Psychology Assignment

Introspection Method

SUBMITTED TO:- ANUPREET KAUR ARORA

SUBMITTED BY:- KUNAL
SID:- 18103115
 Introspection Method
Introspection is the examination of one's own conscious thoughts
and feelings. In psychology, the process of introspection relies exclusively
on observation of one's mental state, while in a spiritual context it may refer
to the examination of one's soul. Introspection is closely related to human
self-reflection and is contrasted with external observation.
Introspection generally provides a privileged access to one's own mental
states, not mediated by other sources of knowledge, so that individual
experience of the mind is unique. Introspection can determine any number
of mental states including: sensory, bodily, cognitive, emotional and so
forth.
Introspection has been a subject of philosophical discussion for thousands
of years. The philosopher Plato asked, "…why should we not calmly and
patiently review our own thoughts, and thoroughly examine and see what
these appearances in us really are?" While introspection is applicable to
many facets of philosophical thought it is perhaps best known for its role
in epistemology; in this context introspection is often compared
with perception, reason, memory, and testimony as a source of knowledge

Introspection explores access one has to their mental state of mind.

Psychologist Wilhelm Wundt developed the technique. His studies
developing the technique included helping others through self-observation
of their thoughts. He trained people to analyze context within personal
opinions objectively. The concept features a common element people do,
which is examining their ideas. With techniques of introspection,
psychology experts help people emotionally engage in events from the past
to understand their thought processes related to feelings they experienced.
The aspect simply looks at how the mind processes emotions and
memories to help one understand their meanings. It gives another look at
how people are affected by things around them through a precise,
structured process.

In modern terms, the concept helps people get to know themselves by

uncovering values deep within and deciding how to use them. It is allowing
yourself to become an expert on your emotions with professional guidance.
Research on the concept shows evidence it encourages people to make
better decisions in life leading to fulfillment and a sense of purpose. Even
when dealing with uncertainty, techniques practiced and applied ensure
that you stay on track to meet personal goals. It may lead to improved
relations with others at home and work while enhancing mental health.
Some see this as a way of uncovering inner strength and power, allowing
better control of processing thoughts.

The practice was widely used through the United States and Europe after
Wundt's discovery, which included 40 years of research. The method is
abandoned in parts of the world, but researchers continue to explore ways
of self-reporting measures to gain more understanding about thought
pattern processes and perceptions of introspecting subjects. Some see
introspection as a tool to observe a person's thoughts, while others feel it is
valuable spiritually when observing feelings of one's soul.

What Is Introspection?
The term introspection can be used to describe both an informal reflection
process and a more formalized experimental approach that was used early
on in psychology's history.

In everyday use, introspection is a way of looking inward and examining

one's internal thoughts and feelings. As a research tool, however, the
process was much more controlled and structured.

Introspection as reflection: The first meaning is the one that most

people are probably the most familiar with, which involves informally
examining our own internal thoughts and feelings. When we reflect on our
thoughts, emotions, and memories and examine what they mean, we are
engaged in introspection.

Introspection as a research technique: The term introspection is

also used to describe a research technique that was first developed by
psychologist Wilhelm Wundt. Also known as experimental self-observation,
Wundt's technique involved training people to carefully and objectively as
possible to analyze the content of their own thoughts.

Some historians suggest that introspection is not the most accurate term to
refer to the methods that Wundt utilized. Introspection implies a level of
armchair soul-searching, but the methods that Wundt used were a much
more highly controlled and rigid experimental technique.

The Self-Reflection Connection

The Greek philosopher Plato has influenced developments of introspection,
along with the aspect of human self-reflection. His beliefs included not just
reviewing one's thoughts, but to be thorough in examining how they appear
within us. Introspection is exercised by the human ability to be willing to
learn more about one's nature and purpose. Philosophy of the mind, self-
awareness, and consciousness also play essential roles in self-reflection.
Mental exercises may include elements of introspection and self-reflection
to help people find value within personal mistakes to encourage spiritual
growth.

