What is Psychology?

By Saul McLeod, updated 2019

Psychology is the scientific study of the mind and behavior, according to the
American Psychological Association. Psychology is a multifaceted discipline and
includes many sub-fields of study such areas as human development, sports,
health, clinical, social behavior and cognitive processes.
Psychology is really a very new science, with most advances happening over
the past 150 years or so. However, its origins can be traced back to ancient
Greece, 400 – 500 years BC.
The emphasis was a philosophical one, with great thinkers such as Socrates
(470 BC – 399 BC) influencing Plato (428/427 BC – 348/347 BC), who in turn
influenced Aristotle (384 BC - 322 BC).
Philosophers used to discuss many topics now studied by modern psychology,
such as memory, free will vs determinism, nature vs. nurture, attraction etc.

The Beginnings of Psychology as a

Discipline
In the early days of psychology there were two dominant theoretical
perspectives regarding how the brain worked, structuralism and
functionalism.
Structuralism was the name given to the approach pioneered by Wilhelm
Wundt (1832-1920), which focused on breaking down mental processes intro
the most basic components.
The term originated from Edward Titchener, an American psychologist who
had been trained by Wundt. Wundt was important because he separated
psychology from philosophy by analyzing the workings of the mind in a more
structured way, with the emphasis being on objective measurement and
control.
Structuralism relied on trained introspection, a research method whereby
subjects related what was going on in their minds while performing a certain
task.
However, introspection proved to be an unreliable method because there was
too much individual variation in the experiences and reports of research
subjects.
Despite the failure of introspection Wundt is an important figure in the history
of psychology as he opened the first laboratory dedicated to psychology in
1879, and its opening is usually thought of as the beginning of modern
experimental psychology.
An American psychologist named William James (1842-1910) developed an
approach which came to be known as functionalism, that disagreed with the
focus of Structuralism.
James argued that the mind is constantly changing and it is pointless to look
for the structure of conscious experience. Rather, he proposed the focus
should be on how and why an organism does something, i.e. the functions or
purpose of the brain.
James suggested that psychologists should look for the underlying cause of
behavior and the mental processes involved. This emphasis on the causes and
consequences of behavior has influenced contemporary psychology.

The Perspectives of Psychology

Structuralism and functionalism have since been replaced by several dominant
and influential approaches to psychology, each one underpinned by a shared
set of assumptions of what people are like, what is important to study and how
to study it.
Psychoanalysis, founded by Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) was the dominant
paradigm in psychology during the early twentieth century. Freud believed
that people could be cured by making conscious their unconscious thoughts
and motivations, thus gaining insight.
Freud’s psychoanalysis was the original psychodynamic theory, but the
psychodynamic approach as a whole includes all theories that were based on
his ideas, e.g., Jung (1964), Adler (1927) and Erikson (1950).
The classic contemporary perspectives in psychology to adopt scientific
strategies were the behaviorists, who were renowned for their reliance on
controlled laboratory experiment and rejection of any unseen or unconscious
forces as causes of behavior.
Later, the humanistic approach became the 'third force' in psychology and
proposed the importance of subjective experience and personal growth.
During the 1960s and 1970s psychology began a cognitive revolution, adopting
a rigorous, scientific, lab based scientific approach with application
to memory, perception, cognitive development, mental illness, and much
more.

The Goals of Psychology

The four main goals of psychology are to describe, explain, predict and change the
behavior and mental processes of others
To Describe
Describing a behavior or cognition is the first goal of psychology. This can
enable researchers to develop general laws of human behavior.
For example, through describing the response of dogs to various stimuli, , Ivan
Pavlov helped develop laws of learning known as classical conditioning theory.
To Explain
Once researchers have described general laws behavior, the next step is to
explain how or why this trend occurs. Psychologists will propose theories
which can explain a behavior.
To Predict
Psychology aims to be able to predict future behavior from the findings of
empirical research. If a prediction is not confirmed, then the explanation it is
based on might need to be revised.
For example, classical conditioning predicts that if a person associate a
negative outcome with a stimuli they may develop a phobia or aversion of the
stimuli.
To Change
Once psychology has described, explained and made predictions about
behavior, changing or controlling a behavior can be attempted.
For example, interventions based on classical conditioning, such as systematic
desensitization, have been used to treat people with anxiety disorders
including phobias.

Critical Evaluation
Kuhn (1962) argues that a field of study can only legitimately be regarded as a
science if most of its followers subscribe to a common perspective or
paradigm.
Kuhn believes that psychology is still pre-paradigmatic, while others believe
it’s already experienced scientific revolutions (Wundt’s structuralism being
replaced by Watson’s behaviorism, in turn replaced by the information-
processing approach).
The crucial point here is: can psychology be considered a science if
psychologists disagree about what to study and how to study it?

