Dr.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL LAW

UNIVERSITY

2018-2019

PSYCHOLOGY

Project on
Introspection: Merits And Importance

SUBMITTED BY: UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF:

Hariank Gupta Ms Tanya Dixit
Enrollment No. 180101053 Assistant Professor (Psychology)
Sec: A Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya
B.A. LL.B. (Hons), Semester-I National Law University
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to use this opportunity to extend my heartiest gratitude to all the people who

have helped me develop this project.

First and foremost, I would thank my Psychology professor, Ms Tanya Dixit , who has been

constantly supporting me, guiding me and helping me with all my queries and difficulties

regarding this project since its fledgling stage. Without his enthusiasm, inspiration, and

efforts to explain even the toughest of jargons in the most lucid manner, the successful

inception of this project would have been a Herculean task.

Next, I would like thank the librarians of Dr. Madhu Limaye library for helping me find the

correct resources for my research and for helping me enrich my knowledge.

Finally, I would like to extend my gratitude to my batch mates and seniors for providing me

some unique ideas and insights which helped me make this project even better.

I know that despite my sincerest efforts some discrepancies might have crept in, I hope and

believe that I would be pardoned for the same.

Thanking You

Hariank Gupta

2
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION AND PLAN OF STUDY.......................................................................4

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................5
RESEARCH QUESTIONS..........................................................................................5
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.................................................................................5
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION .....................................................................6
CHAPTERIZATION ............................................................................................................7

INTROSPECTION AS PSYCHOLOGICAL METHOD…………………………....7

IMPORTANCE OF INTROSPECTION .....................................................................8
MERITS AND LIMITATIONS OF INTROSPECTION ............................................9
INTROSPECTION: RIGHT WAY TO DO IT.........................................................11
THOUGHT INSERTION AND THOUGHT BROADCAST ..................................14
DISPLACED PERCEPTION ...................................................................................15
CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................17
BIBLIOGRAPHY................................................................................................................18

3
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

INTRODUCTION AND PLAN OF STUDY

INTRODUCTION

Introspection is a method of self- observation. The word 'Introspection is made up

of two Latin words. "Intro" meaning within and "spection" meaning looking. Hence
it is a method where an individual is looking within one self.
Introspection method is one of the oldest methods to collect data about conscious
experiences of the subject. It is a process of self-examination where one perceives analyses
and reports one's own feelings.
Introspection is the subject of investigations in both philosophy and psychology.
1

Philosophers are often concerned with the seemingly privileged status of those beliefs
formed through introspection and the metaphysical import of the views that try to account
for it. By contrast, psychologists seem to be more concerned with the reliability of
introspection as well as its scope. There seem to be some connections between these issues,
but it is not clear how exactly philosophical research and psychological research on
introspection relate to each other. How do philosophical theories of introspection
constrain the empirical research carried out by psychologists? How do psychological data
inform the conceptual work being done by philosophers?
Here is an outline of a certain framework wherein we can understand the interaction
of philosophical and psychological research on introspection. 2 We can view the notion
of introspection as the concept of a theoretical entity. As such, it can be seen as a concept
whose content is determined by the role that it plays within a particular theory. In
the case of introspection, that theory is folk psychology. We can think of folk
psychology as the collection of claims that describe the typical causal relations that hold
between our perceptual stimuli, our behavioural responses and the different kinds of mental
states that we occupy. Folk psychology is common knowledge to us in that we have implicit
knowledge of those claims.

1
For an example of a psychological investigation, see (Wilson 2002). See the essays in (Cassam 1996)
for examples of philosophical discussions.
2
The following is meant to be a very rough description of, basically, David Chalmers’s ‘functional reduction’
framework in (1995). I take it that one of the sources of this framework is David Lewis’s work on theoretical
entities in (1972).
4
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

Thus, in order to spell out the claims that jointly constitute our
characterization of Introspection, we can simply reflect in our intuitive concept of
introspection and analyse it. I propose to view this ‘Analysis’ aspect of investigating the
introspection, as mainly the philosopher’s job. Nonetheless, psychology can contribute to
this kind of enquiry in an important way. And psychological research can provide us
with clear, precise descriptions of interesting cases for those purposes. There are
various disorders of thought, especially in schizophrenia, that constitute very effective
tests for our intuitions with regards to some of the questions that the philosopher asks
about introspection.
Furthermore, there is a different contribution that psychology makes to the study of
introspection. This is the identification of the property, process or mechanism that,
in humans, constitutes introspection. Even if we spell out all the features that a
certain mechanism must have in order to qualify as introspection in us, we are still
left with the question of which mechanism actually has all of those features.
As I see it, this ‘identification’ aspect of an investigation of introspection is an
empirical project, and pursuing it is the psychologist’s job. Notice that, in different
senses, both the project of analysis and the project of identification attempt to
answer the question ‘What is introspection?’ The philosopher will pursue an answer of
the kind ‘It is whatever mechanism meets such-and-such conditions.’ By contrast, the
psychologist will answer the question by locating the mechanism that actually meets those
conditions.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. What is the history and basic concept of Introspection?

