American woman to earn a Ph.D. in psychology (not focus of study is how the mind allows educational psychology) in 1934 from the University of Minnesota (Guthrie, 2004). people to adapt, live, work, and play. *heredity: the transmission of traits and characteristics from parent to offspring through the actions of genes. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 5 10/12/2017 12:23:14 PM  6  Chapter 1 Since those early days, psychology has seen an increase in the contributions of all minorities, although the percentages are still small when compared to the population at large. The American Psychological Association’s Office of Ethnic Minority Affairs features notable psychologists as part of their Ethnicity and Health in America Series. Their Web site provides brief biographies of ethnic minority psychologists and work or research high- lights particularly related to chronic health conditions for several ethnic groups: African American, Asian American, Hispanic Latino, and Native American. For more informa- tion, visit http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/ethnicity-health/psychologists/. Is functionalism still an important point of view in psychology? In the new field of psychology, functionalism offered an alternative viewpoint to the structuralists. But like so many of psychology’s early ideas, it is no longer a major perspective. Instead, one can find elements of functionalism in the modern fields of edu- cational psychology (studying the application of psychological concepts to education) and industrial/organizational psychology (studying the application of psychological concepts to businesses, organizations, and industry), as well as other areas in psychology. Functional- ism also played a part in the development of one of the more modern perspectives, evolu- tionary psychology, discussed later in this chapter. Three Influential Approaches: Gestalt, Psychoanalysis, and Behaviorism 1.2 Summarize the basic ideas and the important people behind the early approaches known as Gestalt, psychoanalysis, and behaviorism. While the structuralists and functionalists argued with each other and among them- selves, other psychologists were looking at psychology in several other ways. Gestalt Psychology: The Whole Is Greater Than the Sum of Its Parts Max Wertheimer (VERT-hi-mer), like James, objected to the structuralist point of view, but for different reasons. Wertheimer believed that psychological events such as perceiving* and sensing** could not be broken down into any smaller elements and still be properly understood. For example, you can take a smartphone apart, but then you no longer have a smartphone—you have a pile of unconnected bits and pieces. Or, just as a melody is made up of individual notes that can only be understood if the notes are in the correct relationship to one another, so perception can only be understood as a whole, entire event. Hence the familiar slogan, “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” Wertheimer and others believed that people naturally seek out patterns (“wholes”) in the sensory information available to them. Figure 1.1 A Gestalt Perception Wertheimer and others devoted their efforts to studying sensation and perception in The eye tends to “fill in” the blanks here and this new perspective, Gestalt psychology. Gestalt (Gesh-TALT) is a German word meaning sees both of these figures as circles rather “an organized whole” or “configuration,” which fit well with the focus on studying whole than as a series of dots or a broken line. patterns rather than small pieces of them. See Figure 1.1 for an example of Gestalt percep- tual patterns. Today, Gestalt ideas are part of the study of cognitive psychology, a field focus- ing not only on perception but also on learning, memory, thought processes, and problem solving; the basic Gestalt principles of perception are still taught within this newer field (Ash, 1998; Kohler, 1925, 1992; Wertheimer, 1982). The Gestalt approach has also been Gestalt psychology influential in psychological therapy, becoming the basis for a therapeutic technique called early perspective in psychology focus- Gestalt therapy. ing on perception and sensation, particularly the perception of patterns Sigmund Freud’s Theory of Psychoanalysis It should be clear by now that psychol- and whole figures. ogy didn’t start in one place and at one particular time. People of several different viewpoints *perceiving: becoming aware of something through the senses. **sensing: seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, or smelling something. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 6 10/12/2017 12:23:14 PM  The Science of Psychology   7 were trying to promote their own perspective on the study of the human mind and behavior in different places all over the world. Up to now, this chapter has focused on the physiologists who became interested in psychology, with a focus on understanding consciousness but little else. The medical profession took a whole different approach to psychology. What about Freud? Everybody talks about him when they talk about psychology. Are his ideas still in use? Sigmund Freud had become a noted physician in Austria while the structuralists were arguing, the functionalists were specializing, and the Gestaltists were looking at the big picture. Freud was a neurologist, a medical doctor who specializes in disorders of the nervous system; he and his colleagues had long sought a way to understand the patients who were coming to them for help. Freud’s patients suffered from nervous disorders for which he and other doctors could find no physical cause. Therefore, it was thought, the cause must be in the mind, and that is where Freud began to explore. He proposed that there is an unconscious (unaware) mind into which we push, or repress, all of our threatening urges and desires. He believed that these repressed urges, in trying to surface, created the nervous disor- ders in his patients (Freud et al., 1990). Freud stressed the importance of early childhood experiences, believing that per- sonality was formed in the first 6 years of life; if there were significant problems, those problems must have begun in the early years. Some of his well-known followers were Alfred Adler, Carl Jung, Karen Horney, and his own daughter, Anna Freud. Anna Freud began what became known as the ego move- ment in psychology, which produced one of the best-known psychologists in the study of personality development, Erik Erikson. Freud’s ideas are still influential today, although in a somewhat modified form. He had a number of followers in addition to those already named, many of whom became famous by altering Freud’s theory to fit their own viewpoints, but his basic ideas are still discussed and debated. While some might think that Sigmund Freud was the first person to deal with peo- ple suffering from various mental disorders, the truth is that mental illness has a fairly long (and not very pretty) history. Freudian psychoanalysis, the theory and therapy based on Freud’s ideas, has been the basis of much modern psychotherapy (a process in which a