Some feel there are effective ways to engage in these aspects that may
reduce feelings of anxiety, stress, and depression. An element to note is
that it is suggested to avoid becoming obsessed with experiencing certain
beliefs, but instead, stay focused on answering questions or getting to the
bottom of what is causing negative emotions. Questions asking why may
help someone understand personal limitations created from their feelings.
Questions asking what fuels curiosity and positivity about future results.
While there are ways to apply such exercises to gain personal reflection of
one's feelings, it is crucial to stay open to similar concepts that may open
doors to understanding how your thoughts engage in behaviors expressed

In psychology
Wundt

It has often been claimed that Wilhelm Wundt, the father of modern
psychology, was the first to adopt introspection to experimental
psychology though the methodological idea had been presented long
before, as by 18th century German philosopher-psychologists such
as Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten or Johann Nicolaus Tetens. Also,
Wundt's views on introspection must be approached with great care.
Wundt was influenced by notable physiologists, such as Gustav Fechner,
who used a kind of controlled introspection as a means to study
human sensory organs. Building upon the pre-existing use of introspection
in physiology, Wundt believed the method of introspection was the ability to
observe an experience, not just the logical reflection or speculations which
some others interpreted his meaning to be. Wundt imposed exacting
control over the use of introspection in his experimental laboratory at
the University of Leipzig, making it possible for other scientists
to replicate his experiments elsewhere, a development that proved
essential to the development of psychology as a modern, peer-
reviewed scientific discipline. Such exact purism was typical of Wundt and
he instructed all introspection observations be performed under these same
instructions:
1) the Observer must, if possible, be in a position to determine beforehand
the entrance of the process to be observed.
2) the introspectionist must, as far as possible, grasp the phenomenon in a
state of strained attention and follow its course.
3) Every observation must, in order to make certain, be capable of being
repeated several times under the same conditions.
4) the conditions under which the phenomenon appears must be found out
by the variation of the attendant circumstances and when this was done the
various coherent experiments must be varied according to a plan partly by
eliminating certain stimuli and partly by grading their strength and quality
Titchener
Edward Titchener was an early pioneer in experimental psychology and
student of Wilhelm Wundt. After earning his doctorate under the tutelage of
Wundt at the University of Leipzig, he made his way to Cornell University,
where he established his own laboratory and research. When Titchener
arrived at Cornell in 1894, psychology was still a fledgling discipline,
especially in the United States, and Titchener was a key figure in bringing
Wundt's ideas to America. However, Titchener misrepresented some of
Wundt's ideas to the American psychological establishment, especially in
his account of introspection which, Titchener taught, only served a purpose
in the qualitative analysis of consciousness into its various parts, while
Wundt saw it as a means to quantitatively measure the whole of conscious
experience. Titchener was exclusively interested in the individual
components that comprise conscious experience, while Wundt, seeing little
purpose in the analysis of individual components, focused on synthesis of
these components. Ultimately, Titchener's ideas would form the basis of
the short-lived psychological theory of structuralism.
Introspection Concerns
Wundt and other psychologists studying the technique have faced
criticisms about the concept. Some experts feel the process itself may
influence changes in how a person truly feels during the experience. For
instance, when providing information about your feelings, chances are you
have to stop and think about it for a moment. It is during this time that it is
believed the experience is being changed and even the feeling itself
because the thought process is interrupted to give feedback on what one is
feeling.

Associated techniques with introspection are credited for advancing

scientific aspects of psychology. However, experts have argued some
areas of the method lacked scientific sufficiency when supporting certain
forms of behavior. Additionally, the concept presented other concerns
including:

 Responses by experts observing a person's feelings may not be

consistent.
 The technique may benefit only certain groups of people such as
adults instead of children.
 Some experts think there are limitations with introspection in complex
situations such as those with developmental, learning, mental or
personality disorders.