How to reference this article:

McLeod, S. A. (2019). What is psychology? Retrieved

Behaviorist Approach
By Saul McLeod, updated 2017

Behaviorism refers to a psychological approach which emphasizes scientific

and objective methods of investigation. The approach is only concerned with
observable stimulus-response behaviors, and states all behaviors are learned
through interaction with the environment.
The behaviorist movement began in 1913 when John Watson wrote an article
entitled 'Psychology as the behaviorist views it,' which set out a number of
underlying assumptions regarding methodology and behavioral analysis:

Basic Assumptions

All behavior is learned from the environment:

Behaviorism emphasizes the role of environmental factors in influencing
behavior, to the near exclusion of innate or inherited factors. This amounts
essentially to a focus on learning.
We learn new behavior through classical or operant conditioning (collectively
known as 'learning theory').
Therefore, when born our mind is 'tabula rasa' (a blank slate).

Psychology should be seen as a science:

Theories need to be supported by empirical data obtained through careful and
controlled observation and measurement of behavior. Watson (1913) stated
that:
'Psychology as a behaviorist views it is a purely objective experimental branch
of natural science. Its theoretical goal is … prediction and control.' (p. 158).
The components of a theory should be as simple as possible. Behaviorists
propose the use of operational definitions (defining variables in terms of
observable, measurable events).

Behaviorism is primarily concerned with observable

behavior, as opposed to internal events like thinking and
emotion:
While behaviorists often accept the existence of cognitions and emotions, they
prefer not to study them as only observable (i.e., external) behavior can be
objectively and scientifically measured.
Therefore, internal events, such as thinking should be explained through
behavioral terms (or eliminated altogether).

There is little difference between the learning that takes

place in humans and that in other animals:
There's no fundamental (qualitative) distinction between human and animal
behavior. Therefore, research can be carried out on animals as well as humans
(i.e., comparative psychology).
Consequently, rats and pigeons became the primary source of data for
behaviorists, as their environments could be easily controlled.

Behavior is the result of stimulus-response:

All behavior, no matter how complex, can be reduced to a simple stimulus-
response association). Watson described the purpose of psychology as:
'To predict, given the stimulus, what reaction will take place; or, given the
reaction, state what the situation or stimulus is that has caused the reaction.'
(1930, p. 11).

Types of Behaviorism
Historically, the most significant distinction between versions of behaviorism
is that between Watson's original 'methodological behaviorism,' and forms of
behaviorism later inspired by his work, known collectively as neobehaviorism
(e.g., radical behaviorism).

Methodological Behaviorism
Watson's article 'Psychology as the behaviorist views it' is often referred to as
the 'behaviorist manifesto,' in which Watson (1913, p. 158) outlines the
principles of all behaviorists:
'Psychology as the behaviorist views it is a purely objective experimental branch
of natural science. Its theoretical goal is the prediction and control of behavior.
Introspection forms no essential part of its methods, nor is the scientific value of
its data dependent upon the readiness with which they lend themselves to
interpretation in terms of consciousness.
The behaviorist, in his efforts to get a unitary scheme of animal response,
recognizes no dividing line between man and brute. The behavior of man, with all
of its refinement and complexity, forms only a part of the behaviorist's total
scheme of investigation'.

Radical Behaviorism
Radical behaviorism was founded by B.F Skinner and agreed with the
assumption of methodological behaviorism that the goal of psychology should
be to predict and control behavior.
Skinner, like Watson, also recognized the role of internal mental events, and
while he agreed such private events could not be used to explain behavior, he
proposed they should be explained in the analysis of behavior.
Another important distinction between methodological and radical
behaviorism concerns the extent to which environmental factors influence
behavior. Watson's (1913) methodological behaviorism asserts the mind is
tabula rasa (a blank slate) at birth.
In contrast, radical behaviorism accepts the view that organisms are born with
innate behaviors, and thus recognizes the role of genes and biological
components in behavior.

The History of Behaviorism

 Pavlov (1897) published the results of an experiment on conditioning
after originally studying digestion in dogs.
 Watson (1913) launches the behavioral school of psychology, publishing
an article, Psychology as the behaviorist views it.
 Watson and Rayner (1920) conditioned an orphan called Albert B (aka
Little Albert) to fear a white rat.
 Thorndike (1905) formalized the Law of Effect.
 Skinner (1936) wrote The Behavior of Organisms and introduced the
concepts of operant conditioning and shaping.
 Clark Hull’s (1943) Principles of Behavior was published.
 B.F. Skinner (1948) published Walden Two, in which he described a
utopian society founded upon behaviorist principles.
  Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior begun in 1958.
 Chomsky (1959) published his criticism of Skinner's behaviorism,
"Review of Verbal Behavior."
 Bandura (1963) publishes a book called the Social Leaning Theory and
Personality development which combines both cognitive and behavioral
frameworks.
 B.F. Skinner (1971) published his book, Beyond Freedom and Dignity,
where he argues that free will is an illusion.