2. For introspection how many techniques are used by people?
3. Introspection has how many elements?
4. By what way Introspection benefit us?
5. What are the Limitations of Introspection?

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

5
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

The research methodology is purely analytical. The facts and information already available

have been analysed to make a critical evaluation. To fulfill above said objectives data has

been collected through books, journals, newspapers and internet etc.

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

To discuss introspection I will discuss two pictures of Introspection i.e. thought insertion
and thought broadcast. I will first consider several approaches to these two disorders. The
discussion of those different approaches will lead us to briefly consider two other
pathologies of introspection, that is, multiple personality disorder and thought control.
Then, I will identify some philosophical questions about introspection for which
thought insertion and thought broadcast seem particularly relevant. The discussion of those
questions will get us back to the issue of how psychology contributes to the project of
analysis and, therefore, how psychological data bears on the philosophical research on
introspection.

Introspection, I submit, is an instance of displaced perception. What one comes to know by

introspection are, to be sure, facts about one's mental life, facts about internal events
3
and processes. The objects and events one perceives to learn these facts, however,
are seldom internal and never mental. One does not become aware of the fact that one is
having a certain sensation by peering inward at the sensation itself. To see the facts that
reside within, one has to look at the objects that tell you what is going on within, and these
objects are all outside.

I cannot prove this. It is, rather, a consequence of thinking about the mind so to speak, the
representational face of the brain. Since I do not think I can convince anyone that
they should-let along that they must-think about the mind in this way, I cannot demonstrate
that the mind's knowledge of itself is an instance of displaced perception. Nevertheless, I
can, I think, show that the conditional is true-that if one thinks of sensation and thought as
modes of representation, as ways the brain has of representing external affairs, then
introspection is as straightforward and unproblematic-well, almost so-as finding out how

6
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

much one weighs by looking at a bathroom scale. If one thinks in representational terms, the
mind's knowledge of itself, its awareness of mental facts, is a form of perceptual
knowledge that is obtained- indeed, can only be obtained-by awareness of non-mental
objects. So this is what I propose to do-argue for the conditional. Those who do not share
my representational proclivities will, I hope, find the consequent agreeable enough to be
tempted by its antecedent.

CHAPTERISATION

INTROSPECTION AS PSYCHOLOGICAL METHOD

In psychology introspection is a method of inquiry in which subjects attempt to examine the

contents and processes of their consciousness. Introspection has been used in the study of a
range of psychological processes, including memory, learning, thinking, problem solving,
dream analysis, and perception.

Nineteenth century psychology relied heavily on introspection. As a research method,

introspection was used by German physiologist, philosopher, and psychologist Wilhelm
Wundt in the experimental psychology laboratory that he had founded in Leipzig, in 1879.
Wundt believed that by using introspection in his experiments, he would gather information
into how the subjects' minds were working. In this way, he wanted to examine the mind into
its basic elements. Wundt did not invent this way of looking into an individual's mind
through their experiences; rather, it can be dated to Plato and Augustine . Wundt's distinctive
contribution was to take this method into the experimental arena and thus into the newly
formed field of psychology.

Wilhelm Wundt was interested in studying people’s mental experiences. His introspective
method involved one's careful self-examination and reporting of one's conscious experience
—what one is perceiving, feeling, thinking, or sensing at each particular moment in time.
For example, he would expose people to a visual or auditory stimulus, a light or a sound,
7
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

and ask them to report their conscious reactions to the stimulus (what it sounded like, how
long it lasted, how it felt).

The method of introspection was not a simple reflection on experience. Subjects were
rigorously trained in the process of examining, describing, and reporting immediate sensory
experience in response to systematic questioning. Edward B. Titcherner defined the
conditions for optimum introspective observation: subjects should be unbiased and should
prevent other associations from influencing the report of the immediate experience. In
addition, subjects should be alert, free from distractions, healthy, fresh and free from fatigue,
and interested in the experience under study.

