Wundt and Introspection

11 Key excerpts on "Wundt and Introspection"

• 

  eBook - ePub

  History and Philosophy of Psychology

  • Man Cheung Chung, Michael E. Hyland(Authors)
  • 2011(Publication Date)
  • Wiley-Blackwell

    (Publisher)

  dualist interpretation of the mind-body problem, that there is a mind substance and a body substance. This view is not correct, as Wundt’s interpretation was monist, i.e. one physical substance that manifests in terms of two different kinds of causality (Van Rappard, 1980). Wundt’s approach to the mind-body problem is consistent with more recent mind body theories, such as methodological complementarity (Kirsch and Hyland, 1987). Methodological complementarity derives from the suggestion of an atomic physicist, Niels Bohr, that reality can only be fully described by several mutually incompatible forms of description. The underlying reality is physical, but to describe that reality fully it is necessary to have psychological description.

  Wundt used a form of introspection to investigate immediate experience, but his introspection was very different from that normally associated with the word. Wundt did not use the word introspection; instead he used the term internal perception (Wahrnehmung ). Internal perception means focusing on the experience of sensation itself – not any interpretation of that sensation. The ability to engage in inner perception was a skill only achieved after lengthy training, because there is a natural tendency to report mediate experience rather than immediate experience. For example, if a table is presented as a stimulus, there is a natural tendency to report seeing a table. However, if immediate experience is reported, then the stimulus should be reported as flat plane under which are four cylindrical objects (assuming the legs are round) of a certain colour. Wundt developed scientific rules for his form of introspection, all based on the procedure of presenting a stimulus to an observer. These were:

  • First, the observer needs to be properly trained. It is interesting to note that in Wundt’s laboratory there is no clear demarcation between participant and experimenter. His students experimented on themselves! The term ‘subject’ appears later in the history of psychology.
  • Second, the observer knows when the stimulus is about to be presented. The observer must not be taken by surprise.
  • Third, the observer must be in a state of ‘strained attention’. The observer must be waiting and ready for the stimulus, so the stimulus and not some memory of the stimulus is reported.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Points of View in the Modern History of Psychology

  • Claude E. Buxton(Author)
  • 2013(Publication Date)
  • Academic Press

    (Publisher)

  One other methodological development particularly troubled Wundt. This was the specialized, or systematic, introspection movement that appeared around the turn of the century in the work of Titchener, Külpe, and their students. As Titchener (1912) describes it: The experimenter of the early nineties [when Titchener was in Leipzig] trusted, first of all, in his instruments: chronoscope and kymograph and tachistoscope were—it is hardly an exaggeration to say—of more importance than the observer . . . Now, twenty years after, we have changed all that. The movement toward qualitative analysis has culminated in what is called, with a certain redundancy of expression, the method of systematic experimental introspection. (p. 427) In an earlier critical comment on Titchener's methods, Wundt (1900a) uses the phrase introspective method to indicate precisely what he considers to be a verfehlte Methode, or false method (p. 180). In express-ing his exasperation at Titchener's backward step toward introspection, Wundt (1900a) writes: Introspective method [introspective Methode] re-lies either on arbitrary observations that go astray or on a withdrawal to a lonely sitting room where it becomes lost in self-absorption. The unreli-ability of this method is today rather universally recognized (p. 180, italics added). He concludes: Clearly, Titchener has himself come under the influence of the deceptions of this method (p. 180). 2. Wilhelm Wundt: Psychology as the Propaedeutic Science 31 Wundt's (1907) critique of the introspectionism of the Würzburg psy-chologists led by Külpe is better known, although it is often misde-scribed as opposition to the use of experiments in the study of higher mental processes. Rather, it is basically a critique of introspection as a laboratory method. Naturalistic Observation Wundt held naturalistic observation to be a necessary supplement to experimentation. He saw it as the most effective method for studying many social and developmental processes.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  A History of Modern Psychology

  • C. James Goodwin(Author)
  • 2022(Publication Date)
  • Wiley

    (Publisher)

