11

Scientific Psycbology: Sbould we Bury it or Praise it?

nowotJ CotJoet
*

hgassL[pz.harvard.edu


A8S1kAC1

ln 120 years slnce Wllllam !ames publlshed hls ltloclples of lsycboloqy, sclenLlflc psychology has made
greaL sLrldes. ?eL !ames' concerns abouL Lhe lack of coherence of psychology have conLlnued unLll Lhls
day. An analysls of Lhe currenL dlsclpllnary Lerraln suggesLs LhaL large parLs of conLemporary psychology
are belng absorbed by Lhe newly emerglng flelds of cognlLlve sclence and neurosclence. Soclal
psychology may become parL of a broader fleld of culLural sLudles, whlle oLher subflelds LhaL have
prlmarlly an applled sLaLus. WhaL wlll remaln cenLral Lo sclenLlflc psychology ls a concern wlLh Lhose
lssues LhaL were plvoLal for Wllllam !ames - self, wlll, consclousness, and personallLy. 1hls endurlng
core" of psychology may beneflL from deeper and more exLended lnLeracLlons wlLh llLerary and oLher
arLlsLlc sLudles.


ln 1987, l was lnvlLed Lo dellver an address Lo Lhe Amerlcan sychologlcal AssoclaLlon. l
declded Lo use Lhls occaslon Lo alr some of Lhe mlsglvlngs LhaL l had abouL Lhe sLaLus of
psychology as a coherenL sclenLlflc dlsclpllne. noL surprlslngly, Lhe Lalk recelved lLs share of
crlLlclsm, and when l prepared a wrlLLen verslon of Lhe Lalk, lL was re[ecLed by a few
malnsLream psychologlcal [ournals. lorLunaLely, a recenLly launched publlcaLlon, New lJeos lo
lsycboloqy, agreed Lo publlsh Lhe crlLlque ln full and lL generaLed a modesL amounL of
dlscusslon ln Lhe ensulng years. 1he lnvlLaLlon Lo conLrlbuLe Lo Lhe presenL volume has glven
me Lhe opporLunlLy Lo revlslL Lhe argumenL puL forLh over Lwo decades ago.

WILLIAM IAMLS' ASIkA1ICNS AND CCNCLkNS

Cne and a quarLer cenLury ago, Lhe esLeemed phllosopher-Lurned-psychologlsL Wllllam !ames
slgned a conLracL Lo wrlLe Lhe flrsL Amerlcan LexLbook ln psychology. As he wroLe Lo hls frlend
1homas W. Ward, l have blocked ouL some readlng ln physlology and psychology. lL seems Lo
me LhaL perhaps Lhe Llme has come for psychology Lo begln Lo be a sclence" (quoLed ln
lelnsLeln, 1984, p. 313). As ls well known, a Lask slaLed Lo be compleLed ln Lwo years dragged
on for a dozen years, buL ln Lhe end !ames had expounded Lhe sub[ecL ln a way whlch has
seldom lf ever been equaled. CerLalnly lL ls dlfflculL Lo Lhlnk of any oLher LexLbook whlch ls read
noL only for pleasure buL also for proflL well over a cenLury afLer lLs lnlLlal publlcaLlon.

ln wrlLlng hls unsurpassed ltloclples of lsycboloqy (1890), !ames soughL Lo share hls vlslon of
psychology and lLs relaLlon Lo physlology, on Lhe one hand, and Lo phllosophy, on Lhe oLher. Pe

1hls paper was presenLed lnlLlally as an lnvlLed address Lo ulvlslon 1 of Lhe Amerlcan sychologlcal
AssoclaLlon upon Lhe auLhor's recelpL of Lhe Wllllam !ames Award. l wlsh Lo dedlcaLe Lhls paper Lo Lhe
memory of Penry A. Murray, wlLh whom l was prlvlleged Lo dlscuss lLs conLenLs shorLly before hls deaLh
ln !une 1988.

Crlglnally publlshed ln: New lJeos lo lsycboloqy. 1992 vol.10, no.2, pp. 179-190
*
Parvard CraduaLe School of LducaLlon, 14 Applan Way, Larsen Pall, 2nd ll Cambrldge, MA 02138 -
617.496.4929


Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9

12

was well aware LhaL Lhese flelds of knowledge dld noL yeL fully cohere wlLh one anoLher, buL
he LhoughL LhaL lL would soon be posslble Lo brldge Lhe reglon lylng beLween Lhe physlcal
changes ln Lhe nerves and Lhe appearance of consclousness (ln Lhe shape of sense
percepLlons) (lelnsLeln, 1984, p. 313). !ames composed memorable chapLers on whaL are
now Lhe famlllar sLaples of any psychology LexL: Lhe senses, emoLlons, aLLenLlon, memory,
reasonlng, and percepLlon. ?eL lL ls probably Lhe cenLral chapLers - on Lhe SLream of
Consclousness and on Lhe Self - LhaL consLlLuLe hls mosL dlsLlncLlve conLrlbuLlons.

!ames' opus lmmedlaLely drew pralse among psychologlsLs as well as scholars ln relaLed flelds.
ln llghL of Lhe subsequenL fragmenLed hlsLory of psychology, Lhe commenLs by Lwo colleagues
sLrlke me as parLlcularly apL. llrsL Lhere ls !ames' flrsL sLudenL and close assoclaLe ln
psychology, C. SLanley Pall:

1he auLhor (!ames) mlghL be descrlbed as an lmpresslonlsL ln psychology. Pls porLfollo conLalns
skeLches old and new, eLhlcal, llLerary, sclenLlflc, and meLaphyslcal, some exqulslLe and charmlng
ln deLall and even color, oLhers rough charcoal ouLllnes, buL all LogeLher sLlmulaLlng and
suggesLlve, and showlng a greaL lndusLry and greaL versaLlllLy. 1hls ls Lhrough and Lhrough o
teoJooce book. lLs very lnconslsLencles and lncoherences noL only reflecL buL greaLly magnlfy all
Lhe unresL, dlsLracLlon, and confllcLs of Lhe presenL hour. (quoLed ln knlghL, 1934, p. 43)

1hen hls long-Lerm colleague ln phllosophy, Ceorge SanLayana commenLed:

lL would be pedanLry Lo regreL Lhe loss of loglcal unlLy ln a book so rlch and llvlng, ln whlch a
generous naLure breaks ouL aL every polnL, and Lhe perennlal problems of Lhe human mlnd are
dlscussed so modesLly, so solldly, wlLh such a deep and paLheLlc slncerlLy. (quoLed ln !ames,
1963/1892, p. xl)