Introspection was the principal method of the structuralist school led by Wilhelm Wundt
in Germany and Edward B. Titchener in America. Structuralists or introspectionists sought
to break down experience into its component parts or elementary sensations. Sensation was
considered primary, with perceptual processes being viewed as secondary organized
activities. A subjective understanding of consciousness and the contents of mind was the
goal of Structural or Introspective Psychology.

This method was opposed by the psychologists of the Gestalt school. They rejected the
assumption of primary elements of experience in favor of innate organizational propensities
and a  holistic view of perception. Introspective analysis they claimed revealed nothing
because phenomena were experienced as patterns, rather than simply the sum of their parts.
The Functionalist school represented by John Dewey also opposed the subjective
introspective approach, emphasizing instead the importance of systematic, objective
demonstration and experimental testing theory. The behaviorists such as John B. Watson,
condemned introspection as qualitative and unreliable and opposed the consideration of all
notions of subjective experience and questions of consciousness, emphasizing only
observable behavior analyzed in terms of measurable stimuli and responses.

IMPORTANCE OF INTROSPECTION

An infuriating traffic jam, a boss who never considers your opinions, a torrential downpour
when you planned a weekend at the beach -- you get the idea. No matter how many times
we’ve been told not to stress about what we can’t change, we do it anyway.

8
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

It’s difficult to realize we don’t always have total control of the outcome, and sometimes, we
have no choice but to adapt to unfavourable conditions.
Introspection allows us to eventually detach from these aspects over which we have no
influence, and instead, direct our energy toward things we can absolutely improve on
ourselves.3
In day-to-day life if we don’t know what is the motive of the work we are doing or lack the
focus then the work is worthless.
“A person who fails to plan he plans to fail.”
When we regularly introspect our work then the focus increases and make us foresighted.
Only a person himself can decide what he/she wants in life and according to it fix up the
targets and to check upon the execution he/she can self-introspect the progress. For
successful self-introspection one can pen down the goals and aims he want to achieve on a
piece of paper. By doing this target is in front of eye and it is always reminded to the person
of his aims when he have a look on that paper.
A person has many shortcomings which he/she may not able to notice while talking,
studying, playing, exercising a task. Self-Introspection helps to realize those mistakes and
drawbacks a person does in his normal behaviour and then figure them out.
If you are afraid of something like failure in studies or losing a match or a competition or
rejection from someone whom you like then there comes the role of introspection which lets
you face those fears thus making out best way to handle it and overcome it.
When it comes to making important decisions then sometimes there is involvement of other
peoples in it. However self-introspection helps making decisions realizing what is right and
what is wrong for you. The advice of different people may vary and sway you while the
decision of your own will be unique and by following your decisions will never make you
feel regretted for more better options but in turn make you feel better about the path you
chose. Introspection increases your self-confidence and helps you to trust your guts.

MERITS OF INTROSPECTION METHOD

MERITS:
 It is the easiest method and is readily available to the individual.
 There is no involvement of any other person so the data collected by introspection
is first-hand as the person himself examines his own activities.
3
<https://www.elitedaily.com/life/7-ways-self-reflection-introspection-will-give-happier-life/943309>
9
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

 It is the very cheap and economical method of studying behavior of one self. Any one
from any background either rich or poor can do it and we even don’t need any scientific
laboratory for its use.
 Introspection can be done anytime, at anyplace - while walking, traveling, sitting,
resting, exercising doing meditation etc.
 Introspection has gradually become more objective because of the gradual research
done in this field by the psychologists.
 With the help of this method an individual can know his emotions and feelings by
himself without being biased by any other person.
 It is the most efficient strategy and one which empowers us to think about the mental
condition of an individual, i.e. his feelings and sentiments.
 It needn't bother with any device or research facility as the subject and the examiner is
the same.
 The subjective observation methods provide an opportunity to check the results obtained
through other methods. For example, the general finding is that the pleasant materials
are better remembered than the unpleasant materials. Suppose, in an experiment the
results suggested that the unpleasant material were better remembered than the pleasant
material. The reason for this unexpected finding can be found from the introspective
report given by the subject. The subject might have reported that he might be inattentive
or mentally disturbed or feeling unwell when the pleasant materials were presented to
him. Here the introspective report would be helpful in explain the results.