  On the other hand, apperception is occurring if, when you see John and Mary, you bring them into the focus of your attention and perceive them as a special couple, or perhaps as two people who seem completely ill-suited for one another. That is, you are going beyond the information given and perceiv- ing them distinctly and meaningfully. One final point about the historical misperception of Wundt concerns introspection. As described earlier, Wundt restricted verbal reports in the laboratory to simple responses to carefully controlled stimuli (e.g., “object A is heavier than object B”), a process he called internal perception. Titchener’s approach to self-report, called systematic experimental introspection, was much more elaborate, involv- ing detailed descriptions of mental experiences after some experimental task had been completed. From these descriptions, inferences would be made about human mental processing. Accounts of intro- spection based on Boring’s history failed to distinguish between the two approaches, assuming that Wundt’s strategy for self-report was the same as Titchener’s (Danziger, 1980). It wasn’t, and Wundt in fact was highly critical of Titchener’s version, once writing that the method relies either on arbitrary observations that go astray or on a withdrawal to a lonely sitting room where it becomes lost in self-absorption. The unreliability of this method is universally recog- nized . . . . Clearly, Titchener has himself come under the influence of the deceptions of this method. (quoted in Blumenthal, 2001, p. 125) The Wundtian Legacy Because it was his intention to create a new way of conceptualizing psychology, Wundt is justifiably considered the first experimental psychologist of the modern era. Although it is difficult to identify a single Wundtian among the early American psychologists, he had a strong influence on the origins of American psychology.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  History of Modern Psychology

  A Global Perspective

  • C. James Goodwin(Author)
  • 2023(Publication Date)
  • Wiley

    (Publisher)

  In Wundt’s lab, these types of introspective responses were “largely limited to judgments of size, intensity, and duration of physical stimuli, supplemented at times by judgments of their simultaneity and succession” (Danziger, 1980, p. 247). These, of course, are the kinds of judgments made in psychophysics experiments, which comprised a significant portion of the research in Wundt’s laboratory. As we will learn, Wundt’s conception of introspection as internal perception differed sharply from the “systematic experimental introspection” used by two of his better-known students, Oswald Külpe (discussed later in this chapter) and Edward B. Titchener (Chapter 7). Studying Higher Mental Processes Although Wundt believed that laboratory investigation was necessarily limited to the immediate conscious experience of basic mental processes, he also had a broader aim for his psychology. He wished to examine other mental processes such as learning, thinking, language, and the effects of culture. But he believed that because these processes were so intertwined with an individual’s personal history, cultural history, and the social environment, they could not be controlled sufficiently to be examined with precision in the laboratory. Instead, they could be studied only through inductive observational techniques, cross-cultural comparisons, historical analyses, and case studies. These higher mental processes were a lifelong interest of Wundt’s, first outlined in detail in his second major book (Lectures on Human and Animal Psychology, 1863/1907). They fully occupied the last two decades of his life; and during this time, he enhanced his reputation as a prodigious writer by publishing the massive 10-volume Völkerpsychologie (volker translates roughly as a combination of “cultural,” “ethnic,” “social,” and/or “communal”).

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  A History of Modern Psychology

  • C. James Goodwin(Author)
  • 2015(Publication Date)
  • Wiley

    (Publisher)