Behaviorism Summary
Key Features
Stimulus-Response

Operant ConditioningSchedules of ReinforcementClassical

ConditioningNomotheticReductionism

Methodology / Studies

Contolled Experiment Little AlbertBobo Doll StudySkinner BoxPavlov's

DogsEthical Considerations

Basic Assumptions
Psychology should be seen as a science, to be studied in a scientific manner.
Behaviorism is primarily concerned with observable behavior, as opposed to
internal events like thinking.
Behavior is the result of stimulus–response (i.e., all behavior, no matter how
complex, can be reduced to a simple stimulus – response features).
Behavior is determined by the environment (e.g., conditioning, nurture).

Areas of Application
Gender Role Development
 Behavioral TherapyPhobiasEducationBehavior-

ModificationPsychopathologyDepression

Relationships
Moral Development

Aggression

Addiction
Strengths
The behaviorist approach provides clear predictions. This means that
explanations can be scientifically tested and support with evidence.
Real life applications (e.g., therapy)
Emphasizes objective measurement
Many experiments to support theories
Identified comparisons between animals (Pavlov) and humans (Watson &
Rayner - Little Albert)
Limitations
Ignores mediational processes
Ignores biology (e.g., testosterone)
Too deterministic (little free-will)
Experiments – low ecological validity
Humanism – can’t compare animals to humans
Reductionist

Critical Evaluation
An obvious advantage of behaviorism is its ability to define behavior clearly
and to measure changes in behavior. According to the law of parsimony, the
fewer assumptions a theory makes, the better and the more credible it is.
Behaviorism, therefore, looks for simple explanations of human behavior from
a very scientific standpoint.
However, behaviorism only provides a partial account of human behavior, that
which can be objectively viewed. Important factors like emotions,
expectations, higher-level motivation are not considered or explained.
Accepting a behaviorist explanation could prevent further research from other
perspective that could uncover important factors.
In addition, humanism (e.g., Carl Rogers) rejects the scientific method of
using experiments to measure and control variables because it creates an
artificial environment and has low ecological validity.
Humanistic psychology also assumes that humans have free will (personal
agency) to make their own decisions in life and do not follow the deterministic
laws of science. Humanism also rejects the nomothetic approach of
behaviorism as they view humans as being unique and believe humans cannot
be compared with animals (who aren’t susceptible to demand characteristics).
This is known as an idiographic approach.
The psychodynamic approach (Freud) criticizes behaviorism as it does not
take into account the unconscious mind’s influence on behavior, and instead
focuses on externally observable behavior. Freud also rejects the idea that
people are born a blank slate (tabula rasa) and states that people are born with
instincts (e.g., eros and thanatos).
Biological psychology states that all behavior has a physical/organic cause.
They emphasize the role of nature over nurture. For
example, chromosomes and hormones (testosterone) influence our behavior
too, in addition to the environment.
Cognitive psychology states that mediational processes occur between
stimulus and response, such as memory, thinking, problem-solving, etc.
Despite these criticisms, behaviorism has made significant contributions to
psychology. These include insights into learning, language development, and
moral and gender development, which have all been explained in terms of
conditioning.
The contribution of behaviorism can be seen in some of its practical
applications. Behavior therapy and behavior modification represent one of the
major approaches to the treatment of abnormal behavior and are readily used
in clinical psychology.
Download this article as a PDF

How to reference this article:

McLeod, S. A. (2017, Feb 05). Behaviorist approach. Simply Psychology.
https://www.simplypsychology.org/behaviorism.html

APA Style References

Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1963). Social learning and personality
development. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Chomsky, N. (1959). A review of BF Skinner's Verbal Behavior. Language,
35(1), 26-58.
Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of behavior: An introduction to behavior theory.
New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Pavlov, I. P. (1897). The work of the digestive glands. London: Griffin.
Skinner, B. F. (1948). Walden two. New York: Macmillan.
Skinner, B. F. (1971). Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Knopf.
Thorndike, E. L. (1905). The elements of psychology. New York: A. G. Seiler.
Watson, J. B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological
Review, 20, 158-178.
Watson, J. B. (1930). Behaviorism (revised edition). University of Chicago
Press.
Watson, J. B., & Rayner, R. (1920). Conditioned emotional reactions.
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 3, 1, pp. 1–14.

Humanism
Saul McLeod, updated 2015

Humanistic, humanism and humanist are terms in psychology relating to an

approach which studies the whole person, and the uniqueness of each
individual. Essentially, these terms refer the same approach in psychology.
The humanistic approach in psychology developed as a rebellion against what
some psychologists saw as the limitations of the behaviorist and
psychodynamic psychology. The humanistic approach is thus often called the
“third force” in psychology after psychoanalysis and behaviorism (Maslow,
1968).
Humanism rejected the assumptions of the behaviorist perspective which is
characterized as deterministic, focused on reinforcement of stimulus-response
behavior and heavily dependent on animal research.
Humanistic psychology also rejected the psychodynamic approach because it
is also deterministic, with unconscious irrational and instinctive forces
determining human thought and behavior. Both behaviorism and
psychoanalysis are regarded as dehumanizing by humanistic psychologists.
Humanistic psychology expanded its influence throughout the
1970s and the 1980s. Its impact can be understood in terms of
three major areas:
1) It offered a new set of values for approaching an understanding of human
nature and the human condition.
2) It offered an expanded horizon of methods of inquiry in the study of human
behavior.
3) It offered a broader range of more effective methods in the professional
practice of psychotherapy.