LIMITATIONS:
 One needs to observe or examine one's mental processes carefully in the form of
thoughts, feeling and sensation. Since the state of one's mental processes is
continuously changing therefore when one concentrates on introspecting a particular
phase of one's mental activity, that phase passes off. For example when you get happy
because of something and afterwards introspect calmly, the state of happiness is sure
to have passed off and so what you try to observe is not what is happening at that time
with yourself but what had happened sometime before.
 The data collected by introspection cannot be verified. An individual may not pass
through the same mental state again, There is no independent way of checking the
data.
10
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

 Introspection method demands a mature, highly trained and skilled person to

introspect properly.
 The data collected by introspection lacks validity and reliability because it is not
possible to acquire the validity and correctness in self observation of mental
process of oneself.
 Since the data of introspection is too much subjective. So there is danger of being
biased and influenced by preconceptions of the individuals.
 Since the person observing and the person observed are the same so there is
high chances that the individual lie or hide the facts deliberately.
 Introspection cannot be applied to children, animal and abnormal people.

 Introspection is logically defective because the same person is the experimenter as

well as observer. It is not possible for the same individual to act as an experimenter
and observer both.
 The most serious objection against this method is that human mind is not static like
inanimate objects such as stone or chair etc. our mental process is under constant
changes so when one attempts to introspect, the state of mental process disappears and
it becomes a retrospect. Therefore it is different to changing psychological
experiences.
 The mind is divided in two parts. One is his own mental operation and the other is the
object to which this mental opaeration is directed. To expect any indivisual to attend
the working of his mind during a mental; process, especially in a complex and
emotional state such as anger or fear, is a mistaken idea. Ross commenting on the
limitation of introspection said “The observer and the observed are the same, the mind
is both the field and the instrument of observation.”

INTROSPECTION: RIGHT WAY TO DO IT

Psychologist Anthony M. Grant discovered that people who possess greater insight —
which he defines as an intuitive understanding of ourselves — enjoy stronger
relationships, a clearer sense of purpose and greater well-being, self-acceptance and
happiness. Similar studies have shown that people high on insight feel more in control of
their lives, show more dramatic personal growth, enjoy better relationships and feel
calmer and more content. However, Grant and others have also come to realise there’s

11
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

no relationship between introspection and insight. This means that the act of thinking about
ourselves isn’t necessarily correlated with knowing ourselves. And, in a few cases, they’ve
even found the opposite: the more time the participants spend in introspection, the less self-
knowledge they have. In other words, we can spend endless amounts of time in self-
reflection but emerge with no more self-insight than when we started.
But, Introspection can cloud our self-perceptions and unleash a host of
unintended consequences. Sometimes it may surface unproductive and upsetting
emotions that can swamp us and impede positive action. Introspection might also lull us
into a false sense of certainty that we’ve identified the real issue. Buddhist scholar
Tarthang Tulku uses an apt analogy: when we introspect, our response is similar to
a hungry cat watching mice. We eagerly pounce on whatever “insights” we find without
questioning their validity or value.
Organizational psychologist, researcher, and New York Times best-selling author and TEDx
speaker Dr. Tasha Eurich says that the problem with introspection isn’t that it’s categorically
ineffective, but that we don’t always do it right. “When we examine the causes of our
thoughts, feelings, and behaviors — which we often do by asking ourselves ‘why’ questions
— we tend to search for the easiest and most plausible answers. Generally, once we’ve
found one or two, we stop looking.” Asking why also tends to keep us fixated on our
problems and placing blame instead of moving forward.
So when it comes to developing internal self-awareness, Eurich has developed a simple tool
that she calls ‘What Not Why’. Asking ‘what’ would be better because it could keep us open
to discovering new information about ourselves, even if that information is negative or in
conflict with our existing beliefs. Asking why might have the opposite effect.
She explains that ‘why’ questions can draw us to our limitations while ‘what’ questions help
us see our potential; ‘why’ questions stir up negative emotions while ‘what’ questions keep
us curious; ‘why’ questions trap us in our past while ‘what’ questions help us create a better
future.
Eurich illustrates with an example we can all relate to: “Let’s say you’re in a terrible mood
after work one day. Asking “Why do I feel this way?” might elicit such unhelpful answers as
“Because I hate Mondays!” or “Because I’m just a negative person!” Instead, if you ask
“What am I feeling right now?” you could realize you’re feeling overwhelmed at work,

12
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

exhausted and hungry. Armed with that knowledge, you might decide to fix yourself dinner,
call a friend or commit to an early bedtime.4
At times, asking what instead of why  can force us to name our emotions, a process that a
strong body of research has shown to be effective. Evidence shows the simple act of
translating our emotions into language — versus simply experiencing them — can stop our
brains from activating our amygdala, the fight-or-flight command centre. This, in turn,
seems to help us stay in control.