  Such precision came with a price, however. Internal perception could yield valid scientific data only if its results could be replicated. For Wundt, this meant that laboratory research had to be limited to a nar-row range of conscious experiences. In practice, this amounted to basic sensory/perceptual/attentional ones. Such experiences could be controlled by means of sophisticated apparatus used to present stimuli to observers, who in turn would give simple responses to these stimuli. In Wundt’s lab, these types of introspective responses were “largely limited to judgments of size, intensity, and duration of physical stimuli, supplemented at times by judgments of their simultaneity and succession” (Danziger, 1980, p. 247). These, of course, are the kinds of judgments made in psychophysics experiments, which com-prised a significant portion of the research in Wundt’s laboratory. As we will learn, Wundt’s conception of introspection as internal perception differed sharply from the “systematic experimental introspec-tion” used by two of his better-known students, Oswald Külpe (discussed later in this chapter) and Edward B. Titchener (Chapter 7). 92 CHAPTER 4 WUNDT AND GERMAN PSYCHOLOGY Studying Higher Mental Processes Although Wundt believed that laboratory investigation was necessarily limited to the immediate conscious experience of basic mental processes, he also had a broader aim for his psychology. He wished to examine other mental processes such as learning, thinking, language, and the effects of culture. But he believed that because these processes were so intertwined with an individual’s personal history, cultural history, and the social environment, they could not be controlled sufficiently to be examined with precision in the laboratory. Instead, they could be studied only through inductive observational techniques, cross-cultural comparisons, historical analyses, and case studies.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Companion to the History of Modern Science

  • G N Cantor, G.N. Cantor, J.R.R. Christie, M.J.S. Hodge, R.C. Olby(Authors)
  • 2006(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  25 Wilhelm Wundt and the Emergence of Experimental Psychology K. Danziger DOI: 10.4324/9780203191873-31

  The name of Wilhelm Wundt (1832–1920) remains indissolubly linked to the origins of experimental psychology. This is so even though he cannot be credited with a single significant scientific discovery, any genuine methodological innovation or any influential theoretical generalisation. Recognition on such grounds is far more readily granted to other German experimentalists of the second half of the nineteenth century for their contributions to the emerging field of experimental psychology. Among these it is appropriate to mention Gustav Theodor Fechner (1801–87), the inventor of the field of psychophysics with its ‘psychophysical methods’, Hermann von Helmholtz (1821–94), remembered for his monumental work on vision and hearing; and Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850–1909), who pioneered the experimental study of memory.

  Nevertheless, there has always been a pervasive intuitive appreciation among experimental psychologists that it was Wundt rather than these others who played the crucial role in constituting the field. In other words, his role is felt to be intimately tied up with the emergence of the field as such, rather than with the emergence of specific issues within the field.

  At the most accessible level, Wundt’s achievements are clearly reflected in certain historical landmarks. From 1875 onwards, he occupied a chair in philosophy at the University of Leipzig, one of the largest and best-funded academic institutions in Germany. As such, it attracted a large number of foreign students who flocked to Germany during this period to complete their academic training. Wundt’s tenure happened to coincide with the period of Germany’s undisputed ascendancy in the field of higher learning, especially in the sciences. Over a period of about four decades Wundt supervised nearly two hundred Ph.D. theses, many of them by non-Germans. Thousands more attended his lectures and witnessed his demonstrations. His international reputation was assured, particularly in countries with inadequate but expanding systems of higher education. American research students were the most numerous, with the Russians forming another major group.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Psychology

  Theoretical–Historical Perspectives

  • R. W. Rieber, Kurt Salzinger, R. W. Rieber, Kurt Salzinger(Authors)
  • 2013(Publication Date)
  • Academic Press

    (Publisher)

  But first, we must reflect on the essence of that psychology. Wundt's Psychology The dominant school of psychological thought in mid-nineteenth-century Germany was that of J. F. Herbart whose theories were fundamentally mechanistic and associationistic though tempered with some native German 2. WILHELM WUNDT AND EARLY AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGY 2 9 rationalism. Herbart's work was decidedly nonexperimental, for at heart he was a mathematician and a model-builder in his approach to psychology. It was in those days around midcentury, however, that the experimental method began to receive wide notice because of its successes in the hands of physiologists. The idea then came about quite naturally, and was frequently suggested in Germany, that these new methods—involving measurement, replicability, public data, and controlled tests—might be usefully applied to any and all problems of human knowledge. And in this way, the adjective 'physiological (physiologischen) came to mean experimental. Thus, there was talk of physiological pedagogy, physiological aesthetics, physiological linguistics, and physiological psychology. The young Wilhelm Wundt—then a laboratory assistant at Heidel-berg—took up the challenge of these proposals. And in so doing, his 60-year career as a scientific psychologist began one day in one of those moments of propitious insight. It happened at a time in his life when friends described him as an absent-minded, daydreaming young scholar of Heidelberg. One of the notions that was then occupying the wandering thoughts of young Wundt was the personal equation problem found in astronomers' research. If you do not remember, there had been systematic differences between astronomers in their measures of the passage of stars across grid lines in telescopes. These slight differences in measured star transits depended on whether the astronomer first focused his attention on the star or on his timing device.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Hergenhahn's An Introduction to the History of Psychology