trained psychological pro- fessional helps a person gain insight into and change his or her behavior), but another major and competing viewpoint has actually been more influential in the field of psy- chology as a whole. Pavlov, Watson, and the Dawn of Behaviorism Ivan Pavlov, like Freud, was not a psychologist. He was a Russian physiologist who showed that a ref lex (an involun- tary reaction) could be caused to occur in response to a formerly unrelated stimulus. While working with dogs, Pavlov observed that the salivation reflex (which is nor- psychoanalysis mally produced by actually having food in one’s mouth) could be caused to occur in an insight therapy based on the theory response to a totally new stimulus, in this case, the sound of a ticking metronome. At of Freud, emphasizing the revealing of the onset of his experiment, Pavlov would turn on the metronome and give the dogs unconscious conflicts; Freud’s term for food, and they would salivate. After several repetitions, the dogs would salivate to the both the theory of personality and the sound of the metronome before the food was presented—a learned (or “conditioned”) therapy based on it. reflexive response (Klein & Mowrer, 1989). This process was called conditioning. By the early 1900s, psychologist John B. Watson had tired of the arguing among behaviorism the structuralists; he challenged the functionalist viewpoint, as well as psychoanalysis, the science of behavior that focuses on with his own “science of behavior,” or behaviorism (Watson, 1924). Watson wanted to observable behavior only. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 7 10/12/2017 12:23:14 PM  8  Chapter 1 bring psychology back to a focus on scientific inquiry, and he felt that the only way to do that was to ignore the whole consciousness issue and focus only on observable behavior— something that could be directly seen and measured. He had read of Pavlov’s work and thought that conditioning could form the basis of his new perspective of behaviorism. Watson was certainly aware of Freud’s work and his views on unconscious repres- sion. Freud believed that all behavior stems from unconscious motivation, whereas ­Watson believed that all behavior is learned. Freud had stated that a phobia, an irratio- nal fear, is really a symptom of an underlying, repressed conflict and cannot be “cured” without years of psychoanalysis to uncover and understand the repressed material. Watson believed that phobias are learned through the process of conditioning and set out to prove it. Along with his colleague Rosalie Rayner, he took a baby, known as “Little Albert,” and taught him to fear a white rat by making a loud, scary noise every time the infant saw the rat until finally just seeing the rat caused the infant to cry and become fearful (Watson & Rayner, 1920). Even though “Little Albert” was not afraid of the rat at the start, the experiment worked very well—in fact, he later appeared to be afraid of other fuzzy things including a rabbit, a dog, and a sealskin coat. This sounds really bizarre—what does scaring a baby have to do with the science of psychology? Watson wanted to prove that all behavior was a result of a stimulus–response relation- ship such as that described by Pavlov. Because Freud and his ideas about unconscious moti- vation were becoming a dominant force, Watson felt the need to show the world that a much simpler explanation could be found. Although scaring a baby sounds a little cruel, he felt that the advancement of the science of behavior was worth the baby’s relatively brief discomfort. A graduate student of Watson’s named Mary Cover Jones later decided to repeat Watson and Rayner’s study but added training that would “cancel out” the phobic reac- tion of the baby to the white rat. She duplicated the “Little Albert” study with another child, “Little Peter,” successfully conditioning Peter to be afraid of a white rabbit (Jones, 1924). She then began a process of counterconditioning, in which Peter was exposed to the white rabbit from a distance while eating a food that he really liked. The pleasure of the food outweighed the fear of the faraway rabbit. Day by day, the situation was repeated with the rabbit being brought closer each time, until Peter was no longer afraid of the rabbit. Jones went on to become one of the early pioneers of behavior therapy. Behavior- ism is still a major perspective in psychology today. It has also influenced the develop- ment of other perspectives, such as cognitive psychology. Going Beyond the Euro-American Traditions of Psychology Differences in the ways of thinking, behaving, and lifestyles of people of different cul- tures have been documented for a long time by travelers, traders, warriors, invaders, and anthropologists. Such differences, however, did not attract the attention of psychol- ogists until the early 1970s when culture started coming up as a salient factor in studies of human psychological functioning. The establishment of the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology and the Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology marked the beginning of systematic research on culture-behavior relationship. Gustav Jahoda, Harry Triandis, Walter Lonner, John Berry, Pierre Dasen, Ype Poortinga, Michael Cole, and sev- eral others, have played a key role in shaping the discipline. From the Indian continent, Durganand Sinha, R.C. Tripathi, Janak Pandey, and Girishwar Misra have greatly con- tributed to the development of the field. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 8 10/12/2017 12:23:14 PM  The Science of Psychology   9 Several textbooks, handbooks, and field guides have been published in the sub- ject area. At present, there is hardly any department of psychology where a course is not offered under titles like “cross-cultural psychology”, “cultural psychology”, “culture and psychology”, “psychology and culture”. Courses like Indian psychology, Chinese psychology, or Asian psychology share the same spirit as long as they try to search for the cultural roots of behavior of the people living in the respective nations. This field has come to be known as “indigenous psychology”. Increasing cultural diversity in different parts of the world over the last few decades, the quest of immigrant groups to maintain their cultural identity, and failures related to assimilation of smaller groups into the larger societies have led to the belief that culture matters in human life. Psychologists who share a cultural perspective on human behavior argue that psychology has remained, and still largely continues to be, culture-bound and culture-blind. Psychology textbooks are full of theories, models, and principles of behavior that have been developed in the West, based on research with the Euro-American university students. Also, in research studies, there is a general disregard for cultural variables in the pursuit of a “universal psychology” (Berry, 2013). Interest in the study of universality of psychological processes is rooted in the belief about human mind as a highly abstract central processing unit (CPU) that functions inde- pendently