Page 1

Teachers College ​greetings my name is dr. Eric Landrum from the Department of Psychology at Boise State University and this is a lecture for my capstone history of systems class on punt and the founding of psychology historians of psychology could certainly debate and have debated in the past about when psychology could be founded and who would be labeled the founder of psychology but typically the current opinion settles on Vilhelm vote who lived from 1832 until 1920 the zeitgeist the time of woun't was to truly ignore the practical applications of psychology but focus on ideas like the purpose of human existence so just to give you a little bit of background vote would have been in a department of philosophy because there was no Department of Psychology at the time he was in academia he would have been thinking about these ideas through a philosophical perspective and I think sometimes students are surprised to understand that psychology when it's founded in the date that we're going to use and you'll see that on the next slide is 1879 that when psychology is founded it's not about helping people it's not about the helping professions that we typically think of psychology today but really the zeitgeist that time psychology was founded was to ignore those practical applications and to be a hard-nosed science and so to look at you know why do we exist and how do we function what are what's the structure of consciousness things like that and so there is no movement for clinical psychology or abnormal psychology at the beginnings of psychology it's very much strove to be very scientific it mimics physics in a lot of way in the founding of psychology it wants formulas it wants to understand not how the world works but how the mind works how the brain works how our consciousness work together and so that's this notion that vilho month brings from a philosophical perspective and the founding of psychology so in 1874 volume Vogt publishes the principles of physiological psychic Algie a book that in fact a very long book which he sets out to establish psychology as a science and so the basic premise is that the mind works as a process the mind is not a location and again we know for thousands of years that this brain body this mind brain problem has existed it we talked about it when we talked about Descartes and other philosophical influences to psychology and so for vaunteth the mind is not a location but a process well when he publishes the principles of physiological psychology in 1874 I think one could make the argument that that could be the founding date 1874 but typically it's not that's not accepted as the founding date of psychology it is 1879 is the acceptance of the founding of psychology and so vonda's employed at the University of Leipzig in Germany and he founds that he is the founder of the first lab in the world for the study of experimental psychology and so obviously philosophers and others had been studying human behavior since there's been human behavior but what makes this important is that there's this is the first time that space and resources are set aside and it's actually labeled the study of Experimental Psychology and so 1879 is typically the starting date that most folks when they're talking about the history of psychology that's the label that's the date if we were taking that epidemic approach and memorizing names and dates that would be the one that we would memorize 1879 as that starting date in psychology I just a couple years later in 1881 he founded Belmont founded the first journal of psychology they call it philosophical studies now you might think that that's kind of odd and so here we are our founding we're coming out of philosophy departments at universities we're launching this new psychological science the science of psychology understanding mind processes and brain and the structure of consciousness and things like that so why in the world would your first journal in psychology not be labeled psychological studies that would make better sense than philosophical studies you would think that'd be confusing well the reason why vaunt did not call his journal Psychological studies is that there already was a journal at the time named psychological studies sadly however that wasn't about psychology is the way you and I would typically think about it the journal Psychological studies which was already in existence was about psychic phenomenon so it was about telekinesis in telepathy and clairvoyance and precognition and things like that so the name was already taken so he couldn't label his new journal he couldn't title it psychological studies one to try to describe what was going on those processes of mind.remember into these two big major categories and almost like the words independent independent variable it's really kind of too bad these words are so close to one another because it makes them easy to get confused so vaunt talked about immediate experiences and immediate experiences and you can see there on your screen on the on the