Elements of the concept continue to be explored and debated. Wundt,

along with other observers, broke down their observations of people's
feelings into three categories: affection, images, and sensations. Concerns
from theorists believe the technique doesn't put enough focus on how
thoughts are organized. Therefore, critics feel aspects of behavior should
be the primary focus defined as scientific psychology

How Introspection Explores Consciousness

Psychologically, as a method, it examines thought processes related to
thinking, learning, perception, problem-solving, and analyzing dreams.
During the late 1800s, Wundt and other observers relied on this method
often to understand levels of consciousness of the mind. Wundt had a
unique interest in understanding what a person is thinking, feeling, and
perceiving during specific experiences in time. Visual and auditory
elements such as light and sound were also introduced to understand other
aspects of one's experience.

The studies behind the method present more intricate reflections of what a
person experienced. Others that observed along Wundt were aggressively
trained on how to examine, describe, and report related senses of the
experienced described by those they were studying. The line of questioning
involved was systematic and avoided bias while preventing outside
influence from affecting how the experience was reported. Those that
participated in the study were assumed to be in good health, alert, and free
of distractions while giving personal self-reports.

Benefits of Introspection
While introspection has fallen out of favor as a research technique, there
are many potential benefits to this sort of self-reflection and self-analysis.

 Introspection can be a great source of personal knowledge

 The process provides knowledge that is not possible in any other way
 It can help people make connections between different experiences
and responses.

Why Many Suggest That Introspection is Crucial

People may think they don't have time to explore their thoughts with more
in-depth detail. Society influences how people spend their time while also
changing their thoughts and feelings. Making time to understand your
thoughts and why they affect you takes courage while helping you discover
who you are. Assessing your thoughts is encouraged because it helps one
know the different stages in life and how they are approached. Whether
you engage in professional guidance through in-person or online
therapy support options, or you complete personal assessments to ask
questions about your feelings, such efforts work to improve the value of
thoughts created leading to clarity of how things affect you.

Studies suggest people's thought patterns include a significant amount of

harmful content. Many include repetitive thoughts or concepts taking up too
much energy and space physically and mentally. Thus, affecting how
people use their ability to see things with conviction and clarity when
making decisions. Introspection encourages positive energy from oneself to
enhance personal motivation to learn more about themselves. It makes it
easier to break down things that distract us or lead to negative thoughts by
establishing a process of analyzing and purifying thoughts and feelings.

Introspection may help you realize capabilities to deal with challenges you
thought were impossible. Exploring your thoughts may be done in different
ways from analyzing relationships to how to meet goals in life. Asking
questions about yourself is the starting point of realizing what you can do
and why some things have a stronger effect on you than others. Using a
concept such as introspection along with other useful mental health tools
may help achieve a productive approach to creating a balanced lifestyle

Criticisms of Introspection
While Wundt's experimental techniques did a great deal to advance the
cause of making psychology a more scientific discipline, the introspective
method had a number of notable limitations.

The use of introspection as an experimental technique was often criticized,

particularly Titchener's use of the method. Schools of thought including
functionalism and behaviorism believed that introspection lacked scientific
reliability and objectivity. Because the process is so subjective, it is
impossible to examine or repeat the results.

A few other problems with introspection:

 Different observers often provided significantly different responses to

the exact same stimuli
 Even the most highly trained observers were not consistent in their
responses
 The technique is impossible to use with children or animals
 Introspection is limited in its use; complex subjects such as learning,
personality, mental disorders, and development are difficult or even
impossible to study with this technique
 The very act of analyzing one's own thoughts plays a role in changing
the experience
Also, because observers have to first be trained by the researchers, there
is always the possibility that this training introduces a bias to the results.
Those engaged in introspection might be thinking or feeling things because
of how they have been influenced and trained by the experimenters.