Basic Assumptions
Humanistic psychology begins with the existential
assumptions that people have free will:
Personal agency is the humanistic term for the exercise of free will. Personal
agency refers to the choices we make in life, the paths we go down and their
consequences.

People are basically good, and have an innate need

to make themselves and the world better:
The humanistic approach emphasizes the personal worth of the individual, the
centrality of human values, and the creative, active nature of human beings.
The approach is optimistic and focuses on noble human capacity to overcome
hardship, pain and despair.

People are motivated to self-actualize:

Self-actualization concerns psychological growth, fulfillment and satisfaction
in life.
Both Rogers and Maslow regarded personal growth and fulfillment in life as a
basic human motive. This means that each person, in different ways, seeks to
grow psychologically and continuously enhance themselves.
However, Rogers and Maslow both describe different ways of how self-
actualization can be achieved.

The subjective, conscious experiences of the

individual is most important:
Humanistic psychologists argue that objective reality is less important than a
person's subjective perception and understanding of the world.
Sometimes the humanistic approach is called phenomenological. This means
that personality is studied from the point of view of the individual’s subjective
experience.
For Rogers the focus of psychology is not behavior (Skinner), the unconscious
(Freud), thinking (Wundt) or the human brain but how individuals perceive
and interpret events. Rogers is therefore important because he redirected
psychology towards the study of the self.

Humanism rejects scientific methodology:

Rogers and Maslow placed little value on scientific psychology, especially the
use of the psychology laboratory to investigate both human and animal
behavior.
Humanism rejects scientific methodology like experiments and typically uses
qualitative research methods. For example, diary accounts, open-ended
questionnaires, unstructured interviews and unstructured observations.
Qualitative research is useful for studies at the individual level, and to find out,
in depth, the ways in which people think or feel (e.g. case studies).
The way to really understand other people is to sit down and talk with them,
share their experiences and be open to their feelings.

Humanism rejected comparative psychology (the

study of animals) because it does not tell us
anything about the unique properties of human
beings:
Humanism views human beings as fundamentally different from other
animals, mainly because humans are conscious beings capable of thought,
reason and language.
For humanistic psychologists’ research on animals, such as rats, pigeons, or
monkeys held little value.
Research on such animals can tell us, so they argued, very little about human
thought, behavior and experience.

The History of Humanistic Psychology

 Maslow (1943) developed a hierarchical theory of human motivation.
 Carl Rogers (1946) publishes Significant aspects of client-centered
therapy (also called person centered therapy).
  In 1957 and 1958, at the invitation of Abraham Maslow and Clark
Moustakas, two meetings were held in Detroit among psychologists who
were interested in founding a professional association dedicated to a
more meaningful, more humanistic vision.
 In 1962, with the sponsorship of Brandeis University, this movement
was formally launched as the Association for Humanistic Psychology.
 The first issue of the Journal of Humanistic Psychology appeared in the
Spring of 1961.
 Clark Hull’s (1943) Principles of Behavior was published.
 B.F. Skinner (1948) published Walden Two, in which he described a
utopian society founded upon behaviorist principles.

Humanistic Approach Summary

Key Features
Authenticity
Phenomenology

Self-actualisationSelf ConceptHierarchy of Needs

Methodology / Studies

Case Study Q-Sort MethodUnstructured InterviewOpen-ended

QuestionnairesQualitative Research

Basic Assumptions
Humans have free will; not all behavior is determined.
All individuals are unique and are motivated to achieve their potential.
A proper understanding of human behavior can only be achieved by studying
humans - not animals.
Psychology should study the individual case (idiographic) rather than the
average performance of groups (nomothetic).

Areas of Application

Person Centered Therapy MotivationDepressionEducationSelf-worth

Strengths
Shifted the focus of behavior to the individual / whole person rather than the
unconscious mind, genes, observable behavior etc.
Real life applications (e.g., therapy)
Humanistic psychology satisfies most people's idea of what being human
means because it values personal ideals and self-fulfillment.
Qualitative data gives genuine insight and more holistic information into
behavior.
Highlights the value of more individualistic and idiographic methods of study.
Limitations
Ignores biology (e.g., testosterone)
Unscientific – subjective concepts.
Behaviorism – human and animal behavior can be compared
Ethnocentric (biased towards Western culture)
Humanism – can’t compare animals to humans
Their belief in free will is in opposition to the deterministic laws of science.