Slnce Lhe lnlLlal appearance of Lhe ltloclples, Lens of Lhousands of works ln psychology have
been publlshed, psychology as a dlsclpllne-academlc and pracLlcal-has achleved remarkable
success. 1he flagshlp publlcaLlon lsycboloqlcol 5cleoce recelved 1800 submlsslons ln 2007. ?eL,
lL ls sLlll noL clear Lo many observers LhaL Lhe promlse lmplled by a Lwo-volume LexL ln a new
fleld called psychology has acLually come Lo frulLlon. Clearly advances have been made ln
many, lf noL mosL, of Lhe Loplcs LreaLed by !ames and hls lmmedlaLe successors. 8uL have
Lhese advances added up Lo a unlfled dlsclpllne whose componenLs lnLerrelaLe wlLh one
anoLher? Are Lhey worLhy Lo be called a sclence ln Lhe same sense LhaL blology, chemlsLry, and
physlcs - or, for LhaL maLLer, economlcs or demography - merlL LhaL label? Are Lhere serlous
aLLempLs Lo Lle LogeLher Lhe mlcro" and macro" levels as are currenLly underway ln Lhe
blologlcal and Lhe physlcal sclences?

ln LreaLlng Lhe posslblllLy of psychology as a unlfled sclence, l am dlscusslng a Loplc LhaL
Wllllam !ames would have found of lnLeresL. Pe hlmself had ofLen volced mlsglvlngs abouL Lhe
confused and lmperfecL sLaLe" (erry, 1933, vol. l, p. 40) and Lhe anLe-sclenLlflc condlLlon" of
psychology (Allen, 1967, p. 313). ln my vlew, !ames' concerns have proved all Loo [usLlfled.
sychology has oot added up Lo an lnLegraLed sclence, and lL ls unllkely ever Lo achleve LhaL
sLaLus. lL no longer makes sense Lo dlscuss sclenLlflc psychology as a Lenable long-Lerm goal.
WhaL does make sense ls Lo recognlze lmporLanL lnslghLs LhaL have been achleved by
psychologlsLs, Lo ldenLlfy Lhe conLrlbuLlons whlch conLemporary psychology can make Lo
dlsclpllnes whlch may some day achleve a flrmer sclenLlflc sLaLus, and flnally Lo deLermlne
Bowaiu uaiunei - Scientific Psychology

13

wheLher aL leasL parLs of psychology mlghL survlve as parLlclpanLs ln a scholarly conversaLlon
LhaL obLalns across ma[or dlsclpllnes.



1nL DkLAM, 1nL DCU81S, AND 1nL C1ICNS

ln 1780 lmmanuel kanL developed argumenLs whlch purporLed Lo show LhaL a sclenLlflc
psychology was noL posslble. 1he redoubLable phllosopher ldenLlfled Lhree apparenLly
lnsuperable obsLacles: Lhe mlnd ls lnherenLly affecLed whlle sLudylng lLself, Lhere ls noLhlng of
spaLlal exLenL whlch can be sLudled, and Lhere ls no maLhemaLlcal basls on whlch a sclence can
be consLrucLed. kanL concluded ln maglsLerlal Lerms:

sychology can, Lherefore, never become anyLhlng more Lhan a hlsLorlcal (and, as such, as much
as posslble) sysLemaLlc naLural docLrlne of Lhe lnLernal sense, l.e., a naLural descrlpLlon of Lhe
soul, buL noL a sclence of Lhe soul, nor even a psychologlcal experlmenLal docLrlne. (quoLed ln
WaLson, 1979, p. 88)

osLulaLlng Lhe lmposslblllLy of a fleld ls a rlsky Lhlng Lo do. ln Lhe followlng cenLury,
such formldable sclenLlsLs as Permann von PelmholLz, CusLav lechner, !ohannes Mueller, and
Wllhelm WundL devoLed Lhelr conslderable powers Lo Lhe refuLaLlon of kanL's dlcLum, Lhus
laylng Lhe groundwork for !ames' work and for Lhe poLenLlal emergence of a sclence of
psychology.

ln Lhe second cenLury afLer kanL's dlsmal eplLaph, psychology conquered much of Lhe
academlc world. WhaL followed mlghL be called, ln Lhe argoL of Chlnese dynasLles, Lhe erlod
of Lhe Warrlng Schools: we had funcLlonallsm, behavlorlsm, sLrucLurallsm, CesLalL sychology,
learnlng Lheory, psychoanalysls, and a pack of oLher lsms", we hosLed Lhe movemenLs
surroundlng magneLlc sclenLlsLs llke !ames !. Clbson, Clark Pull, !ean lageL, and 8. l. Sklnner,
and we experlenced a number of worldly successes, such as Lhe lnLelllgence LesL, varlous
lndlces of psychopaLhology recorded ln successlve edlLlons of Lhe uSM manual, and Lhe
lnLegraLed commerclal sphere LhaL spans persuaslon, adverLlslng, and markeLlng. sychology
has become esLabllshed as a poLenL socleLal force, wlLh lLs deparLmenLs, [ournals, lnsLlLuLlons,
and huge organlzaLlons. WlLhln Lhe unlLed SLaLes Lhe mosL promlnenL among Lhem ls Lhe
130,000 member Amerlcan sychologlcal AssoclaLlon (AA), buL slnce 1988 Lhere ls a rlval
group, now called Lhe AssoclaLlon for sychologlcal SocleLy (AS), havlng 20,000 members,
whlch sLyles lL as a sclenLlflc alLernaLlve Lo Lhe more ecumenlcal and more cllnlcally orlenLed
AA.

AL leasL on Lhe level of llp servlce, Lhe dream of a unlfled psychology conLlnues. lL appears aL
Lhe beglnnlng and end of LexLbooks, Lhough much less frequenLly ln Lhe lnLervenlng chapLers.
lL surfaces as well ln unlverslLy caLalogues and ln Lhe bollerplaLe sLaLemenLs of granLlng
agencles. And occaslonally, a scholar - more ofLen an ouLslder or lndependenL researcher"
Lhan a pracLlLloner of normal sclence" - acLually proposes a formula or cenLral dogma" for
Lhe fleld-one LhaL purporLs Lo llnk all subflelds and Lo blnd Lhe mlcro" wlLh Lhe macro"
(Cook, 1986). 8uL for Lhe mosL parL, psychologlsLs (llke oLher academlcs) go abouL Lhelr dally
research and wrlLlng wlLhouL agonlzlng abouL Lhe acLual or poLenLlal coherence of Lhelr fleld.


Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9

14

Cccaslonally, as exempllfled by Lhls volume, Lhere has been expllclL concern wlLh Lhe
fragmenLaLlon of Lhe dlsclpllne. lssues of Lhe Ametlcoo lsycboloqlst (8lckman & CoodsLeln,
1987) and New lJeos lo lsycboloqy (8aer, 1987, 8akan, 1987, kranLz, 1987, 8oyce, 1987,
1oulmln, 1987) have been devoLed largely Lo Lhls Loplc. 1he debaLe has been framed ln Lerms
of cenLrlfugal" as opposed Lo cenLrlpeLal" forces ln Lhe fleld, abouL alLernaLlons beLween
coheslon" and spllnLerlng" from one decade or from one generaLlon Lo anoLher, abouL
sysLem-bulldlng as opposed Lo Lendlng one's own llLLle seLLlemenL. ConLroversy has cenLered
on wheLher physlcs, blology, or some oLher dlsclpllne should serve as a model for psychology,
and wheLher we should deplore or revel ln our plurallsm. no less an auLhorlLy Lhan Slgmund
koch (1981) devoLed much of hls career Lo Lhls nexus of lssues and over Lhe years assumed an
lncreaslngly pesslmlsLlc noLe.

1hese and oLher volces call lnLo grave doubL Lhe posslblllLy-ln Lheory or ln pracLlce-of a
unlfled sclenLlflc psychology. 1he evldence of Lhe pasL cenLury glves llLLle consolaLlon Lo Lhose
who would llke Lhe LexLbook vlslon Lo become a reallLy. ln whaL follows l focus on posslble
reacLlons Lo Lhls sLaLe of affalrs and Lhen propose one plauslble Lopography for Lhe comlng
decades.

ln as much as psychology glves llLLle slgn of coherlng, we are faced wlLh Lhe followlng opLlons:

(1) We can slmply close our mlnds Lo Lhe posslblllLy of dlsclpllnary exLlncLlon and
conLlnue whaL we have been dolng. no Super-body ls llkely Lo announce
sychology as a fraud, and so we can malnLaln Lhe sLaLus quo.

(2) lollowlng a well-known suggesLlon made wlLh reference Lo Lhe vleLnam War by Lhe
laLe SenaLor Alken of vermonL, we can slmply Jeclote LhaL psychology ls a success
- as lL has been, accordlng Lo many crlLerla - and swallow any llngerlng doubLs
whlch we mlghL enLerLaln.

(3) We can hope LhaL we are slmply passlng Lhrough a Lemporary phase of
fragmenLaLlon and LhaL some enLerprlslng researcher, or some brllllanL LheorlsL,
wlll dlscover Lhe golden Lhread" LhaL wlll unlfy our fleld.

(4) We can clalm LhaL Lhere has been an un[usLlfled romanLlclzaLlon of oLher
dlsclpllnes. AfLer all, Lhere are many numbers of subflelds of blology: Lhe
geneLlclsLs or molecular blologlsLs lnhablL qulLe dlfferenL worlds from Lhe
evoluLlonlsLs, LaxonomlsLs, or paleonLologlsLs. AL one Llme, my unlverslLy had nlne
dlfferenL deparLmenLs of blology: and economlcs ls aL leasL as Lop-heavy as
psychology wlLh schools LhaL sLruggle agalnsL one anoLher.

1here are cerLalnly oLher opLlons, buL l favor a flfLh. LeL us recognlze LhaL flelds of sclence
evolve, ofLen ln unsuspecLed and unexpecLed ways. nearly every fleld of knowledge beglns as
phllosophy, and psychology conLlnues Lo foreground lLs phllosophlcal orlglns more falLhfully
Lhan any oLher dlsclpllne. 1here was a perlod Lwo cenLurles ago when psychology seemed
lmposslble, a seL of dlscoverles ln Lhe nlneLeenLh cenLury whlch esLabllshed a number of
endurlng psychologlcal paradlgms and concepLs, a complex of soclal and hlsLorlcal facLors ln
Lhe LwenLleLh cenLury whlch earned psychology a place ln vlrLually every academlc
envlronmenL.
Bowaiu uaiunei - Scientific Psychology

13


SLlll, whlle psychology was developlng, so were oLher flelds of knowledge. lL ls agalnsL Lhe
background of oLher evolvlng dlsclpllnes LhaL psychology musL be undersLood and locaLed. ln
Lhe lasL cenLury, psychophyslcs - once Lhe core of psychology - was slowly asslmllaLed lnLo
englneerlng and compuLer sclence, and more recenLly, Lhe sLudy of anlmal behavlor wlLhln
psychology has been complemenLed by work from an eLhologlcal perspecLlve. CerLaln
approaches-such as slmulaLlng LhoughL and behavlor vla neural neLs (8umelharL and
McClelland 1986) - and cerLaln LhemaLlc emphases - such as Lhose of poslLlve psychology -
have recenLly come Lo Lhe fore (Sellgman 2004). lL ls my conLenLlon LhaL whaL we presenLly call
psychology has already begun Lo be absorbed by a number of more fundamenLal dlsclpllnes,
some more sclenLlflc (ln Lhe classlcal sense), some less so. 1he opLlon l favor ls Lo dlscern
LradlLlonal psychology's place(s) wlLhln Lhls emerglng Lopography.

1nL LMLkGING DISCILINAk 1CCGkAn

8oughly parallellng breakLhroughs ln physlcs ln Lhe decades followlng Lhe beglnnlng of Lhe lasL
cenLury, and Lhe parallel advances ln molecular blology aL mld-cenLury, Lhe years aL Lhe close
of Lhe 20Lh cenLury can be well descrlbed as Lhe comlng-of-age of braln- or neurosclence. AL
every level of Lhe nervous sysLem, from Lhe lndlvldual synapse Lo Lhe blood-flow paLLerns
Lhrough Lhe enLlre corLex, our knowledge has accumulaLed aL a phenomenal raLe. 1hose areas
of psychology whlch were LradlLlonally called physlologlcal psychology and comparaLlve
psychology, as well as large porLlons of whaL are called sensaLlon and percepLlon, are rapldly
becomlng Lhe concerns of neurosclenLlsLs. lndeed Lhe flrsL nlne chapLers of !ames 'ltloclples (l
refer hereafLer Lo Lhe shorLer verslon of LhaL LexL) would all flL comforLably lnLo a baslc
neurosclence course.

l should sLress LhaL l am noL endorslng a reducLlonlsL poslLlon. 1he phenomena of sensaLlon,
percepLlon, or oLher psychologlcal sLaLes wlll never be reduclble Lo an accounL ln Lerms of
braln sLaLes." As ls well lndlcaLed ln Lhe ploneerlng work of neurophyslologlsLs llke uavld Pubel
and 1orsLen Wlesel (Pubel, 1979), Lhe caLegorles and Lhe level of psychologlcal analysls wlll
conLlnue Lo be essenLlal noL only ln ordlnary dlscourse buL also ln Lhe work of pracLlclng
neurosclenLlsLs. Powever, ln my vlew, psychologlcally-Lralned lndlvlduals wlll lncreaslngly Lake
Lhelr places as members of research Leams LhaL are problng Lhe sLrucLure and funcLlonlng of
Lhe nervous sysLem. 1he percepLual psychologlsL or psychophyslclsL worklng ln lsolaLlon ls
gradually becomlng an anachronlsm.