video the definitions that he would use and so once interest was very much in the immediate experience and so rather than listen to you say I have a headache he would want on someone doing introspection someone described he wants the description of the experience and so not your interpretation of it it's almost like he was looking for the raw data and not your interpretation of the raw data so for instance if someone had a toothache he would want them to describe the pulsing pain the was at a sharp pain or a dull pain wasn't an ache was her throbbing he'd want you to describe the characteristics that you were experiencing he would not want you to interpret for you and say I have a headache he would want those what he would call immediate experiences and so he'd want the raw unfiltered uninterpreted data not the interpreter of I have a headache and so what one did is that he trained others in his laboratory and his students in this technique of introspection where ideally one could by thinking carefully and following a protocol you could extract those immediate experiences rather than shoot to the chase so to speak you know and get to the mediate experiences so vaunt had this methodology called experimental introspection and so it was by the way in the picture that you see here vaunt is seated so that would be Avant around some of the instruments and surrounds some of his students in the laboratory so to do once a version of experimental introspection you would be trained to report observations of mental events rather than just report what was in your memory so again not saying oh yeah I remember having a toothache you would be trained very carefully to describe the experiences to describe the sensations the the raw data if you will of what led you to that conclusion so it's almost like before it's immediate before you get to the conclusion and when people slipped up and gave them oh yeah I remember that to think it was really bad would would call it a stimulus error so that would be the perception is being reported around in the sensation I think the sensation perception dichotomy really makes a lot of sense and it's kind of a useful thing for us to think about so think about vision for a second so if we talk about sensation perception sensation is that piece were these wavelengths of light come through your iris come through your cornea and hit your retina and you know there are rods and cones there and they are going to take those light waves and they're going to translate them you know Reggie Biv and all that good stuff and then those signals are sent through the optic chiasm to your brain all right well that whole process of grabbing the data and then translating it or actually it was called transduction transducing it into electrochemical message this is called transduction and that's the sensation sation the perception is what your brain makes sense of it's all yeah that's blue oh I love that shade of blue or wow that car is moving really fast so the sensation was the data collection and the perceptions the data analysis and I think that's a nice parallel to these notions for wouldn't so good experimental introspection was about data collection it was about sensation accept about what was going on in the mind but if someone skipped to the chase and then all of a sudden interpreted what was going on I see blue I see a car moving fast that would have been perception and for one perception would have been what he would call a stimulus error I don't want you to interpret what you see I want you to tell me the raw sensory data that's being input through the retina or in his case input into the mind I don't want you to interpret what's going on there make sense of it I want the data I want to understand the data that your brain is collecting and not the perception I don't want to I don't want to hear the analysis that your brain would offer to explain those phenomena just a little bit about once philosophical approach and you'll see a little bit of this repeated from prior lectures because they were antecedents to psychology that influenced one so for example votes philosophical approach was very much anti metaphysical to get what anti metaphysics means it's probably important to understand what metaphysics means and so I've got a little definition there for you so metaphysics is the principle going beyond mechanical and physical analyses and so it's you know the whole square the sum of its parts there's something beyond that and so vaunt was anti metaphysical which meant that we only analyzed the data that we've got in front of us so again that's that nice data collection versus data analysis I only want the raw data I don't want to do anything to it I don't want to apply formulas to it I don't want to take it and and have a linear transformation or anything like that and with the raw data so what was and it kind of makes sense if you understand what he'd been talking about and writing about for some time he was anti metaphysical but also he took this mental chronometry approach and we saw this in one of the earlier antecedents this is where that notion of the two you know the two astronomers are tracking the movement of objects in the night sky and they're trying to get the exact same x down and the times are slightly different and that leads to this notion of individual differences and so that mental chronometry and so complicated reaction times are the sum of individual acts and that was Donders a dutch physiologist who started lay the groundwork for that that vaunt then try to time cognitive acts in the laboratory and he had those elaborate instruments that you saw at that table he was sitting at where he was he would try to time the the the amount of cognitive processing of introspecting you try to time that and kind of gauge that and maybe something that was more complicated to introspect was achieved in a longer frame of time than something that was relatively easier to introspect and so you can see that zeitgeist here it's very mechanical we want to kind of dissect what's going on we

