Recommended characteristics of hopehead writers

Clark, R. E. (2004). The classical origins of Pavlov's conditioning. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 39(4), 279-294.

Classical conditioning is the cornerstone of behaviorism. However, it is often taken for granted how classical conditioning was introduced to the field of psychology. This article starts with a brief section about the precursors of Pavlov’s famous dog salivation response experiments. The precursor to Pavlov was Twitmyer’s knee-jerk reflexes. Like Green (2009), Clark (2004) talks a little of William James and his contributions to the early evolution of psychology. Then, Clark (2004) delves into the meat of the matter: Pavlov’s experiments. Using dogs as subjects, the Russian scientist revolutionized the study of human behavior with his studies showing how classical conditioning works. Clark (2004) traces Pavlov’s work, and also shows how it was received. Then, the author shows how Pavlov’s conditioning experiments became classical conditioning through the work of B.F. Skinner. Essentially, this research uses primary sources to explain the evolution of behaviorism and early psychology from Twitmyer onwards.

Digdon, N., Powell, R. A., & Harris, B. (2014). Little Albert's alleged neurological impairment. History of Psychology, 17(4), 312-324.

In 1920, Watson and Rayner conducted a now-famous experiment on an infant named Albert. The experiment on “Little Albert” has since been maligned for obvious ethical reasons. In fact, Digdon, Powell & Harris (2014) focus more on the reactions to the original experiment and the historiography that blossomed because of it. According to the authors, a study published in 2012 by Friglund, Beck, Goldie & Irons had attested that Little Albert was born with a neurological impairment and claimed that Watson and his colleague were actually aware of this fact. If this were true, then Watson and Rayner would have committed even graver ethical breaches than was previously believed. As methodology, Digdon, Powell & Harris (2014) use the primary sources including the film made by Watson in 1923 entitled Experimental Investigation of Babies, as well as the secondary sources that comment on, criticize, or base new research on the Watson studies. The authors conclude that there are alternative explanations for Little Albert’s story, and that the subsequent analyses should be critiqued in their own right. The implications of this research are to think more critically about the historiography of psychology. Other implications have to do with the ethical dimensions of all psychological research.

Green, C. D. (2009). Darwinian theory, functionalism, and the first American psychological revolution. American Psychologist, 64(2), 75-83. doi: 10.1037/a0013338

This article focuses on functionalism, a branch of psychology contemporaneous with behaviorism. Functionalism is typically relegated to the history pages of psychology textbooks, or simply described as being the antipode to structuralism as Green (2009) points out. According to the author, functionalism is a lot more important than most historians of psychology give it credit for. One reason is that functionalism was a theoretical extension of Darwinism. As such, functionalism provided the first scientific and evolutionary foundation for behaviorism. Green (2009) further argues that Watson’s theories were fundamentally functionalistic. Green (2009) talks about William James as one of the founders of functionalism, as well as Chauncey Wright. This source is tremendously illuminating for a study of the early history of psychology.

Moore, J. (2011). Behaviorism. The Psychological Record, 61(3), 449-464.

Whereas psychology was establishing itself as the field that studied the human subconscious and unconscious, behaviorism was something different altogether. Behaviorism focused squarely on observable responses in the human body and behavior, and had little to do with emotions and nothing to do with dreams. Unlike other historians of psychology, Moore (2011) goes back to the late 19th century to the work of Wilhelm Wundt. A little-known figure in early psychology, Wundt’s experiments involved perception and sensation domains of the human experience. While it seems commonplace now to consider human perception, sensation, and cognition, these were revolutionary fields of inquiry at the time. Moore (2011) then broaches other luminaries in early psychology, from Titchener to the rise of behaviorism with John Watson. Operationism is the basis of behaviorist inquiry. One of the unique elements of this article is that Moore (2011) describes the scientific method as the hypo-deductive method.

Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review, 20(2), 158-177. doi:10.1037/h0074428

The only primary source used in my research, this article by John Watson reveals behaviorism from the perspective of one of the founding fathers of the field. Right from the beginning, Watson wants to establish behaviorism not as a social science, but as a branch of the natural sciences. Also, Watson expresses the objectives of behaviorism: to predict and control behavior. Watson claims that behaviorism’s value is not just in understanding or explaining human behavior but for changing it, too. The author quite clearly differentiates behaviorism with the branches of psychology that are interested in consciousness and other less measurable manifestations of mind. Watson’s article is an explanation and defense of behaviorism, an analysis of the theoretical underpinnings and methodologies used by behaviorists, and not an experimental article. Its value is that it is a primary source, used to make clear assessments about this field.