Critical Evaluation
The humanistic approach has been applied to relatively few areas of
psychology compared to the other approaches. Therefore, its contributions
are limited to areas such as therapy, abnormality, motivation and personality.
A possible reasons for this lack of impact on academic psychology perhaps lies
with the fact that humanism deliberately adopts a non-scientific approach to
studying humans. Humanistic psychologists rejected a rigorous scientific
approach to psychology because they saw it as dehumanizing and unable to
capture the richness of conscious experience.
In many ways the rejection of scientific psychology in the 1950s, 1960s and
1970s was a backlash to the dominance of the behaviorist approach in North
American psychology. For example their belief in free-will is in direct
opposition to the deterministic laws of science.
Also, the areas investigated by humanism, such as consciousness and emotion
are very difficult to scientifically study. The outcome of such scientific
limitations means that there is a lack of empirical evidence to support the key
theories of the approach.
However, the flip side to this is that humanism can gain a better insight into
an individual's behavior through the use of qualitative methods, such as
unstructured interviews. The approach also helped to provide a more holistic
view of human behavior, in contrast to the reductionist position of science.
Download this article

The Psychodynamic
Approach
By Saul McLeod, updated 2017

The psychodynamic approach includes all the theories in psychology that see
human functioning based upon the interaction of drives and forces within the
person, particularly unconscious, and between the different structures of the
personality.
Freud’s psychoanalysis was the original psychodynamic theory, but the
psychodynamic approach as a whole includes all theories that were based on
his ideas, e.g., Jung (1964), Adler (1927) and Erikson (1950).
The words psychodynamic and psychoanalytic are often confused. Remember
that Freud’s theories were psychoanalytic, whereas the term ‘psychodynamic’
refers to both his theories and those of his followers. Freud’s psychoanalysis is
both a theory and therapy.
Sigmund Freud (writing between the 1890s and the 1930s) developed a
collection of theories which have formed the basis of the psychodynamic
approach to psychology.
His theories are clinically derived - i.e., based on what his patients told him
during therapy. The psychodynamic therapist would usually be treating the
patient for depression or anxiety related disorders.

Basic Assumptions

Our behavior and feelings are powerfully affected

by unconscious motives:
The unconscious mind comprises mental processes that are inaccessible to
consciousness but that influence judgments, feelings, or behavior (Wilson,
2002).
According to Freud (1915), the unconscious mind is the primary source of
human behavior. Like an iceberg, the most important part of the mind is the
part you cannot see.
Our feelings, motives, and decisions are actually powerfully influenced by our
past experiences, and stored in the unconscious.

Our behavior and feelings as adults (including

psychological problems) are rooted in our childhood
experiences:
Psychodynamic theory states that events in our childhood have a great
influence on our adult lives, shaping our personality. Events that occur in
childhood can remain in the unconscious, and cause problems as adults.
Personality is shaped as the drives are modified by different conflicts at
different times in childhood (during psychosexual development).

All behavior has a cause (usually unconscious), even

slips of the tongue. Therefore all behavior is determined:
Psychodynamic theory is strongly determinist as it views our behavior as
caused entirely by unconscious factors over which we have no control.
Unconscious thoughts and feelings can transfer to the conscious mind in the
form of parapraxes, popularly known as Freudian slips or slips of the tongue.
We reveal what is really on our mind by saying something we didn't mean to.
Freud believed that slips of the tongue provided an insight into the
unconscious mind and that there were no accidents, every behavior (including
slips of the tongue) was significant (i.e., all behavior is determined).

Personality is made up of three parts (i.e., tripartite):

the id, ego, and super-ego:
The id is the primitive and instinctive component of personality. It consists of
all the inherited (i.e., biological) components of personality present at birth,
including the sex (life) instinct – Eros (which contains the libido), and the
aggressive (death) instinct - Thanatos.
The ego develops in order to mediate between the unrealistic id and the
external real world. It is the decision making component of personality.
The superego incorporates the values and morals of society which are learned
from one's parents and others.
Parts of the unconscious mind (the id and superego) are in constant conflict
with the conscious part of the mind (the ego). This conflict creates anxiety,
which could be dealt with by the ego’s use of defense mechanisms.

History of Psychodynamic Theory

 Anna O a patient of Dr. Joseph Breuer (Freud's mentor and friend) from
1800 to 1882 suffered from hysteria.
 In 1895 Breuer and his assistant, Sigmund Freud, wrote a book, Studies
on Hysteria. In it they explained their theory: Every hysteria is the
result of a traumatic experience, one that cannot be integrated into the
person's understanding of the world. The publication establishes Freud
as “the father of psychoanalysis.
 By 1896 Freud had found the key to his own system, naming
it psychoanalysis. In it, he had replaced hypnosis with "free
association."
 In 1900 Freud published his first major work, The Interpretation of
Dreams, which established the importance of psychoanalytical
movement.
 In 1902 Freud founded the Psychological Wednesday Society, later
transformed into the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society.
 As the organization grew, Freud established an inner circle of devoted
followers, the so-called "Committee" (including Sàndor Ferenczi, and
Hanns Sachs (standing) Otto Rank, Karl Abraham, Max Eitingon, and
Ernest Jones).