want to see the pieces in part so we don't want to go on beyond the pieces and parts we don't want to fabricate complicated you know explanations it's very anti metaphysical it's very concrete what's in front of us is what's important very much about the sensation and data collection not so much about the perception and the data analysis this mental chronometry just to kind of end up on some of the ideas that won't try the forward throughout his life you know these processes that vaughn hypothesized and that we if we could time them then we could see about more complex thoughts as a compared to lesser complex thoughts so this mental chronometry had these three steps that you see before so you know you can read them they're I guess I'll read them to it because I'm talking to you right now but that middle one is the one I want to come back to the woman's got the asterisk and so their proposal was that there were three parts of this notion of mental chronometry apprehension a person and in volunteerism so apprehension was the admission of sensory impressions into consciousness that passive process so this might be you know how things were entering one's mind if we are talking about the visual system this would be the impinging of the wavelengths on the retina the in the back of your eye all right the a perception was that paying attention that phrase that we use all the time paying attention to the impression the process of attending to it so what is to the particular perceptions was it tended to is a perceived insistence would be focusing our effort and so for visually this would be for example turning our head so that the most wavelengths could hit the fovea where there was a great concentration of rods and cones and so we get the best visual acuity when light is hitting our fovea which is part of the retina but in the vaunting system in terms of mind and brain and process this would be you know this introspection so we're going to apply this process systematically that we've been trained to do we're going to tune in we're going to focus our attention on the immediate processes the immediate experiences that are going on right now so I've got the apprehension which is the capturing of the data we've got the abbe perception which is focusing on the incoming data and then we've got that third step volume terrorism the power to organize contents of mind into higher-level thought processes this is what we're going to make sense of it so this is where we're going to interpret it this is where we are going to draw conclusions from it here's where we're going to apply our knowledge and our training to figure out what does this really mean what is what's going on in terms of the mental process and so I think the parallel for the visual example would be the perception so that's we see we can focus on an image in the distance or we can see something in the foreground and so the proposal here in the early days of vaunting psychology was this three mental chronometry process apprehension a perception and voluntourism i put an asterisk next to a perception because it's not a term that you hear a lot these days although there's one place where this term still continues to exist and depending on whether or not you've had sight for 21 psychological measurement or not you may not be familiar where that term exists do you have any idea here I'll pause go ahead you can guess no that's not it dragon no sorry that's not it either so app you'll see the term app perception when there's a certain acronym spelled out called the t-80 in the t-80 it stands for the Thematic Apperception tests and it's a kind of a relative of the Rorschach test in that you could use this in the therapeutic situation where the t-80 is comprised of I think it's like 38 or 40 black and white images cotton there were printed on cardstock and you could present these kind of vague images to a patient or client and then they would have to describe and they would have to describe the story or describe the thoughts of the person in the in the image or the situation they're seeing in the environment and then the trained psychotherapist then would would draw some conclusions from these interpretations of very vague stimulate and this really isn't really a devant other than I wanted to show you where this word a perception kind of still exists with us today with regard to the t-80 just for fun I'm going to show you some examples of t-80 cards and so you can imagine if you're in therapy and someone were to show you this and so you could ask the person well look at this guy right here tell me what he's thinking and so over a series of cards you might be able to think about what underlying themes that might emerge so rather than you know asking the therapist or the therapist asking a client so what's wrong with you which that may or may not be able to you know ascertain you could do things like this where you could have folks tell story so you have a patient look at a image like this and say what do you think the little boy is thinking about and again if you systematically did this over time if you did it over a number of cards so you could ask what's the man on the Left thinking what's the woman on the right thinking you know you might be able to figure out some of those themes or underlying processes here's another one I'm just showing you some examples just because they're kind of fun and then here's here's the last one I'll show you and so you could ask you know so the boy is staring at the violin so what do you think he's thinking you know what what kind of thought process these do you think and so it's kind of a I show it because it's a nice continuance to this notion of a perception that word still exists in our psychology vocabulary and there's some similarity in terms of other underlying themes that can emerge you know could we get a participant a patient to think about that immediate experience in the way that one would have thought about it and so just trying to get at some of that raw underlying data as opposed to well tell me why you're not feeling so good that kind of thing anyway that's it for me and won't and

the Sarah Lawrence College.