lf neurosclence wlll absorb much from Lhe lower reglons" of psychology, an analogous klnd of
rald wlll be made by cognlLlve sclence - perhaps from Lhe Lop", perhaps more laLerally
(Cardner, 1983). 1hls emerglng branch of sclence ls a self-sLyled lnLerdlsclpllnary fleld whlch,
llke LradlLlonal psychology, seeks Lo uncover Lhe baslc processes of LhoughL, however,
adopLlng Lhe currenL vogue, cognlLlve sclenLlsLs regard Lhe compuLer as Lhe mosL sulLable
model for all forms of cognlLlon.
Whlle several dlsclpllnes are candldaLes for membershlp ln an ulLlmaLe cognlLlve sclence,
unLll Lhls polnL researchers ln psychology and of arLlflclal lnLelllgence have been parLlcularly
cenLral ln cognlLlve-sclenLlflc endeavors. Many of Lhe concepLs and paradlgms ln cognlLlve
sclence come from psychology, whlle Lhe meLhods of research and oLher key concepLs sLem
from compuLer sclence, especlally arLlflclal lnLelllgence. Among conLemporary areas of
psychology, Lhe flelds of aLLenLlon, memory, reasonlng, problem-solvlng, and Lhe hlgher
forms" of percepLlon and psychophyslcs are mosL closely afflllaLed wlLh cognlLlve sclence. arLs

Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9

16

of developmenLal, educaLlonal, and neuropsychology wlll flL comforLably under Lhe cognlLlvlsL
label as well. MosL of Lhe remalnlng chapLers ln !ames' brlefer LexL, beglnnlng wlLh ChapLer 10
on PablL and concludlng wlLh ChapLer 22 on 8easonlng, would also flnd a proper place ln a LexL
of cognlLlve sclence.

ln Lhe case of cognlLlve sclence, Lhere ls llLLle danger of a reducLlonlsm LhaL wlll exclude
psychologlcal analyses. (When neurosclence ls lncluded wlLhln cognlLlve sclence, lL Lyplcally
assumes a non-reducLlonlsL gulse ln LhaL company.) A greaLer rlsk ls LhaL, ln comlng up wlLh a
core compuLaLlonal Lheory, researchers may shorL change Lhose aspecLs of reasonlng or
problem-solvlng LhaL are characLerlsLlc of humans raLher Lhan mechanlcal ob[ecLs (ureyfus,
1972). Also undeLermlned aL presenL ls Lhe lssue of wheLher Lhe varlous subflelds of cognlLlve
sclence - for example, percepLlon, aLLenLlon, memory, reasonlng - wlll prove any less
unwleldy when LhoughL of ln compuLaLlonal Lerms Lhan Lhey were when concepLuallzed ln
LradlLlonal psychologlcal frames. 1he dlspuLe abouL Lhe approprlaLeness of parallel-dlsLrlbuLed-
processlng models, as agalnsL von neumann symbollc models, lndlcaLes LhaL cognlLlve sclence
may lnherlL psychology's woes (lnker & rlnce, 1988).

When l wroLe my orlglnal paper, neurosclence and cognlLlve sclence sLood as Lhe Lwo
behemoLhs, LhreaLenlng Lo absorb many seLLlemenLs of sclence, lncludlng Lhe malnsLream of
research ln psychology. ln Lhe lasL quarLer cenLury, Lhe Lwo subflelds have largely merged wlLh
one anoLher. nearly all cognlLlve sclenLlsLs Lhlnk now ln Lerms of braln modellng and many of
Lhem acLually use Lhe Lools of neuro-lmaglng. And neurosclenLlsLs, who once spurned cognlLlve
Lerms and labels, now regularly lmmerse Lhemselves ln cognlLlve models. CLher flelds of
psychology, such as soclal psychology, developmenLal psychology, or cllnlcal psychology are
less aL rlsk" of lmmedlaLe absorpLlon, posslbly because Lhey lack easlly LransporLable research
paradlgms, Lhey can conLlnue Lo evolve wlLh less LhreaL of a Lakeover by an lnLerdlsclpllnary
corporaLe ralder."

My remarks abouL Lhese laLLer flelds are even more speculaLlve, buL l wlll venLure a few words
abouL Lhelr posslble faLes. l see soclal psychology as conLlnulng Lo produce sLrlklng
demonsLraLlons abouL human soclal behavlor - Lhe klnds of flndlngs assoclaLed ln Lhe pasL
wlLh researchers llke Solomon Asch, Leon lesLlnger, lrlLz Pelder, SLanley Mllgram, and
Muzafer Sherlf - and more recenLly, wlLh work llke LhaL of 8lchard nlsbeL, Lllen Langer, and
AnLhony Creenwald. As lmpresslonlsLlc and suggesLlve as Lhese flndlngs can be, l do noL see
Lhem addlng up cumulaLlvely lnLo a coheslve sclence. lndeed, mosL are more llkely Lo flnd Lhelr
way lnLo a general culLural dlsclpllne - lncludlng soclology, anLhropology, and soclal
psychology - Lhan Lo be absorbed lnLo more classlcal or asplrlng sclences llke neurosclence or
cognlLlve sclence. SLlll, l noLe Lhe rowlng lnfluence of a fleld someLlmes dubbed soclal cognlLlve
neurosclence (uamaslo 2000, Creene 2003).

A number of currenL flelds or subflelds should conLlnue Lo evolve wlLhouL serlous dlverslon. l
have ln mlnd here subflelds llke educaLlonal psychology, lndusLrlal psychology, and cllnlcal
psychology. lor Lhe mosL parL Lhese areas do noL asplre Lo Lhe sLaLus of pure sclences."
8aLher, Lhey are applled flelds, whlch use meLhods and flndlngs from baslc research ln Lhe
servlce of problems LhaL arlse aL Lhe workplace, Lhe markeL place, Lhe school, or Lhe cllnlc.
1hey wlll malnLaln communlcaLlon wlLh neurosclence, cognlLlve sclence, and culLural sLudles,
buL noL Lo Lhe polnL of belng lnLegrally affecLed by sclenLlflc advances, dlspuLes, or Lakeovers"
ln areas wlLh lmperlallsLlc deslgn.
Bowaiu uaiunei - Scientific Psychology

