Q.
1 How human capacity create and articulate knowledge in
Behavioural sciences?
Human Capacity in Behavioural Sciences
Human capacity to create and articulate knowledge in the behavioural sciences involves
a complex interplay. Below are key aspects of how this knowledge is generated and
communicated:
1. Cognitive Processes:
Cognitive abilities such as perception, memory, and reasoning are essential in
observing and interpreting behaviour. These mental processes help individuals
recognize patterns and causes of behaviour, forming the basis for theories and
models in behavioural sciences.
2. Social Interaction and Learning:
Social interaction plays a critical role in shaping behavioural knowledge. Through
socialization, individuals learn from experiences and others in their social
environment, which influences their understanding of behaviour. This process allows
for the creation of shared knowledge that reflects cultural and societal norms.
3. Language and Communication:
Once knowledge is created, language is the primary tool used to articulate it. Humans
use verbal and non-verbal communication to share insights and findings about
behaviour, making complex concepts accessible to others in various contexts,
including academic and practical applications.
4. Scientific Methods and Research:
Behavioural knowledge is systematically generated through scientific research,
including observation, experimentation, and data analysis. These methods ensure
that the knowledge produced is reliable and objective, allowing for its validation and
further refinement.
5. Metacognition:
Metacognition, or the ability to reflect on one’s thinking processes, enhances the
creation and articulation of behavioural knowledge. By critically analyzing their own
thoughts and behaviours, individuals improve their understanding and interpretation
of behaviour.
References:
Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science,
26(1-2), 113-125.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52, 1-26.