Research has also shown that people are largely unaware of many of the
workings of their own minds, yet are surprisingly unaware of this
unawareness

A Word From Verywell

The use of introspection as a tool for looking inward is an important part
of self-awareness and is even used in psychotherapy as a way to help
clients gain insight into their own feelings and behavior. While Wundt's
efforts contributed a great deal to the development and advancement of
experimental psychology, researchers now recognize the numerous
limitations and pitfalls of using introspection as an experimental technique.

Recent developments
Later psychological movements, such as functionalism and behaviorism,
rejected introspection for its lack of scientific reliability among other
factors. Functionalism originally arose in direct opposition to structuralism,
opposing its narrow focus on the elements of consciousness and
emphasising the purpose of consciousness and other psychological
behavior. Behaviorism's objection to introspection focused much more on
its unreliability and subjectivity which conflicted with behaviorism's focus on
measurable behavior.
The more recently established cognitive psychology movement has to
some extent accepted introspection's usefulness in the study of
psychological phenomena, though generally only in experiments pertaining
to internal thought conducted under experimental conditions. For example,
in the "think aloud protocol", investigators cue participants to speak their
thoughts aloud in order to study an active thought process without forcing
an individual to comment on the process itself.
David Hume pointed out that introspecting a mental state tends to alter the
very state itself; a German author, Christian Gottfried Schütz, noted that
introspection is often described as mere "inner sensation", but actually
requires also attention, that introspection does not get at unconscious
mental states, and that it cannot be used naively - one needs to know what
to look for. Immanuel Kant added that, if they are understood too narrowly,
introspective experiments are impossible. Introspection delivers, at best,
hints about what goes on in the mind; it does not suffice to justify
knowledge claims about the mind. Similarly, the idea continued to be
discussed between John Stuart Mill and Auguste Comte. Recent
psychological research on cognition and attribution has asked people to
report on their mental processes, for instance to say why they made a
particular choice or how they arrived at a judgment. In some situations,
these reports are clearly confabulated. For example, people justify choices
they have not in fact made. Such results undermine the idea that those
verbal reports are based on direct introspective access to mental content.
Instead, judgements about one's own mind seem to be inferences from
overt behavior, similar to judgements made about another person.
One of the central implications of dissociations between consciousness and
meta-consciousness is that individuals, presumably including researchers,
can misrepresent their experiences to themselves. Jack and Roepstorff
assert, '...there is also a sense in which subjects simply cannot be wrong
about their own experiential states.' Presumably they arrived at this
conclusion by drawing on the seemingly self-evident quality of their own
introspections, and assumed that it must equally apply to others. However,
when we consider research on the topic, this conclusion seems less self-
evident. If, for example, extensive introspection can cause people to make
decisions that they later regret, then one very reasonable possibility is that
the introspection caused them to 'lose touch with their feelings'. In short,
empirical studies suggest that people can fail to appraise adequately (i.e.
are wrong about) their own experiential states.

Even when their introspections are uninformative, people still give confident
descriptions of their mental processes, being "unaware of their
unawareness". This phenomenon has been termed the introspection
illusion and has been used to explain some cognitive biases and belief in
some paranormal phenomena. When making judgements about
themselves, subjects treat their own introspections as reliable, whereas
they judge other people based on their behavior. This can lead to illusions
of superiority. For example, people generally see themselves as
less conformist than others, and this seems to be because they do not
introspect any urge to conform. Another reliable finding is that people
generally see themselves as less biased than everyone else, because they
are not likely to introspect any biased thought processes. These
introspections are misleading, however, because biases
work unconsciously.
One experiment tried to give their subjects access to others' introspections.
They made audio recordings of subjects who had been told to say
whatever came into their heads as they answered a question about their
own bias. Although subjects persuaded themselves they were unlikely to
be biased, their introspective reports did not sway the assessments of
observers. When subjects were explicitly told to avoid relying on
introspection, their assessments of their own bias became more realistic