17


Clearly aspecLs of developmenLal sLudles are relevanL Lo each of Lhe four flelds so far
menLloned, neurosclenLlsLs musL concern Lhemselves wlLh baslc laws and sLages of
developmenL, cognlLlve sclence wlll examlne Lhe developmenL and breakdown of Lhlnklng
capaclLles, culLural sLudles wlll feaLure a componenL deallng wlLh Lhe behavlors of chlldren ln
dlfferenL soclal and culLural conLexLs, and parL of developmenLal psychology wlll conLlnue Lo
be lnLermlngled wlLh educaLlonal and cllnlcal psychology.

ln Lhe pasL a number of ma[or Lhlnkers, such as Pelnz Werner, !ean lageL, and !erome 8runer,
have arLlculaLed Lhe vlslon of an over-archlng developmenLal sclence, somewhaL along Lhe
llnes of cognlLlve sclence, whlch would lnclude maLerlal from neurology, physlology, evoluLlon,
llfe-span sLudles, chlld psychology, psychopaLhology, and perhaps even Lhe sLudy of dlfferenL
sclenLlflc dlsclpllnes (geneLlc eplsLemology). As a card-carrylng developmenLallsL, l flnd Lhls
vlslon appeallng. 8uL l musL noLe LhaL pursulL of Lhls vlslon has almosL compleLely vanlshed ln
Lhe mosL recenL decades.


1nL SUkVIVING CLN1Lk

lL may seem LhaL, ln Lhls Cook's Lour of Lhe dlsclpllnary Lopography of Lhe fuLure, we have
drlfLed far away from Wllllam !ames and hls vlew of psychology. 8uL LhaL ls only because l have
yeL Lo menLlon Lhose sub[ecLs - and Lhose chapLers - LhaL were cenLral ln Wllllam !ames'
own accounL. l refer here Lo Consclousness - LreaLed ln ChapLer 11, 1he Self - LreaLed ln
ChapLer 12, Wlll-Lhe concludlng subsLanLlve chapLer, and ersonallLy, whlch, whlle rarely
menLloned expllclLly by !ames, ls ln facL an lmporLanL presence ln Lhese chapLers.

lor !ames, Lhe lssue of Lhe self or ego - lLs experlences, lLs lnLernal and soclal aspecLs, lLs
asplraLlons, and lLs evoluLlon Lhrough llfe - ls key ln psychology. !ames llved ln Lhe pre-
lreudlan era buL had already lnLulLed some of Lhe lssues whlch were Lo occupy lreud. And
when he heard LhaL lreud was comlng Lo Amerlca, Lhe alllng !ames made hls way from
Cambrldge Lo Clark unlverslLy WorcesLer, MassachuseLLs and declared Lo Lhe vlslLor from
vlenna, 1he fuLure of psychology belongs Lo your work." As Lhe hlsLorlan P. SLuarL Pughes
commenLed, Lhere ls no more dramaLlc momenL ln Lhe lnLellecLual hlsLory of our Llme" (1961,
p. 113).

Slnce Lhe Llme of !ames and lreud, Lhe sLudy of personallLy, self, wlll, and consclousness
(hereafLer, Lhe person-cenLered quarLeL") has occupled a paradoxlcal poslLlon wlLhln
psychology. Cn Lhe one hand Lhese Loplcs are clearly cenLral ln any dellneaLlon of Lhe fleld, and
Lhey occupy predlcLably plvoLal spoLs ln LexLbooks. And yeL l musL acknowledge Lhere ls a
sllghL embarrassmenL abouL Lhese Loplcs. 1o be sure work conLlnues on each of Lhem, and
many of Lhe ma[or flgures ln psychology have had Lhelr say" on Lhese Loplcs. Also, Lhere has
emerged a consensus LhaL personallLy can be descrlbed ln Lerms of flve prlnclpal facLors:
Cpenness, ConsclenLlousness, LxLraverslon, AgreeablllLy, and neuroLlclsm. noneLheless, ln my
vlew, progress here ls less compelllng Lhan ln oLher sLrands of psychology.

lnLeresLlngly, desplLe growlng speculaLlon abouL Lhe naLure of human consclousness, nelLher
cognlLlve sclence, nor neurosclence, nor culLural sLudles has asserLed domlnance over Lhese
Loplcs. l Lhlnk Lhls relucLance occurs noL merely because Lhese lssues are dlfflculL Lo sLudy. l
Lhlnk lL ls because, rlghLly or wrongly, Lhey are seen as cenLral Lo psychology ln a way LhaL

Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9

18

noLhlng else ls-lndeed Lhey could be seen hlsLorlcally as Lhe deflnlng feaLures of psychology.
noLably, Lhese Loplcs seem parLlcularly reslsLanL Lo decomposlLlon, elemenLarlsm, or oLher
forms of reducLlonlsm - and of course, Lhe cannlballzlng dlsclpllnes exhlblL sLrong Lendencles
ln Lhls aLomlsLlc dlrecLlon. erhaps equally lnLeresLlng, Lhls deflnlLlon mlghL well be shared
even ln remoLe culLures. Whlle falllng Lo lnLrospecL abouL percepLual or cognlLlve processes,
and dlsplaylng llLLle lnLeresL ln Lhe sLudy of oLher culLures or ln sLages of chlld developmenL -
prellLeraLe socleLles do lnLrospecL and develop folk Lheorles abouL Lhe person and abouL
personal experlences (CeerLz, 1973).

lf Lhese flelds are so cenLral and yeL have wlLnessed llLLle progress, whaL can we expecL of
Lhem ln Lhe fuLure? l Lhlnk LhaL here we flnd a clue ln Lhe expanslve psychologles of Wllllam
!ames, Slgmund lreud, and Penry Murray. ln one way or anoLher, each of Lhese scholars
sensed an lmporLanL LruLh: LhaL Lhe sLudy of self or personallLy ls aL once a problem of
psychology and Lhe home ground of llLeraLure. ln Lhe examples Lhey use and ln Lhe approaches
Lhey adopL, each researcher slgnaled Lhe reallzaLlon LhaL Lhe lmaglnaLlve wrlLer ls Lackllng Lhe
same klnds of lssues as Lhe psychologlsL of personallLy. ln !ames' case, of course, we have Lhe
lengLhy and LorLured relaLlon wlLh hls broLher Penry as well as frequenL references Lo oLher
wrlLers and Lo llLerary examples, ln lreud's case, Lhere ls hls rellance on Lhe greaL auLhors of
Lhe pasL - Sophocles, Shakespeare, uosLoevsky - for so many of hls core concepLs, ln
Murray's case, lL ls hls dellberaLe approprlaLlon of lmages from llLeraLure (e.g., Ao Ametlcoo
lcotos) as well as hls own ploneerlng scholarshlp on Perman Melvllle.