 Freud and his colleagues came to Massachusetts in 1909 to lecture on

their new methods of understanding mental illness. Those in attendance
included some of the country's most important intellectual figures, such
as William James, Franz Boas, and Adolf Meyer.
 In the years following the visit to the United States, the International
Psychoanalytic Association was founded. Freud designated Carl Jung as
his successor to lead the Association, and chapters were created in
major cities in Europe and elsewhere. Regular meetings or congresses
were held to discuss the theory, therapy, and cultural applications of the
new discipline.
 Jung's study on schizophrenia, The Psychology of Dementia Praecox,
led him into collaboration with Sigmund Freud.
 Jung's close collaboration with Freud lasted until 1913. Jung had
become increasingly critical of Freud's exclusively sexual definition of
 libido and incest. The publication of Jung's Wandlungen und Symbole
der Libido (known in English as The Psychology of the Unconscious) led
to a final break.
 Following his emergence from this period of crisis, Jung developed his
own theories systematically under the name of Analytical Psychology.
Jung's concepts of the collective unconscious and the archetypes led him
to explore religion in the East and West, myths, alchemy, and later
flying saucers.
 Anna Freud (Freud's daughter) became a major force in British
psychology, specializing in the application of psychoanalysis to children.
Among her best known works are The Ego and the Mechanism of
defense (1936).

Psychodynamic Summary
Key Features
Unconscious Mind Collective UnconsciousPsyche (Id, Ego,

Superego)Defense MechanismsPsychosexual DevelopmentPsychosocial

Development
Methodology / Studies
Case Study (e.g., Little Hans) Dream AnalysisFree AssociationProjective

TestsSlips of the TongueHypnosis

Basic Assumptions
The major causes of behavior have their origin in the unconscious.
Psychic determinism: all behavior has a cause/reason.
Different parts of the unconscious mind are in constant struggle.
Our behavior and feelings as adults (including psychological problems) are
rooted in our childhood experiences.

Areas of Application
Gender Role Development
Therapy (Psychoanalysis)Attachment (Bowlby)Moral Development (super-

ego)Psychopathology (e.g., Depression)

Aggression (Displacement / Thanatos)
Dream Analysis
Strengths
It has given rise to one of the first “talking cure,” psychoanalysis, on which
many psychological therapies are now based.
It could be argued that Freud was the first person to highlights the importance
of childhood in mental health and this is an idea extensively used today.
The Psychodynamic approach takes into account both sides of the
Nature/Nurture debate.
Freud claimed that adult personality is the product of innate drives- i.e.,
natural motivations or urges we are born with- and childhood experiences-
i.e., the way we are raised and nurtured.
Limitations
Ignores mediational processes (e.g., thinking)
The psychodynamic approach places too much emphasis on the psychological
factors, without considering the biological/genetic factors that influence and
contribute to mental health problems.
Too deterministic (little free-will)
Unfalsifiable (difficult to prove wrong)
Case Studies - Subjective / Cannot generalize results
Simplifying the human mind into the id, ego, and superego and the five
psychosexual stages make the approach reductionist.

Critical Evaluation
The greatest criticism of the psychodynamic approach is that it is unscientific
in its analysis of human behavior. Many of the concepts central to Freud's
theories are subjective, and as such, difficult to test scientifically.
For example, how is it possible to scientifically study concepts like
the unconscious mind or the tripartite personality? In this respect, it could be
argued that the psychodynamic perspective is unfalsifiable as its theories
cannot be empirically investigated.
However, cognitive psychology has identified unconscious processes, such as
procedural memory (Tulving, 1972), automatic processing (Bargh &
Chartrand, 1999; Stroop, 1935), and social psychology have shown the
importance of implicit processing (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995). Such empirical
findings have demonstrated the role of unconscious processes in human
behavior.
Kline (1989) argues that psychodynamic theory comprises a series of
hypotheses, some of which are more easily tested than others, and some with
more supporting evidence than others. Also, while the theories of the
psychodynamic approach may not be easily tested, this does not mean that it
does not have strong explanatory power.
Nevertheless, most of the evidence for psychodynamic theories is taken from
Freud's case studies (e.g., Little Hans, Anna O). The main problem here is that
the case studies are based on studying one person in detail, and with reference
to Freud, the individuals in question are most often middle-aged women from
Vienna (i.e., his patients). This makes generalizations to the wider population
(e.g., the whole world) difficult.
Another problem with the case study method is that it is susceptible to
researcher bias. Reexamination of Freud's own clinical work suggests that he
sometimes distorted his patients' case histories to 'fit' with his theory
(Sulloway, 1991).
The humanistic approach makes the criticism that the psychodynamic
perspective is too deterministic. Freud suggests that all thoughts, behaviors
and emotions are determined by our childhood experiences and unconscious
mental processes. This is a weakness because it suggests we have no conscious
free will over our behavior, leaving little room for the idea of personal agency
(i.e., free will).
Finally, the psychodynamic approach can be criticized for being sexist against
women. For example, Freud believed that females' penis envy made them
inferior to males. He also thought that females tended to develop
weaker superegos and to be more prone to anxiety than males.