of the subject that it is thinking about, or of the background within which it is thinking. Context and content in this conceptualization are viewed as unwanted noise, and every effort is made to keep them as distant as possible in order to capture the pur- est view of the CPU. The computer metaphor here is no accident; many psychologists are still of the view that cultural variations in the ways of thinking cannot exist simply because context and content that remain outside the operation of the underlying CPU have variations as offered by different cultures. In contrast, the cultural psychologists believe that mind operates in interaction with “what” it is thinking about, and the “con- text” within which it is thinking. Culture provides the theme for thinking, and also the ways of thinking. Culture and Psychological Processes The Concept of Culture While the debate about generality vs. cultural specificity of human psychological processes continues, the term culture is also problematic. Different textbooks define culture in so many diverse ways that Jahoda (2012) feels like freeing researchers to suggest their own definitions of “culture” in research. Whether this will do any good to the discipline of psychology is doubtful (Tripathi & Mishra, 2012). Is culture such a complex concept that it cannot be defined in any agree- able way? To some extent, this appears to be true. Even if we are able to define culture, can a conceptual definition grant culture the legitimate status of an inde- pendent variable in the study of psychological processes? In cross-cultural psy- chology, researchers seem to have been struggling with both these problems. Even the simpler definitions of culture are not helpful. For example, Linton (1936) defined culture as “the total social heredity of the mankind”. Herskovits (1948) considered culture as “the man-made part of the environment”. Berry, Poortinga, Chasiotis, Breugelsmans, and Sam (2011) have defined culture as “a shared way of life of a group of people”. For Heine (2015), culture is a set of information (e.g., ideas, beliefs, and meaning) acquired from other members of the group. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 9 10/12/2017 12:23:14 PM  10  Chapter 1 These definitions, since they fail to suggest the mechanism(s) through which culture influences human psychological functioning, present difficulties in using culture as a variable in psychological studies. Then there are as much behavioral variations within any culture as across cultures. Hence, a cultural level explanation of human behavior is fraught with difficulties. This requires “unpack- aging” of culture, which is lacking in most of the studies. Unpackaging Culture for Psychological Research To understand human behavior in the cultural context, Berry’s (1976) eco-cultural framework has been widely used. This framework considers culture as adaptive to ecology and behavior to culture. In other words, the cultural and behavioral phenomenon cannot be understood in isolation from the ecological conditions of people’s life. Berry (1980) has suggested a scheme for unpackaging culture into variables, which are clearly identifiable and measurable. Customary practices of groups, recurrent experiences, learning opportunities (e.g., for hunting), and cul- tural supports (e.g., socialization patterns) are some such variables; any one of these can be reliably assessed and used to interpret behavioral differences of individuals within or across cultures. Evoked and Transmitted Aspects of Cultures A distinction is made between “evoked culture” and “transmitted culture”. In the former case, the ecological conditions directly lead to certain behaviors. For example, the demand of survival in the forest ecology leads to high differentiated cognitive functioning in hunters and gatherers. Transmitted culture is learned via social transmission. For example, hunting-gathering parents teach their children to pay attention to minute details (i.e., cognitively behave in a differentiated man- ner) in the forest ecology. Which one of these two cultural forms has a more pervasive influence on human psychological functioning? Since the effect of “evoked culture” has not been much examined in psychological research, the evidence is more in support of “transmitted culture”. Cultural Change and Human Behavior An important feature of cultures is that they do not remain static; instead, they change and evolve over time. While in the earlier days the changes took place relatively slowly, in the recent decades, they have been occurring at a faster rate due to the increasing mutual contact of people of different cultural groups and their products. The phenomenon has been widely studied under the rubric of “acculturation” (Berry, 1990; Sam & Berry, 2016). Transportation facilities, com- munication technologies (e.g., internet, mobile phones), Western type schooling, urbanization, and industrial economy, etc., have made acculturation a phenome- non of global interest. In the process of acculturation, one culture often becomes dominant or donor, whereas others become subservient or recipient of the influences. This can be observed not only in personal and social spheres of life, but also in the academic sphere. The US American psychology being taught and practised in all parts of the world is a clear evidence of cultural hegemony in the academic world, although we know very well that the US Americans do not represent the psyche or behavior patterns of the whole universe. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 10 10/12/2017 12:23:14 PM  The Science of Psychology   11 Culture Matters: Some Empirical Evidences Those, who subscribe to biological approaches to human behavior, find it hard to believe that culture plays a significant role in shaping human behavior. Nonethe- less, there is enormous evidence to indicate that both the development and dis- play of human behavior are deeply influenced by culture. Besides the biological parents, humans also have cultural parents. A vast amount of social and cultural learning in their case takes place through the processes of enculturation, social- ization, and acculturation. The effects of these processes are reflected both at the level of basic psychological functioning of individuals (e.g., perception, learn- ing, memory, thinking, etc.) as well as in many broader behavioral domains (e.g., social, organizational, and health). Much of this evidence has been presented in textbooks of cross-cultural psychology (e.g., Berry, et al., 2011; Segall, Dasen, Berry & Poortinga, 1999). In the following pages, we will look at a few studies that deal particularly with cultural influences on human cognitive functioning. The role of cultural factors in human cognitive functioning has been widely examined in research. Segall, Campbell, and Herskovits’ (1966) work is a classic example of research that demonstrates the influence of ecological and cultural factors on susceptibility to visual illusions, which once upon a time were consid- ered to be universal and “culture free”. Berry’s (1966) work on the development of spatial perceptual