However, there is one important exception to What Not Why. When you’re navigating
business challenges or solving problems in your team or organization, asking why can be
critical. For example, if a member of your team drops the ball on an important client project,
not exploring why it happened means you risk recurrences of the problem. Or if a new
product fails, you need to know the reason to ensure that your products are better in the
future. A good rule of thumb, then, is that why questions are generally better to help us
understand events in our environment and what questions are generally better to help us
understand ourselves.
There are other some standard ways by which one can introspect correctly :-

Create
Quite
Space

Ask Deep
Reflect
Quetions

Note the see the

answer answer

1. Create Quite Space - This can come in many forms. For some it may be taking a quiet
walk through the woods. For others, it might be grabbing a cup of tea and sitting at the table.
For some, it might even be taking a few extra moments to lie in bed in the morning. The
crucial element is to make sure no one is going to interrupt you.

2. Ask deep ended open questions –

 What is my deepest passion?
4
https://hackspirit.com/psychologist-explains-right-way-introspective-get-wrong/
13
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

 What sets my soul on fire?

These questions will make you know yourself more closely and accurately
3. See What Comes Up With No Judgement – when you answer above questions then don’t
judge the answers you came up with because sometimes there are parts of ourselves that
haven’t been given time to shine.
4. Note the answers on a sheet of paper – It would help you record the insights and feeling
you have.
5. Reflect & Repeat - After you’ve gone through this process let it sit with you and see how
it feels. The more often you ask yourself these questions the more clarity you’ll get. Think
of it and practise it again and again.

THOUGHT INSERTION AND THOUGHT BROADCAST

Thought insertion is a disorder wherein the subject is under the impression that
certain thoughts that she has are not her own thoughts. In fact, subjects who
experience thought insertion often report that other people’s thoughts are happening
in their own minds. The following is a report from a patient with thought insertion
(Mellor 1970, p. 17):
I look at the window and I think that the garden looks nice and the grass look cool, but the
thoughts of Eamonn Andrews come into my mind. There are no other thoughts there, only
his… He treats my mind like a screen and flashes thoughts onto it like you flash a picture.
By contrast, thought broadcast is a disorder wherein the subject is under the impression that
certain thoughts that she has escape her own mind. In fact, subjects who experience thought
broadcast often report that other people can have access to those thoughts.
According to Koehler (1979, p. 239), in thought broadcast, the subject ‘is quite
certain of “negatively” being aware that he has lost HIS OWN thoughts, feeling and so on
because in some way they passively diffuse into or are lost to the outside world
against his will.’ The following is a report from a patient with thought broadcast (Mellor
1970):
As I think, my thoughts leave my head on a type of mental ticker-tape. Everyone around
has only to pass the tape through their mind and they know my thought.

14
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

There are two interesting questions that one might raise about these disorders. We could
4
call them the ‘what-question’ and the ‘why-question.’ The what-question is: What
are these subjects experiencing when they make reports such as the two reports above?
What are they trying to express exactly? Subjects who suffer these two disorders seem to be
having some odd experiences that they cannot quite put into words. One would want
to know what subjects with thought insertion and thought broadcast are trying to get at
when they describe the way in which they experience their relation to their own thoughts.
By contrast, the why- question is: Why do these subjects have the strange sort of
experience that leads them to make reports of that kind? Why does such an odd type of
experience arise in these subjects?
Here is one way of looking at the contrast between the two questions. When one
asks the what-questions about thought insertion and thought broadcast, one is
enquiring about how subjects with those disorders represent the world and her own mind
whereas, when one asks the why-questions, one is enquiring about the causes that made
those subject represent things in that way. There is a sense in which the what questions
about thought insertion and thought broadcast are therefore more basic than their
corresponding why-questions: Answers to each why-question will presuppose answers to
its corresponding what-question. Basically, we cannot begin to discern why a subject
with, let us say, thought insertion has the kind of experience that she tries to express
by saying things such as ‘I have such-and-such thought but it is not my thought’ until we
have a certain grasp of what that experience could be like. Thus, in the following five
sections, I will concentrate on some possible answers to the what- questions about thought
insertion and thought broadcast, and I will leave the corresponding why-questions aside.
Basically, the idea is that the subject with thought insertion attributes some of her thoughts
to other people’s minds because she is wrong about where the boundaries that separate her
own mind from others stand. Thus, according to this answer to the what-question
about thought insertion, subjects who suffer this disorder essentially feel as if they had
access to other people’s minds. We may call this model of thought-insertion, the
‘displacement model.