Biological Approach
By Saul McLeod, updated 2015

The biological approach believes us to be as a consequence of our genetics and

physiology. It is the only approach in psychology that examines thoughts,
feelings, and behaviors from a biological and thus physical point of view.
Therefore, all that is psychological is first physiological. All thoughts, feeling &
behavior ultimately have a biological cause. A biological perspective is relevant
to the study of psychology in three ways:
1. Comparative method: different species of animal can be studied and
compared. This can help in the search to understand human behavior.
2. Physiology: how the nervous system and hormones work, how the
brain functions, how changes in structure and/or function can affect
behavior. For example, we could ask how prescribed drugs to treat
depression affect behavior through their interaction with the nervous
system.
3. Investigation of inheritance: what an animal inherits from its parents,
mechanisms of inheritance (genetics). For example, we might want to know
whether high intelligence is inherited from one generation to the next.
Each of these biological aspects, the comparative, the physiological (i.e., the
brain) and the genetic, can help explain human behavior.

Investigation of Inheritance
Twin studies provide geneticists with a kind of natural experiment in which
the behavioral likeness of identical twins (whose genetic relatedness is 1.0) can
be compared with the resemblance of dizygotic twins (whose genetic
relatedness is 0.5).
In other words, if heredity (i.e., genetics) affects a given trait or behavior, then
identical twins should show a greater similarity for that trait compared to
fraternal (non-identical) twins.
There are two types of twins:
 Monozygotic = identical twins (share 100% genetic information).
 Dizygotic = non-identical twins (share 50% genetic information, similar
to siblings).
Research using twin studies looks for the degree of concordance (or similarity)
between identical and fraternal (i.e., non-identical) twins. Twins are
concordant for a trait if both or neither of the twins exhibits the trait. Twins
are said to be disconcordant for a trait if one shows it, and the other does not.
Identical twins have the same genetic make-up, and fraternal twins have just
50 per cent of genes in common. Thus, if concordance rates (which can range
from 0 to 100) are significantly higher for identical twins than for fraternal
twins, then this is evidence that genetics play an important role in the
expression of that particular behavior.
Bouchard and McGue (1981) conducted a review of 111 worldwide studies
which compared the IQ of family members. The correlation figures below
represent the average degree of similarity between the two people (the higher
the similarity, the more similar the IQ scores).
 Identical twins raised together = .86 (correlation).
 Identical twins raised apart = .72
 Non-identical twins reared together = .60
 Siblings reared together = .47
  Siblings reared apart = .24
 Cousins = .15
However, there are methodological flaws which reduce the validity of twin
studies. For example, Bouchard and McGue included many poorly performed
and biased studies in their meta-analysis.
Also, studies comparing the behavior of twin raised apart have been criticized
as the twins often share similar environments and are sometimes raised by
non-parental family member.

Methods of Studying the Brain

It is important to appreciate that the human brain is an extremely complicated
piece of biological machinery. Scientists have only just “scratched the surface”
of understanding the many functions of the workings of the human brain. The
brain can influence many types of behavior.
In addition to studying brain damaged patients, we can find out about the
working of the brain in three other ways.
Children begin to plan activities, make up games, and initiate activities with
others. If given this opportunity, children develop a sense of initiative and feel
secure in their ability to lead others and make decisions.

1. Neuro Surgery
We know so little about the brain and its functions are so closely integrated
that brain surgery is usually only attempted as a last resort. H.M. suffered
such devastating epileptic fits that in the end a surgical technique that had
never been used before was tried out.
This technique cured his epilepsy, but in the process the hippocampus had to
be removed (this is part of the limbic system in the middle of the brain.)
Afterwards, H.M. was left with severe anterograde amnesia. I.e., He could
remember what happened to him in his life up to when he had the operation,
but he couldn’t remember anything new. So now we know the hippocampus is
involved in memory.

2. Electroencrphalograms (EEGs)
This is a way of recording the electrical activity of the brain (It doesn’t hurt,
and it isn’t dangerous!). Electrodes are attached to the scalp and brain waves
can be traced.
EEGs have been used to study sleep, and it has been found that during a
typical night’s sleep, we go through a series of stages marked by different
patterns of brain wave.
One of these stages is known as REM sleep (Rapid Eye Movement sleep).
During this, our brain waves begin to resemble those of our waking state
(though we are still fast asleep) and it seems that this is when we dream
(whether we remember it or not).

3. Brain Scans
More recently methods of studying the brain have been developed using
various types of scanning equipment hooked up to powerful computers.
The CAT scan (Computerised Axial Tomography) is a moving X-ray beam
which takes “pictures” from different angles around the head and can be used
to build up a 3-dimensional image of which areas of the brain are damaged.
Even more sophisticated is the PET scan (Positron Emission Tomography)
which uses a radioactive marker as a way of studying the brain at work.
The procedure is based on the principle that the brain requires energy to
function and that the regions more involved in the performance of a task will
use up more energy. What the scan, therefore, enables researchers to do is to
provide ongoing pictures of the brain as it engages in mental activity.
These (and other) methods for producing images of brain structure and
functioning have been extensively used to study language and PET scans, in
particular, are producing evidence that suggests that the Wernicke-
Gerschwind model may not after all be the answer to the question of how
language is possible.