skills and of cognitive styles (Berry, 1976) clearly shows that human cognitive functioning is largely shaped by the features of ecology and culture. Research carried out in India strongly supports the claim that “culture mat- ters” in human life. A good example is Sinha’s (1979) work with children of the Birhor (nomadic hunters-gatherers group) and Oraon (settled agricultural group) Adivasi groups of the Chotanagpur region of Bihar. He found that Birhor children were perceptually more differentiated than the Oraon children on a task, which required them to locate certain objects embedded in a complex background (e.g., snakes in the forest). Mishra, Sinha, and Berry (1996) extended this line of research. They stud- ied the cognitive functioning of nomadic hunter-gatherer Birhor, semi-sedentary Asur, and settled agriculturist Oraon Adivasi groups of varying levels of accultur- ation in the state of Bihar (now in Jharkhand). The findings revealed that as com- pared to Asur and Oraon groups, the Birhor group displayed a more differentiated cognitive functioning. Hunting-gathering activities in the forest ecology essen- tially require differentiation of fruits, roots, mushrooms, and animals, etc., from the camouflaged surrounding of the forest, an ability in the absence of which a hunter or gatherer would not survive. This ability was reinforced by the empha- sis placed on independence, autonomy, and achievement in child socialization and training in the Birhor society. The effect of ecology on cognitive functioning of people in this study was found to be so strong that it could not be displaced by the relatively recent experiences of acculturation, which was also linked to greater differentiation. These effects were also noted on the performance of tasks that involved cognitive processes other than that of differentiation. Mishra and Berry (2017) have recently examined the role of ecology and culture in cognitive functioning of hunters-gatherers, agriculturists, and wage earners by drawing several samples from Canada, China, Ghana, and India. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 11 10/12/2017 12:23:15 PM  12  Chapter 1 They again found that hunters-gatherers, negotiating life in the forest ecology at all locations (Canada, Ghana, and India) demonstrated greater cognitive differ- entiation as compared to agriculturists (and also wage earners, to some extent), who showed greater contextualization in cognition. This work indicates that even though the cognitive processes are universal, the features of eco-cultural con- texts influence the way in which they are developed, deployed, and displayed in a variety of situations. In these studies, school education came up as a robust factor to influence cognitive functioning of people in general, but of the Indian Adivasi children in particular, suggesting that acculturation also provides an important context for shaping human cognitive functioning. Studies of spatial language and cognition present us with another good example of cultural influence on psychological processes. In tracing the devel- opment of spatial concepts, Piaget had proposed that children develop spatial understanding first by using topological references (object-centered, such as “the ball is near the table”); these are later on taken over by the use of projec- tive references (also called relative or egocentric, such as “the ball is to the left of me”). The last to appear in the sequence are the Euclidean references (also called environment-centered or geocentric references, such as “the ball is to the east”). This sequence of spatial cognitive development has been taken as uni- versal. A similar sequence of development was discovered in the case of spatial language, starting from the deictic (e.g., saying “this way-that way” often accom- panied by gestures), moving on to the relative language (also called egocentric, such as the use of left, right, front, back), and finally to the absolute language (also called geocentric, such as the use of north, south, east, west). The linguistic universalism met challenge from some work, which demon- strated that in some cultures, there was clear preference for the use of “abso- lute” frame of reference (FoR) in language even though other spatial language frames (e.g., intrinsic, relative) were potentially available (see Levinson, 2003). Similar preference was also reflected in spatial encoding of the objects. This strong form of “linguistic relativism” (that language determines cognition) holds that people engage in encoding of spatial displays depending on which spatial language is emphasized in their cultural context. Dasen and Mishra (2010) car- ried out a series of co-ordinated studies in India, Indonesia, Nepal, and Switzer- land to examine the development of spatial FoR in language and cognition, and their relationship, in the course of children’s development. They systematically documented the languages children used when they described a variety of tasks and situations (called language elicitation tasks), and the ways in which they non-linguistically encoded spatial displays in experimentally created situations. Results indicated that children did not always use the same spatial FoR in language and cognition. More interesting was the fact that in some cultures (e.g., in Switzerland), children moved from the use of deictic to the use of egocentric FoR, but they never used a geocentric FoR, either in language or encoding. In other cultures (e.g., in Varanasi, India and Bali, Indonesia), children largely used a geocentric FoR right from the early age, which in the course of development became stronger. At each of these locations, there were clear variations in the use of spatial FoR according to children’s ecological and cultural conditions. For example, in India, children who lived in a village or attended a Sanskrit-medium school in the city, mainly used the geocentric FoR, whereas children who lived in the city and attended a Hindi-medium school, mainly used the egocentric FoR. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 12 10/12/2017 12:23:15 PM  The Science of Psychology   13 In Nepal, children of the mountainous region mainly used a geocentric FoR, whereas those living in the city of Kathmandu and attending English-medium schools largely used the egocentric FoR. Similar differences in the use of spatial FoR were noted in Bali between rural and urban children, and between children attending schools in the traditional Balinese and standard Indonesian languages. These studies and many others indicate that while the basic psychologi- cal processes are available with individuals everywhere, ecological and cultural contexts create infinite variations in the development and display of these pro- cesses. People develop competencies in different behavioral domains depend- ing on which domain is culturally more salient for them. They also display their underlying competencies when the appropriate contexts call for them. My own work spanning over the last four decades has led me to believe that, depending on the demands of ecological and cultural settings, people