  • Tracy Henley(Author)
  • 2018(Publication Date)
  • Cengage Learning EMEA

    (Publisher)

  When Titchener arrived at Cornell, he was 25 years old, and he remained there for the rest of his life. Beyond language, which was seen as the essence of social interaction, Wundt sought to understand such important questions as how morals arise within a culture, and how religion shapes our behavior. Much of what interests modern social psychologists, sociologists, and anthropologists can be found in the Völkerpsychologie . The Historical Misunderstanding of Wundt Bringmann and Tweney (1980) observe, “Our modern conceptions of psychology—its problems, its methods, its relation to other sciences, and its limits—all derive in large part from [Wun-dt’s] inquiries” (p. 5). And yet Blumenthal (1975) comments, “To put it simply, the few current Wundt-scholars (and some do exist) are in fair agreement that Wundt as portrayed today in many texts and courses is largely fictional and often bears little resemblance to the actual historical figure” (p. 1081). The distortion of Wundt’s ideas started early: “For all the American students who went abroad to attend Wundt’s lectures, very little of Wundt’s psychological system survived the return passage” (Blumenthal, 1980, p. 130). Edward Titchener (whom we consider next), an Englishman who came to the United States and came to be viewed as the U.S. representative of Wundtian ideas, illustrates: While the stimulus of some of Wundt’s ideas is detectable in Titchener’s psychol-ogy, an enormous cultural and intellectual gulf separated the general approach of these two psychologists. … It seems that [Titchener] genuinely could not think in terms of categories that differed funda-mentally from the English positivist tradi-tion. (Danziger, 1980a, pp. 84–85) So Wundt’s school was voluntarism, not structur-alism. An empiricist in some ways, he nevertheless reflected rationalism. His methods seldom included the type of introspection that would come to be ridiculed. His interests included understanding not Copyright 2019 Cengage Learning.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  An Historical Introduction To Modern Psychology

  • Gardner Murphy, Murphy, Gardner(Authors)
  • 2013(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  Beiträge zur Akustik und Musifiwissenschaft, 1., 1898, p. 1,

  Another great figure in the era of Wundt, whose best work is in no sense a reflection of Wundt's influence, is Lipps. The study of optical illusions led him to the conclusion that the observing subject tends to project himself into the pattern. A vertical line, for example, gives the observer the sense of contending against gravity, while the angles and curves of many illusions make the subject expand, bend, or whirl. The theory has very important consequences for æsthetics. A man " feels himself into "1 the material of visual art, and the nature of the tension or relaxation which he experiences determines many aspects of his:esthetic response. A column, for example, must not have too large a capital, because this would oppress the observer with an insufferable burden; while too small a capital would give him the sense of great strength devoted to a trifling task.

  1 The term Einfühlung (" empathy ") has in fact come into general psychological use. See Lipps, Raumaesthetik und geometrisch-optische Tauschungen (1897).

  Stumpf and Lipps are but two of many who in Germany maintained their autonomy and continued to enlarge the boundaries of psychology. The work of G. E. Muller, and more clearly, that of Külpe, is in a sense a part of Wundt's experimental psychology, but both of these students devoted themselves to problems far, indeed, from those which chiefly occupied Wundt. To each of these men we shall return later (p. 197, and p. 237), in order to trace from them certain investigations which are highly characteristic of recent psychological work.