LlLeraLure consLlLuLes an lncredlbly rlch reposlLory of lnformaLlon abouL human naLure and
personallLy, one LhaL sLudenLs lnLeresLed ln Lhe person-cenLered quarLeL" lgnore aL Lhelr perll.
lL ls noL ln Lhe leasL surprlslng LhaL Lhe Lhree scholars clLed here found parLlcularly plvoLal leads
ln Lhe work of Lhe greaL wrlLers. 8uL cruclal lnslghLs abouL human naLure are capLured as well
ln oLher arL forms, ranglng from Lhe vlsual arLs Lo muslc Lo Lhe dance. 1he focus ln Lhls
dlscusslon falls on llLeraLure buL Lhe same llne of analysls can - and should - be exLended Lo
oLher arL forms.

8uL lf Lhere ls a relaLlonshlp beLween Lhe sclenLlflc sLudy of personallLy and Lhe wrlLer's
lnvesLlgaLlon of Lhe world of hls or her characLers, [usL whaL should LhaL relaLlonshlp be?
Should lL be muLual supporL and regular communlcaLlon? Should Lhe psychologlsL aLLempL Lo
locaLe Lhe novellsL's characLers ln hls laboraLory? Should Lhe novellsL draw expllclLly or
lmpllclLly on Lhe psychologlcal Lheorles and concepLs of Lhe Llme? Cr, followlng 8orLy (1979),
should Lhe conversaLlon occur among psychologlsLs and llLerary crlLlcs and LheorlsLs? Should
Lhe meLhods developed by llLerary LheorlsLs be approprlaLed by psychologlsLs Lo help Lhem ln
sLudylng Lhe ways ln whlch Lhe lndlvldual (reader or wrlLer) concelves of and relaLes hls llfe?
Should psychologlcal lnslghLs abouL memory, sense of Llme, or ldenLlflcaLlon be uLlllzed by
sLudenLs of llLeraLure Lo explaln Lhe ways ln whlch flcLlon works for dlfferenL readers or ls
produced by dlfferenL wrlLers? Cr are any or all of Lhese opLlons falr game?

l remaln uncerLaln [usL whlch form Lhls collaboraLlon should Lake and perhaps several forms
deserve exploraLlon. AL Lhe very leasL psychologlcal lnvesLlgaLors of Lhe person-cenLered
quarLeL" oughL Lo sLudy works of arL, lncludlng llLeraLure, wlLh greaL care and LesL Lhelr
porLrayals agalnsL Lhe clalms of sclenLlflc sLudy. CooperaLlve lnvesLlgaLlons among arLlsLs and
psychologlsLs could be very proflLable, Lhough Lhe dlfflculLy of such collaboraLlons should noL
be underesLlmaLed. Whlle Lhe dlsLance beLween psychologlsLs and novellsLs mlghL prove Loo
Bowaiu uaiunei - Scientific Psychology

19

greaL, psychologlsLs and sLudenLs of llLeraLure can each enrlch one anoLher's pursulLs. lndeed,
Lhey may provlde examples and llmlLlng cases" for one anoLher, Lhe psychologlsL's preclse
meLhods and rlgor belng balanced by Lhe llLerary scholar's broad vlew and skepLlcal casL of
mlnd, parLlcularly wlLh respecL Lo reducLlonlsm as ln Lhe flve facLors of personallLy. 1he
psychologlsL's Laxonomles and frameworks need Lo be LesLed agalnsL Lhe rlch range of
characLers found ln llLeraLure and Lhe powerful lnslghLs abouL Lhe naLure of LexL and of readlng
puL forLh recenLly by llLerary scholars. lf Lhe schemes of psychologlsLs prove lnadequaLe for
deallng wlLh Lhese more rounded examples and concepLs, Lhen Lhey need Lo be reconflgured
or alLogeLher scuLLled. lor Lhelr parL, sLudenLs of llLeraLure can beneflL from a sLudy of Lhe way
ln whlch psychologlsLs have concepLuallzed Lhe human personallLy, operaLlonallzed Lhese
varlous concepLuallzaLlons, and LesLed cerLaln LanLallzlng hypoLheses abouL human behavlor ln
Lhe experlmenLal laboraLory.

lL should prove posslble for psychologlcal wrlLers and llLerary scholars Lo do more Lhan read
one anoLher's publlcaLlons. Pere, lndeed, l Lhlnk LhaL we can Lake an lnsLrucLlve leaf from
colleagues ln cognlLlve sclence and neurosclence. 1hese flelds have advanced ln large measure
because researchers reared ln dlsparaLe dlsclpllnes work LogeLher shoulder-Lo-shoulder on
problems of muLual lnLeresL. 1oplcs llke Lhe naLure and appreclaLlon of lrony, Lhe appeal of
falry Lales, or Lhe power relaLlons whlch obLaln among lndlvlduals ln Shakespearean plays,
have already beneflLLed from cross-dlsclpllnary lnvesLlgaLlons (8eLLelhelm, 1977, 8rown &
Cllman, 1989, Wlnner, 1988). Cur own lnvesLlgaLlons aL Parvard ro[ecL Zero have for some
Llme beneflLLed from susLalned collaboraLlons among psychologlsLs, arLlsLs, and experLs ln Lhe
sysLemaLlc sLudy of dlfferenL arL and llLerary forms (Cardner 1982, Cardner &erklns, 1989,
Wlnner, 1982, see also pzweb.harvard.edu). 1he knoLLlesL problems ln arLlsLlc analysls - such
as Lhe quesLlon of wheLher Lhere mlghL be opLlmal lnLerpreLaLlon of a work of arL - call
for lnLerdlsclpllnary lnvesLlgaLlon.

WhaLever collaboraLlon evenLually obLalns among psychologlsLs and lndlvlduals lnvolved ln
llLeraLure and oLher arL forms, one polnL seems clear. 1he parL of psychology mosL llkely Lo
remaln afLer Lhe aforemenLloned cannlballzaLlons have Laken place ls Lhe sLudy of Lhe person-
cenLered quarLeL." CerLaln aspecLs of emoLlon and moLlvaLlon may also elude Lhe cognlLlve
and neurosclences. 1hese are Loplcs for whlch psychologlsLs may have speclal meLhods and
lnslghLs, buL Lhey are equally Lhe concern of wrlLers and oLher arLlsLs, and of Lhose who sLudy
Lhem, llke llLerary crlLlcs and LheorlsLs. no hard sclence la physlcs ls llkely Lo emerge from Lhe
collaboraLlons l envlsage. 8uL an lnLeresLlng and hlghly useful klnd of conversaLlon beLween
behavloral sclence and Lhe humanlLles ls llkely Lo occur lf psychologlsLs and lndlvlduals ln Lhe
arLs make common cause. 1hls lnslghL was noL losL on our forefaLhers, and lL has been
relnforced ln promlslng work underLaken by uonald Spence (1982) and !erome 8runer (1986),
and lrvln ?alom (2003) among oLhers.