develop a cognitive style (i.e., a preferred way of dealing with tasks and situations), which is adaptive to their respective settings. Since each cognitive style carries functional value, evaluative judgments (e.g., good or bad, superior or inferior) about any one of them will be ethnocentric. Knowledge that derives from psychological research and takes culture into account will be less ethnocentric. Culture in the form of “cumulative learning” is unique to humans. Language and other learning processes contribute significantly to this uniqueness. Social and cultural transmission processes influence human functioning in all domains of life. Hence, psychological studies, which ignore culture in the pursuit of a “uni- versal” science of behavior, provide us with a sketchy picture of the complex human psychological functioning. Search for cultural roots or routes of human behavior needs greater attention in societies characterized by cultural diversity such as India. Cultural diversity exists and is displayed in psychological func- tioning everywhere. Whether psychologists take it into consideration or not in understanding human behavior is a matter of their sensitivity, disciplinary iden- tity, personal preferences, and social concerns. R.C. Mishra (Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi) Practice Quiz How much do you remember? Pick the best answer. 1. In the definition of psychology, mental processes means a. Wilhelm Wundt c. John Watson a. internal, covert processes. b. William James d. Sigmund Freud b. unconscious processes. 4. Who was the first woman to complete the coursework for a doctor- c. outward or overt actions and reactions. ate at Harvard University? d. only human behavior. a. Mary Whiton Calkins c. Margaret Washburn 2. Which early psychologist was the first to try to bring objectivity and b. Mary Cover Jones d. Ruth Howard measurement to the concept of psychology? 5. Which early perspective tried to return to a focus on scientific inquiry a. Wilhelm Wundt c. John Watson by ignoring the study of consciousness? b. William James d. Sigmund Freud a. behaviorism c. psychoanalysis 3. Which of the following early psychologists would have been most b. functionalism d. Gestalt likely to agree with the statement, “The study of the mind should focus on how it functions in everyday life”? M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 13 10/12/2017 12:23:15 PM  14  Chapter 1 Psychology in India Background and Philosophical Origins Although psychology in India as a modern scientific discipline has a short history span- ning a century, the pursuit to know the mind and its functions goes back to ancient times. In India, several traditions of reflective thinking evolved, deliberating on mental states and processes with the goal of self-realization and emancipation from suffering. There have been extensive and in-depth explorations into the inner processes such as the self, consciousness, health and well-being, emotion and motivation, ethics and morality. Though many of these explorations have been based on reflection and experience, empir- ical analysis has also been attempted and documented. The vast literature pertaining to the Vedas, Smritis, Upanishads, Vedangas; treatises of the philosophical systems (for example, Nyaya, Mimansa, Vedanta, Carvaka, Yoga, Sam- khya, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Sufism); texts like Caraka Samhita and Susruta Sam- hita, Patanjali’s Yoga Sutra, Kautilya’s Arthashastra, Vatsyayana’s Kamasutra; and epics like Ramayana and Mahabharata, as well as Bhagvad Gita, offer extensive analyses of themes having significant psychological import. As Murphy and Murphy (1968) puts it, this cor- pus comprises “the first great psychological system.” However, there was no indepen- dent science of psychology in ancient and medieval India. Indian thinkers, pursuing a holistic–organic vision, provide us with a compre- hensive view of the interdependent systems of life and the universe. The framework of dharma, belief in continuity across life forms, a relational view of the self, context-sensitive thinking, and the principles of karma (action) and reincarnation provide a unique con- text for personhood and psychological processes. Indian thought about the mind and its processes has been synthetic in approach and many concepts have an universal appeal. The human character is seen as comprising distinct yet mutually dependent and interac- tive traits. There is considerable emphasis on transcending bodily identity and moving towards self-realization based on self-knowledge. In this view, knowing and being are highly interdependent. The Taittiriya Upanishad (c. 600 BCE) is amongst the oldest texts that elucidate five shells or sheaths (panchakoshas): annamaya (food-ful; comprising the gross physical body), pranamaya (energy-ful; the subtle body), manomaya (instinctive; the perceptual body), vijyanamaya (cognitive; the conscious body), and anandamaya (blissful; the transcendental body) (Raina, 2016). The atman (soul) is beyond these five sheaths. Similarly, the doctrine of trigunas (three qualities)—sattva, rajas and tamas—has been used to describe personality. They stand for purity, action, and inertia: the dominance of one or the other guna shapes the behavior of a person. The problems regarding nature, the states and functioning of consciousness, and the modes of its control had interested Indian seers. The detailed discussion of these problems in Patanjali’s Yoga Sutra is now receiving worldwide attention. The text uses direct empirical observation (pratyaksha) and inference (anumana), supplemented by com- parison (upamana), and intuition and testimony (sabda) to understand the problems of mankind. The unique feature of this approach is the use of first-person psychology in which the same person explores his own mental processes and emphasis on experiential enrichment and personal growth. The analysis of self, states of consciousness—partic- ularly samadhi and the fourth state or turiyavastha (see Table 1.1)—mind–body relation- ship, mental functions (cognition, perception, illusion, attention, and reasoning), mental health, and practical wisdom, have all been deliberated upon. Until recently, psychol- ogists only took a passing interest in these concepts. With globalization and increasing interaction of cultures and emerging interest among scholars, these concepts are now being used in theorization and in solving real-life problems. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 14 10/12/2017 12:23:15 PM  The Science of Psychology   15 Table 1.1 The Four States of Consciousness Jagratavastha Wakeful state The state of normal consciousness concerned with the gross world of matter. Swapnavastha Dream state Subconscious faculty of recognizing and getting an inkling of the holy experience of divinity and sanctity. It is concerned with the subtler aspects of human knowledge and experience. Prajnavastha Transcendental state of Dichotomy between grossness and subtlety disappears in consciousness super consciousness. It is pure prajna or consciousness of Divinity. Turiyavastha Highest state of The essential nature of the atman is experienced in this consciousness pure, tranquil, and steady state of super consciousness. The study of ideas and theories of Indian origin, now termed as Indian Psychology, was neglected during British colonial era, which suppressed the study of Indian knowl- edge systems. As a result, the concepts, methods, and theories could not get proper place in formal educational institutions, in fact, creating an aversion. In a recent volume entitled Psychology in the Indian Tradition, Rao and Paranjpe (2016) have presented a systematic account of Indian psychology. According to them, the study of the individual (jiva), which constitutes the body, mind, and consciousness, falls within the purview of Indian psychology. The mind is a hypothetical cognitive instru- ment related to body and consciousness. Consciousness stands for the non-physical aspect of the person. The person functions at three levels—observation (sravan), under- standing (manan), and transcognitive realization (nididhyasan). Human beings have the capacity to realize reality in the form of consciousness. The ultimate goal of human devel- opment is considered as liberation or moksha. It stands for freedom from existential con- straints. In this view, mind is the main source of suffering as well as a resource to calm the turbulence and safely take the person to the shores. The key challenge is incorrect knowl- edge (avidya). Distorted perception is the main cause of suffering which may be dealt with by adopting the paths of knowledge (jnana), devotion (bhakti), and work (karma). Finally, it may also be noted that in addition to empirical knowledge (para vidya), there is transcendental knowledge (aparavidya). Psychology in Modern India Psychology, as studied in the mainstream or Euro-American scholarly tradition, was first introduced at the University of Calcutta. Sir Brajendra Nath Seal, a renowned philoso- pher, drew the first syllabus for experimental psychology in 1905. The first psychology department in India was formally started in 1916, and Dr. N.N. Sengupta—trained at Harvard with Hugo Munsterberg, who was a student of Wilhelm Wundt—was its first chairman. In 1929, Sengupta moved to Lucknow University, and Professor Girindra Shek- har Bose succeeded him. Professor Bose was closely associated with Sigmund Freud and founded the Indian Psychoanalytic Society in 1922, which started publishing its journal Samiksha in 1947. In India, he was awarded the first doctorate in psychology for his work on repression. Bose did differ from Freud on many issues (Hartnack, 2001; Vaidyanathan & Kirpal, 1999). The department started an applied psychology wing in 1938. Soon, the Mysore and Patna universities also started courses in psychology. Dr. M.V. Gopalaswami, trained at the London University with Charles Spearman, the English psychologist, headed the department at Mysore. At Patna University, H.P. Maiti started the Institute of Psychological Research and Services. Subsequently, Professor S.M. Mohsin provided leadership at Patna and a large number of psychologists were trained. A dedicated brand of psychologists did pioneering work to establish modern psychology in India. A select list with the places where they worked is as follows: Professors Jamuna Prasad (Patna), V.K. Kothurkar (Pune), D. Sinha (Allahabad), H.S. Asthana (Sagar), Radha Nath Rath M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 15 10/12/2017 12:23:15 PM  16  Chapter 1 (Bhubaneshwar), Raj Narayan (Lucknow), A.K.P. Sinha (Patna), M.M. Sinha (Varanasi), T.E. Shanmugam (Chennai), E.I. George (Thiruvananthapuram), B. Krishnan (Mysore), H.C. Ganguly (Delhi), Anwar Ansari (Aligarh), M.C. Joshi (Jodhpur), E.G. Paramesh- waran (Hyderabad), Uday Pareek (Udaipur, Ahmedabad), S.N. Sinha (Jaipur), L.B. Tripa- thi (Gorakhpur), T.S. Saraswathi (Baroda), J.B.P. Sinha (Patna), R.C. Tripathi (Allahabad). They established departments of psychology and worked in different areas popularizing the discipline (see for details Bhushan, 2017). Early focus of research in India was experimental psychology, psychoanalysis, and psychological testing. During the early 1960s, many new university departments were established, and gradually, applied areas of psychology received boost in institutes of management, teacher training, defense, child development, communication studies, etc. Many of the early pioneers had received their professional training in England, the US, and Canada, and they continued to work in the Western tradition. In terms of professional development of the field, the Indian Psychological Associa- tion (IPA) was founded in 1925 and launched the Indian Journal of Psychology. In 1940, the Lumbini Park Mental Hospital was founded in Calcutta. In 1945, a psychology wing of Defense Research was established, which became part of the Defence Science Organiza- tion of India in 1949. In 1955, the National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS) was opened in Bangalore and the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology (IAAP) was established in 1962. The establishment of a hospital for mental diseases at Ranchi in 1962 was also an important event. The Indian Association of Clinical Psycholo- gists was formed in 1968, and in 1989, a new professional body, the National Academy of Psychology (NAOP), was founded. In 1997, National Brain Research Centre (NBRC) was established in Gurgaon, Haryana. In 2003, Pondicherry Manifesto of Indian Psychology, adopted by NAOP, emphasized on a shift towards Indian psychology. In 2009, the confer- ence of Asian Association of Social Psychology was organized in Delhi. In 2009, NAOP’s journal Psychological Studies became international and started publication in collaboration with Springer. In 2002, a center of cognitive science was also established at the Allahabad University. The scene has gradually changed and psychology has expanded in its scope; atten- tion is increasingly being paid to the study of not only academically stimulating prob- lems related to cognitive processes, personality processes, and human development but also to the challenges faced by the country such as poverty, prejudice and discrim- ination, socialization and morality, leadership style, health and well-being, etc. A dis- tinct trend is emerging which tries to foster psychology as culturally appropriate and acknowledges the indigenous knowledge systems available in India. In recent years, there is an upsurge of academic interest in these ideas. Several volumes have been pub- lished to bring traditional knowledge to the center stage, situating contemporary con- cerns in a cultural context (Bhawuk, 2011; Carnelissen, Dalal & Misra, 2010; Kakar, 1978, 1998; Kumar, 2011; Misra, 2011, 2012, 2014; Misra & Dalal, 2015; Misra & Varma, 2014; Nandy, 1984, 1995; Paranjpe, 1984, 1998; Paranjpe & Misra, 2012; Rao, Paranjpe & Dalal, 2008; Rao & Paranjpe, 2016; Safaya, 1975; Sinha, 1965, 1969, 1986, 1997; Sinha & Kao, 1997; Vahali, 2009) Furthermore, research publications, namely, the five ICSSR sur- veys of psychological researches in India (ICSSR, 1972; Misra, 2009; Pandey, 1988, 1994; Pareek, 1980) are encompassing many areas, suggesting that Indian researches involve a mix of several trends. While the majority is extending the established traditions of the Euro-American psychology, a concern for culturally relevant psychology is also evident. As a consequence, we notice increase in diversity, application orientation, and indigeniza- tion in contemporary research in India. Internationalization of Psychology Historically, World War II played a vital role in shaping the discipline of psychology. The connection between government agencies and psychological science grew stronger. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 16 10/12/2017 12:23:15 PM  The Science of Psychology   17 Prior to World War II, there were many centers for the study of psychology in Europe, as well as in America. As Danziger (1990) notes, the situation changed during the post-War period. Having become a superpower, the US and its sciences gained ascendency. Amer- ican psychology became the norm and other countries were pushed to the periphery. This one-way flow of knowledge created an imbalance. However, in the 1960s, owing to political and economic compulsions, American psychology was exported to other countries. Many countries obtained freedom from colonial rule and opted for democratic functioning. A resistance also started against the American hegemony. The institution of American psychology became very strong and it became difficult to avoid the concepts, theories, and methods of American psychology. The movements of cross-cultural psychology, cultural psychology, and indigeniza- tion of psychology drew attention to the role of culture in shaping people’s psychologi- cal make-up. It was realized that the study of behavior and mental processes cannot be pursued without placing them in a cultural context. It was noted that the universal (etic), as well as the culturally specific (emic) aspects of psychological functioning need to be studied. The etics also should not be presupposed and imposed. They have to be derived on the basis of studying the emics from various cultures. Culture encompasses lifestyles, values, practices, and goals, which provide distinct identities to the people and commu- nities. The specific ecological conditions and resources available in a region enable peo- ple to think, experience emotions, and act in specific ways. In this way, culture acts as affordance as well as constraint. As we shall learn, there is growing empirical evidence that there are substantial and functionally valuable differences across cultures in the way notions like self, morality, and personality are conceptualized, problems are thought and solved, norms followed, people are led and motivated, decisions taken, and information integrated. In the various chapters of this volume, you will get some glimpses of the cul- tural variations in psychological processes. Indeed, contemporary psychology is becoming multifaceted and psychologists are working on many fronts to not only understand and explain psychological functions but also to enhance and regulate them with the goal of improving the quality of life. The study of psychology is becoming interdisciplinary as the problems encountered belong to several domains. The evolution of the discipline of psychology is becoming more com- plicated and exciting as natural resources are depleting and the prevailing consumerist view of life is fuelling the needs and aspirations, and deepening the environmental cri- sis. This requires rediscovering human nature by integrating the wisdom gained from diverse cultural traditions. This volume invites you to engage with the basic psychologi- cal processes and think critically about them so that you may contribute to the well-being of everyone including yourself. The Field of Psychology Today Even in the twenty-first century, there isn’t one single perspective that is used to explain all human behavior and mental processes. There are actually seven modern perspectives. Modern Perspectives 1.3 Summarize the basic ideas behind the seven modern perspectives in psychology. Two of psychology’s modern perspectives are updated versions of psychoanalysis and behaviorism, while the others focus on people’s goals, thought processes, social and cul- tural factors, biology, and genetics. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 17 10/12/2017 12:23:15 PM  18  Chapter 1 Psychodynamic Perspective Freud’s theory is still used by many professionals in therapy situations. It is far less common today than it was a few decades ago, however, and even those who use his techniques modify them for contemporary use. In the more modern psychodynamic perspective, the focus may still include the unconscious mind and its influence over conscious behavior and on early childhood experiences, but with less of an emphasis on sex and sexual motivations and more emphasis on the devel- opment of a sense of self, social and interpersonal relationships, and the discovery of other motivations behind a person’s behavior. Some modern psychodynamic practi- tioners have even begun to recommend that the link between neurobiology (the study of the brain and nervous system) and psychodynamic concepts should be more fully explored (Glucksman, 2006). Behavioral Perspective Like modern psychodynamic perspectives, behaviorism is still also very influential. When its primary supporter, John B. Watson, moved on to greener pastures in the world of advertising, B. F. Skinner became the new leader of the field. Skinner not only continued research in classical conditioning, but he also devel- oped a theory called operant conditioning to explain how voluntary behavior is learned (Skinner, 1938). In this theory, behavioral responses that are followed by pleasurable con- sequences are strengthened, or reinforced. For example, a child who cries and is rewarded by getting his mother’s attention will cry again in the future. Skinner’s work is discussed later in more depth. In addition to the psychodynamic and behavioral perspectives, there are five newer perspectives that have developed within the last 60 years. Humanistic Perspective Often called the “third force” in psychology, humanism was really a reaction to both psychoanalytic theory and behaviorism. If you were a psy- chologist in the early to mid-1900s, you were either a psychoanalyst or a ­behaviorist— there weren’t any other major viewpoints to rival those two. Behaviorist B. F. Skinner puts a rat through its paces. What challenges might arise from In contrast to the psychoanalytic focus on sexual development and behaviorism’s applying information gained from studies focus on external forces in guiding personality development, some professionals began with animals to human behavior? to develop a perspective that would allow them to focus on people’s ability to direct their own lives. Humanists held the view that people have free will, the freedom to choose their own destiny, and strive for self-actualization, the achievement of one’s full potential. Two of the earliest and most famous founders of this view were Abraham Maslow (1908– 1970) and Carl Rogers (1902–1987). Today, humanism exists as a form of psychotherapy aimed at self-understanding and self-improvement. psychodynamic perspective Cognitive Perspective Cognitive psychology, which focuses on how people think, modern version of psychoanalysis that remember, store, and use information, became a major force in the field in the 1960s. It is more focused on the development wasn’t a new idea, as the Gestalt psychologists had themselves supported the study of of a sense of self and the discovery of mental processes of learning. The development of computers (which just happened to motivations behind a person’s behav- make pretty good models of human thinking) and discoveries in biological psychology ior other than sexual motivations. all stimulated an interest in studying the processes of thought. The ­cognitive ­perspective with its focus on memory, intelligence, perception, thought processes, problem solving, cognitive perspective language, and learning has become a major force in psychology. modern perspective in psychology that Within the cognitive perspective, the relatively new field of cognitive ­neuroscience focuses on memory, intelligence, per- ception, problem solving, and learning. includes the study of the physical workings of the brain and nervous system when engaged in memory, thinking, and other cognitive processes. Cognitive neuroscientists cognitive neuroscience use tools for imaging the structure and activity of the living brain, such as magnetic reso- study of the physical changes in the nance imaging (MRI), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and positron emis- brain and nervous system during sion tomography (PET). The continually developing field of brain imaging is important thinking. in the study of cognitive processes. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 18 10/12/2017 12:23:15 PM  The Science of Psychology   19 Sociocultural Perspective Another modern perspective in psychology is the sociocultural perspective, which actually combines two areas of study: social psychology, which is the study of groups, social roles, and rules of social actions and relationships, and cultural psychology, which is the study of cultural norms,* values, and expectations. These two areas are related in that they are both about the effect that people have on one another, either individually or in a larger group such as a culture (Peplau & Taylor, 1997). Think about it: don’t you behave differently around your family members than you do around your friends? Would you act differently in another country than you do in your native land? Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky (1978) also used sociocultural concepts in forming his sociocultural theory of children’s cognitive development. The sociocultural perspective is important because it reminds people that the way they and others behave (or even think) is influenced not only by whether they are alone, with friends, in a crowd, or part of a group but also by the social norms, fads, class differ- ences, and ethnic identity concerns of the particular culture in which they live. Cross-­cultural research also fits within this perspective. In cross-cultural research, the contrasts and compar- isons of a behavior or issue are studied in at least two or more cultures. This type of research can help illustrate the different influences of environment (culture and training) when com- pared to the influence of heredity (genetics, or the influence of genes on behavior). For example, in a classic study covered in Chapter Twelve: Social Psychology, researchers Dr. John Darley and Dr. Bibb Latané (1968) found that the presence of other people actually lessened the chances that a person in trouble would receive help. The phe- nomenon is called the “bystander effect,” and it is believed to be the result of diffusion of responsibility, which is the tendency to feel that someone else is responsible for taking action when others are present. But would this effect appear in other cultures? There have been incidents in India that meet the criteria for the bystander effect: in 2002, a man under the influence of alcohol sexually assaulted a mentally challenged girl while the two were traveling on a train while five other passengers did nothing to stop the attack, and in 2012 a 20-year-old woman was molested outside a bar in Guwahati for thirty min- utes in view of many witnesses who did nothing (Tatke, 2012). India is a country that is culturally quite different from the United States, and individuals in India are typically expected to act for the greater good of others, yet the bystander effect apparently exists even there (Hofstede, 1980; Hofstede et al., 2002). Questions about how human behavior differs or is similar in different social or cultural settings are exactly what the sociocul- tural perspective asks and attempts to answer, using cross-cultural research. Biopsychological Perspective Biopsychology, or the study of the biological bases of behavior and mental processes, isn’t really as new a perspective as one might think. Also known as physiological psychology, biological psychology, psychobiology, and behavioral neuroscience, biopsychology is part of the larger field of neuroscience: the sociocultural perspective study of the physical structure, function, and development of the nervous system. Also, the previously discussed field of cognitive neuroscience often overlaps with bio- perspective that focuses on the rela- tionship between social behavior and psychology. culture, in which thinking and behav- In the biopsychological perspective, human and animal behavior is seen as a ior is seen as the product of learning direct result of events in the body. Hormones, heredity, brain chemicals, tumors, and dis- and shaping within the context of eases are some of the biological causes of behavior and mental events. Some of the topics one’s family, social group, and culture. researched by biopsychologists include sleep, emotions, aggression, sexual behavior, and learning and memory—as well as disorders. While disorders may have multiple causes biopsychological perspective (family issues, stress, or trauma, for example), research in biopsychology points clearly to perspective that attributes human and biological factors as one of those causes. animal behavior to biological events For example, research suggests that human sexual orientation may be related occurring in the body, such as genetic to the developing baby’s exposure in the womb to testosterone, especially in females influences, hormones, and the activity (­B reedlove, 2010; Grimbos et al., 2010), as well as the birth order of male children of the nervous system. *norms: standards or expected behavior. M02_CICC7961_05_SE_C01.indd 19 10/12/2017 12:23:15 PM  20  Chapter 1 (Puts et al., 2006). The birth order study suggests that the more older brothers a male child has, the more likely he is to have a homosexual orientation (Puts et al., 2006). The biopsychological perspective plays an even greater role in helping us understand psy- chological phenomena in other areas. There is clear evidence that genetics pla