  With regard to the experimental psychology of the United States, it may be said without hesitation that in the first few years of its development it was almost wholly Wundtian in its outlook and approach. American psychology had been saturated with the spirit of the Scottish school. It had been dogmatic in its approach, disregarding both physiological and experimental methods. Prior to 188o, the only important American contributions were a few articles by William James (during the decade of the 'seventies).2

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  A History of Modern Psychology

  • Duane Schultz(Author)
  • 2013(Publication Date)
  • Academic Press

    (Publisher)

  The situation seems reversed with Titchener, who stood out in bold rcHef because every one near him moved away from him. If all movement is relative, then Titchener moved—backwards with respect to his advancing frame of reference [p. 419]. The climate of American and European psychol-ogy was changing, but Titchener was not, and some came to look on his efforts as a futile attempt to cling to antiquated principles. Titchener thought he was establishing the basic pattern for psychol-ogy; his work has proved to be but one phase in its history. The era of structuralism collapsed when Titchener died. That it was sustained as long as it was in America is an effective tribute to the commanding personality of the man himself. Criticisms of Structuralism The most severe criticisms against structuralism have been leveled at the method of introspection. Introspection, as we have seen, was not new with Wundt and Titchener. Indeed, the method (though in a more broadly defined sense) had been in use for a very long time. The attack on introspection was by no means new either. For example, Kant held that an attempt to introspect changes the conscious experience by virtue of introducing an observing element into the content of this conscious experience. The positivist, Auguste Comte, also attacked the method. Several decades before Wundt founded the new psychology, Comte wrote this most telling criticism: The mind may observe all phenomena but its own. . . . The observ-ing and observed organ are here the same, and its action cannot be pure and natural. In order to observe, your intellect must pause from activity; yet it is this very activity that you want to observe. If you cannot effect that pause, you cannot observe; if you do effect it, there is nothing to observe. The results of such method are in proportion to its absurdity. After two thousand years of psychological pursuit, no one proposition is established to the satisfaction of its followers [1896, Vol. I., p. 9].

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Historical and Philosophical Foundations of Psychology

  • Martin Farrell(Author)
  • 2014(Publication Date)
  • Cambridge University Press

    (Publisher)

  The mistaken mirror: on Wundt ’ s and Titchener ’ s psychologies. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences , 17 , 273 – 82. Mach, E. (1914). The Analysis of Sensations , trans. C. M. Williams. Chicago, IL: Open Court. Titchener, E. B. (1898). The postulates of a structural psychology. Philosophical Review , 7 , 449 – 65. Titchener, E. B. (1906). Experimental Psychology: A Manual of Laboratory Practice , vol. I. New York: Macmillan. Titchener, E. B. (1907). An Outline of Psychology . New York: Macmillan. Titchener, E. B. (1912). Prolegomena to a study of introspection. American Journal of Psychology , 23 , 427 – 48. Titchener, E. B. (1919). A Primer of Psychology . New York: Macmillan. Titchener, E. B. (1921). A Textbook of Psychology . New York: Macmillan. Titchener, E. B. (1929). Systematic Psychology: Prolegomena . New York: Macmillan. Wundt, W. (1902). Outlines of Psychology , 2nd edn, trans. C. H. Judd. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann. Titchener, introspection, and positivism 283 13 Gestalt psychology Descriptive psychology Inner perception Intentionality Gestalt-quality Form and matter Constancy hypothesis Prägnantz Self-organisation key topics Timeline 1870 Doctrine of Papal Infallibility becomes of fi cial Church teaching 1871 Wilhelm I becomes emperor of a united Germany 1899 Sigmund Freud publishes The Interpretation of Dreams 1912 Sinking of the Titanic 1914 – 18 First World War 1933 Hitler becomes Chancellor of Germany 1939 – 45 Second World War 1961 Construction of the Berlin Wall Franz Brentano 1838 Born Marienburg, Germany 1864 Ordained a Roman Catholic priest 1873 Resigns from the Catholic priesthood 1874 Appointed professor at Vienna.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book