WnI1nLk SCnCLCGIS1S?

Cn hls beLLer days Wllllam !ames was a deLermlned opLlmlsL, buL he harbored hls doubLs
abouL psychology. Pe once declared, Lhere ls no such Lhlng as a sclence of psychology" and
added LhaL Lhe whole presenL generaLlon (of psychologlsLs) ls predesLlned Lo become
unreadable old medleval lumber, as soon as Lhe flrsL genulne Lracks of lnslghL are made"
(Allen, 1967, p. 313). l have lndlcaLed my bellef LhaL, over a cenLury laLer, !ames' less opLlmlsLlc
vlslon has maLerlallzed and LhaL lL may be Llme Lo bury sclenLlflc psychology, aL leasL as a slngle
coherenL underLaklng.

Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9

20

?eL sclenLlflc psychologlsLs merlL pralse as well. lf we have so far falled ln our more amblLlous
underLaklng, we have developed any number of paradlgms, concepLs, and meLhods whlch
should prove servlceable ln conLemporary and fuLure sclenLlflc endeavors. 1here ls no need Lo
chronlcle Lhese achlevemenLs, because Lhey sLock our LexLbooks and are now ofLen of Lhe
common lore. ln readlng Lhese LexLs l can noL help buL feel prlde abouL my membershlp ln Lhe
psychologlcal gulld, lL ls clearly Lhe work of our fleld whlch has provlded Lhe llon's share of
evldence LhaL Lhe behavloral sclences merlL aLLenLlon and fundlng. lf some psychologlsLs suffer
from physlcs envy," l have no doubL LhaL many ln oLher dlsclpllnes experlence psychology
envy."

We can rlghLly cherlsh Lhe work of our mosL emlnenL pracLlLloners - pasL and presenL - and
Lhe varlous concepLs, flndlngs, and schemes whlch Lhey have developed. WheLher psychology
long endures as a self-conLalned fleld, sclenLlsLs wlll long honor Lhe dlscoverles of uonald Pebb
and karl Lashley, MarLln Sellgman and Mlhaly CslkszenLmlhalyl, Amos 1versky and uanlel
kahneman, Lhe concepLs of ldenLlLy crlsls and cognlLlve dlssonance, Lhe laboraLory procedures
of psychophyslcs, psychollngulsLlcs, and physlologlcal psychology.

Lven as we pay homage Lo our pasL conLrlbuLors, we can parLlclpaLe as full members of
research Leams ln Lhe emerglng dlsclpllnes of cognlLlve sclence, neurosclence, and, perhaps,
culLural sLudles and developmenLal sLudles. lndlvlduals researchlng ln Lhese areas wlll need Lhe
lnslghLs and meLhods of psychology - and lf our colleagues do noL work wlLh us, Lhey wlll only
have Lo repeaL our mlsLakes and relnvenL our flelds.

A Lhlrd polnL ls perhaps more subLle buL lL ls equally lmporLanL. l Lhlnk LhaL Lhe ma[or
conLrlbuLlon LhaL psychologlsLs can make ls Lo conLlnue Lo Lackle Lhe mosL lnLeresLlng
problems LhaL emerge and Lo follow Lhose problems wherever Lhey may lead. 1o paraphrase
an old saw - some sclenLlsLs have avolded psychology because lL ls Loo easy, buL oLhers have
avolded lL because lL ls Loo hard." lL ls ln our bones - as lL was ln Lhe bones of Wllllam !ames
- Lo pursue Lhe hard lssues, Lo dlsplay an audaclous curloslLy abouL Lhe human condlLlon and
Lo follow LhaL curloslLy wherever lL looks.

A cenLury and a half ago, Wllllam !ames' unsLlnLlng curloslLy led hlm Lo physlology and Lhence
Lo psychology - lndeed Lo foundlng aL Parvard around 1873 Lhe flrsL experlmenLal laboraLory
ln Lhe counLry and perhaps ln Lhe world. 1he sclenLlsLs who flocked Lo psychology ln Lhls
cenLury are as glfLed a loL of scholars as any l can lmaglne. erhaps Loday, some of Lhose who
ln an earller era would have Lurned Lo phllosophy are lnsLead aLLracLed Lo compuLer sclence, Lo
braln sclence or geneLlcs, Lo llLeraLure, or llLerary sLudles. Such shlfLlng of alleglances ls
undersLandable and approprlaLe. 8uL my guess ls LhaL a healLhy number of Lhe mosL curlous
wlll conLlnue Lo gravlLaLe Lo Lhose vexed lssues whlch, aL leasL ln Lhelr mlnds, are besL
descrlbed as belng psychologlcal ln naLure.

lf one of Lhose brlghL sLudenLs were Lo wander lnLo my offlce ln search of career advlce, whaL
would l say? l would counsel Lhe sLudenL Lo look for Lhose lssues, problems, and phenomena
LhaL seem Lo sLraddle Lhe newly emerglng flelds. l would have ln mlnd Lhose phenomena or
problems LhaL lle aL Lhe boundary of Lhe lndlvldual self and Lhe soclal self, whlch sLraddle
sLream of consclousness as a psychologlcal concepL and sLream of consclousness as a presence
ln llLeraLure, whlch ralse developmenLal lssues ln a neurologlcal conLexL or Lackle neurologlcal
lssues ln a developmenLal conLexL, whlch occur aL Lhe lnLerface of pure cognlLlon" and
Bowaiu uaiunei - Scientific Psychology

21

cognlLlon as lL unfolds ln Lhe school or aL Lhe worklng place. lf psychology lndeed Lurns ouL Lo
be a fleld for foxes, raLher Lhan for hedgehogs - as l belleve ls Lhe case - Lhen l would Lry Lo
converL psychologlsLs lnLo Lhe sleekesL and cleveresL foxes around.

ln closlng, Lhen, l flnd myself Laklng a leaf from Marc AnLony. Pavlng proposed a funeral for
psychology as we know lL, l have as well engaged ln pralse for much of whaL psychology has
accompllshed. l have suggesLed LhaL Lhere ls much producLlve work lefL for Lhose who, for
whaLever reason, choose Lo conLlnue Lo call Lhemselves psychologlsLs and wlsh Lo pursue Lhe
klnds of lssues and quesLlons whlch are LradlLlonally consldered psychologlcal. ln so dolng, l
belleve l have been falLhful Lo Lhe vlslon of Wllllam !ames, a man whose lnLellecL was far Loo
capaclous ever Lo be corralled lnLo a slngle dlsclpllne, and who ln facL Lhrlved by allghLlng on a
Loplc for awhlle and Lhen movlng on Lo anoLher one. !ames remlnds one of Lhe proverblal fox,
ln lsalah 8erlln's flgure, Lhe lmpresslonlsL palnLer, ln Lhe words of C. SLanley Pall. Wllllam
!ames' long-Llme colleague 1heodore llournoy puL lL well:

[!ames] genlus ls so abundanL, so varled, and so llLLle preoccupled wlLh Lhe appearance of
conLradlcLlon LhaL ln gaLherlng ln hls varlous uLLerances, one does noL easlly frame hlm lnLo a
Lruly harmonlous whole. lndeed lL ls almosL a quesLlon wheLher he hlmself would have been able
Lo produce a perfecLly llnked and coherenL sysLem from Lhe magnlflcenL Lreasure of maLerlal
whlch he has lefL us. (quoLed ln Allen, 1967, p. 493)

As we psychologlsLs move Lo Lhe second cenLury of a posL !ameslan world, we could do worse
Lhan Lo emulaLe hls splrlL and hls example.



8I8LICGkAn

Allen, C.W. (1967). wllllom Iomes. new ?ork: vlklng.
8aer, u. M. (1987). uo we really wanL Lhe unlflcaLlon of psychology? New lJeos lo
lsycboloqy, 3, 333-360.
8akan, u. (1987). sychology's dlgresslons. New lJeos lo lsycboloqy, 347-330.8eLLelhelm,
8. (1977). 1be oses of eocbootmeot. 1be meooloq ooJ lmpottooce of folty toles. new
?ork: vlnLage.
8lckman, L. & CoodsLeln, L. (Lds.) (1987). roceedlngs of Lhe naLlonal conference on
graduaLe educaLlon ln psychology [Speclal lssue]. Ametlcoo lsycboloqlst, 42 (12).
8orlng, L. C. (1930). A blstoty of expetlmeotol psycboloqy. new ?ork: AppleLon-CenLury
CrofLs.
8rown, 8. & Cllman, A. (1989). ollLeness Lheory ln Shakespeare's four ma[or Lragedles.
looqooqe lo 5oclety, 18, 139-212.
8runer, !. S. (1986). Actool mloJs, posslble wotlJs. Cambrldge, MA: Parvard unlverslLy
ress.
Commlsslon on 8ehavloral and Soclal Sclences and LducaLlon of Lhe naLlonal 8esearch
Councll (1988). 1eo eot Ootlook. WashlngLon, uC: naLlonal Academy ress.
Cook, n. (1986). 1be btolo coJe. London, u.k.: MeLhuen.

Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9

22

uamaslo, A. (2000). 1be feelloq of wbot boppeos, new ?ork, ParvesL
ureyfus, P. (1972)..wbot compotets coo Jo. A ctltlpoe of opplleJ teosooloq. new ?ork:
Parper.
lelnsLeln, P. (1984). 8ecomloq wllllom Iomes. lLhaca, n?: Cornell unlverslLy ress.
Cardner, P. (1983). 1be mloJ's oew scleoce. new ?ork: 8aslc 8ooks.
Cardner, P., & erklns, u. (Lds.) (1989). Att, mloJ, ooJ eJocotloo. keseotcb ftom ltoject
2eto. urbana, lL: unlverslLy of llllnols ress.
CeerLz, C. (1973). Cn Lhe naLure of anLhropologlcal undersLandlng, Ametlcoo 5cleotlst, 7J,
47-33.
Creene, !. u. (2003). lrom neural ls" Lo morals oughL": WhaL are Lhe moral lmpllcaLlons
of neurosclenLlflc morals psychology? Notote kevlews Neotoscleoce, 4, 847-830.
Pall C., & Llndzey C. (1978). 1beotles of petsooollty. new ?ork: Wlley.
Polland, n. n. (1988). 1be btolo of kobett ltost. A coqoltlve opptoocb to lltetotote. new
?ork, 8ouLledge.
Pubel, u. (1979). 1he braln, 5cleotlflc Ametlcoo , 241 44-33.
Pughes, P. S. (1961). cooscloosoess ooJ soclety, new ?ork, vlnLage.
!ames, W. (1890). ltloclples of psycboloqy 8osLon, MA: PolL.
!ames, W. (1963). lsycboloqy. 8tlefet cootse. new ?ork, lawceLL. (Crlglnal work publlshed
1892. 8osLon, MA: PolL).
koch, S. (1981). 1he naLure and llmlLs of psychologlcal analysls, Ametlcoo lsycboloqlst, 31
237-269.
knlghL, M. (1934).wllllom Iomes. ParmondsworLh, u.k.: enguln.
kranLz, u. L. (1987). sychology's search for unlLy. New lJeos lo lsycboloqy, 3 329-
339.Murray, P. A. (1938).xplototloos lo petsooollty. new ?ork: Cxford unlverslLy
ress.
CrnsLeln, 8. (1986). 1be psycboloqy of cooscloosoess. new ?ork: enguln.
erry, 8. 8. (1933). 1be tbooqbt ooJ cbotoctet of wllllom Iomes. Cambrldge, MA: Parvard
unlverslLy ress.
lnker, S., & rlnce A. (1988). Cn language and connecLlonlsm: Analysls of a parallel
dlsLrlbuLed processlng model of language acqulslLlon.coqoltloo,2873-193.
8orLy, 8. (1979). lbllosopby ooJ tbe mlttot of ootote. rlnceLon, n!: rlnceLon unlverslLy
ress.
8oyce, !. 8. (1987). More order Lhan a Lelephone book. New lJeos lo lsycboloqy, 5, 341-
343.
8umelharL, u., & McClelland u. (1986). lotollel-JlsttlboteJ ptocessloq. Cambrldge, MA: Ml1
ress.
Sellgman, M. (2004). Aotbeotlc bopploess, new ?ork, lree ress.
Bowaiu uaiunei - Scientific Psychology

23

Spence, u. (1982). Nottotlve ttotb ooJ blstotlcol ttotb. meooloq ooJ lotetptetotloo lo
psycboooolysls. new ?ork: norLon.
1oulmln, S. (1987). Cn noL over unlfylng psychology, New lJeos lo lsycboloqy, 5, 331-333.
WaLson, 8. l. (Ld.) (1979). 8oslc wtltloqs lo tbe blstoty of psycboloqy new ?ork: Cxford
unlverslLy ress.
Wlnner, L. (1988). 1be polot of wotJs. cbllJteo's ooJetstooJloq of metopbot ooJ ltooy
Cambrldge, MA Parvard unlverslLy ress.
?alom, l. (2003). wbeo Nletzscbe wept, ubllcaLlon lnformaLlon noL avallable.




























Bumana.Nente - Issue 11- 0ctobei 2uu9