DISPLACED PERCEPTION

15
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

Theories of perception-whether representational or not- must distinguish object-

perception from fact perception. There is a difference between seeing an artichoke-an
object-and seeing that it is an artichoke-a fact. 5 One can see the object, the artichoke,
without seeing the fact that it is an artichoke, and one can see the fact (by reading a label,
say) without seeing the object. Object perception of an F does not require one to know,
identify, or recognize it as an F. Fact perception-seeing (hearing, tasting, etc.) that it is an F-
does. Fact perception of an F- that it is an F-requires the perceiver to know or understand
what an F is and, in this sense, it requires possession of an F-concept. Object perception of
an F does not. One can see, taste, and feel artichokes without knowing what they are.
On a representational theory of the mind, object-perception and fact-perception involve two
different modes of perceptual representation. There is a sensory mode of representation, the
way sense experience represents objects, and a conceptual mode, the way belief (judgment,
thought) represents facts about objects. One can know the stick is straight-
conceptually representing it this way while, at the sensory level, experiencing it as
bent. Having just measured them, one can believe that k and h are the same length despite
k's looking longer than h. These are cases in which the sensory mode conflicts with the
conceptual mode: things are known (or believed) to be one way while, at the
phenomenal level, they appear to be another. Normally, there is congruence between
the sensory and the conceptual modes of representation. Unless we have reason to think
otherwise, or unless we are being particularly cautious, we take things to be the way they
appear.

5
The confusion between fact-perception and object-perception is fostered by our use
of the same perceptual verbs for both. It is also encouraged by our tendency to exploit
conversational implicatures to describe what facts we have observed (that it is an
artichoke) by mentioning, merely, the objects we have observed (artichokes). For fuller
discussion of these sources of confusion, see Dretske 1969, 1979.
16
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

CONCLUSION

Introspection is when you think about your emotions, motivations, thoughts, and behaviors.
It's also a great way to develop a higher awareness of not only yourself and how you tick, but
also how you perceive the world around you. Everyone is introspective in day-to-day life
without even realizing it. It entails the inward-looking self-observation of conscious
thoughts. Introspection is an inward focusing on mental experiences, such as sensations or
feelings. It is a conscious mental and purposive process relaying on thinking, reasoning, and
examination of one's own thoughts and perceptions 

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. 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

17
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

thoughts, emotions, and memories and examine what they mean, we are engaging in

introspection.

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 behaviour. 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.

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

Titchener's use of the method. Schools of thought including functionalism and behaviourism
believed that introspection lacked scientific reliability and objectivity.

The Introspection technique can be perfected only by remaining alert during Introspection, by
practice and training and by comparing the results with the experts.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. CASSAM, Q. (ed.), 1996. Self-Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

2. GRAHAM, G. AND STEPHENS, G. L., 2000. When Self-Consciousness Breaks:
Alien Voices and Inserted Thoughts. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

3. FISH, F., 1967. Clinical Psychopathology: Signs and Symptoms in Psychiatry.

Bristol: J. Wright & Sons.
4. FRANKFURT, H. G. 1988. The importance of what we care about:
Philosophical essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. CHALMERS, D., 1995. The Conscious Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
6. PAWAR, A. V. AND SPENCE, S. A., 2003. Defining thought broadcast. Semi-
structured literature review. British Journal of Psychiatry, 183, 287-291.
7. JASPERS, K., 1963. General Psychopathology. Manchester: Manchester University

18
 Introspection: Merits And Importance

Press.
8. HAMILTON, M. (ed.), 1984. Fish’s Schizophrenia. London: Wright PSG.

9. Madness: Case Studies in Cognitive Neuropsychiatry. Hove: Psychology Press, 267-

291.
10. SIMS, A., 1995. Symptoms in the Mind: An introduction to Descriptive
Phenomenology. London: Saunders.
11. PRINCE, W. F., 1916. The Doris Case of Quintuple Personality. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 11, 73-122.
12. SCHNEIDER, K., 1959. Clinical Psychopathology. New York: Grune & Stratton.
13. PORTER, R., 1991. The Faber Book of Madness. London: Faber and Faber.

19