History of The Biological Approach

 The Voyage of the Beagle (1805 - 1836) - Darwin formulated his theory
of natural selection through observing animals while traveling the
world.
 Harlow (1848): Phineas Gage brain injury case study provides
neuroscience with significant information regarding the working of the
brain.
 Darwin (1859) publishes "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural
Selection." 1,250 copies were printed, most of which sold the first day.
  Jane Goodall (1957) began her study of primates in Africa, discovering
that chimps have behaviors similar to all the human cultures on the
planet.
 Edward Wilson (1975) published his book, "Sociobiology" which
brought together evolutionary perspective to the psychology.
 The birth of Evolutionary Psychology begins with the publication of an
essay "The Psychological Foundations of Culture" by Tooby and
Cosmides (1992).

Biological Approach Summary

Key Features
Natural Selection / Evolution
Adaptation
GeneticsComparative PsychologyNomotheticReductionism

Methodology / Studies
Experimental Method
Twin Research
CorrelationEthical ConsiderationsReliabilityValidity

Basic Assumptions
Psychology should be seen as a science, to be studied in a scientific manner.
Behavior can be largely explained in terms of biology (e.g., genes/hormones).
Human genes have evolved over millions of years to adapt behavior to the
environment. Therefore, most behavior will have an adaptive / evolutionary
purpose.
Areas of Application
IQ
Gender RoleRelationshipsAbnormal PsychologyStress ResponseAggression
Sleep
Schizophrenia

Strengths
The biological approach provides clear predictions that can. This means that
explanations can be scientifically tested and support with evidence.
Real life applications (e.g., therapy)
Emphasizes objective measurement
Many experiments to support theories
Highly application to other areas: Biology + Cog = Evolutionary Psy
Limitations
Ignores mediational processes (doesn’t recognize cognitive processes)
Bio psychological theories often over-simplify the huge complexity of physical
systems and their interaction with the environment.
Too deterministic (little free-will)
Humanism – can’t compare animals to humans
Reductionist

Critical Evaluation
Theories within the biological approach support nature over nurture.
However, it is limiting to describe behavior solely in terms of either nature or
nurture, and attempts to do this underestimate the complexity of human
behavior. It is more likely that behavior is due to an interaction between
nature (biology) and nurture (environment).
For example, individuals may be predisposed to certain behaviors, but these
behaviors may not be displayed unless they are triggered by factors in the
environment. This is known as the ‘Diathesis-Stress model’ of human
behavior.
A strength of the biological approach is that it provides clear predictions, for
example, about the effects of neurotransmitters, or the behaviors of people
who are genetically related. This means the explanations can be scientifically
tested and ‘proven.’
A limitation is that most biological explanations are reductionist, as it reduces
behavior to the outcome of genes and other biological processes, neglecting
the effects of childhood and our social and cultural environment. and don’t
provide enough information to fully explain human behavior.
Download this article as a PDF

How to reference this article:

McLeod, S. A. (2017, Feb 05). Biological psychology. Simply Psychology.
https://www.simplypsychology.org/biological-psychology.html

APA Style References

Bouchard, T. J., & McGue, M. (1981). Familial studies of intelligence: A
review. Science, 212(4498), 1055-1059.
Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or
the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (1st ed.). London:
John Murray.
Harlow, J. M. (1848). Passage of an iron rod through the head. Boston
Medical and Surgical Journal, 39, 389–393.
Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In
J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary
psychology and the generation of culture. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, E. (1975). Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Harvard University Press
Further Information
Sex differences in the brain What has neuroscience ever done for us? Are

Bigger Brains Better? Nature vs. NurtureBBC Radio 4: The influence of

evolutionary theory, phrenology and a hole in Phineas Gage's head. BBC

Radio 4: Dr Bunn discusses the impact of neurology on how we understand

ourselves today. BBC Radio 4: Mind Myths

Download this article as a PDF

How to reference this article:

McLeod, S. A. (2017, Feb 05). Biological psychology. Simply Psychology.
https://www.simplypsychology.org/biological-psychology.html

Home | About | A-Z Index | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Back to top

This workis licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-

No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.
Company Registration no: 10521846

Mary Ainsworth
The Strange Situation | Attachment Styles
By Saul McLeod, updated 2018
John Bowlby (1969) believed that attachment was an all or nothing process.
However, research has shown that there are individual differences in
attachment quality. Indeed, one of the primary paradigms in attachment
theory is that of the security of an individual’s attachment (Ainsworth & Bell,
1970).
Much research in psychology has focused on how forms of attachment differ
among infants. For example, Schaffer and Emerson (1964) discovered what
appeared to be innate differences in sociability in babies; some babies
preferred cuddling more than others, from very early on, before much
interaction had occurred to cause such differences.
It’s easy enough to know when you are attached to someone because you know
how you feel when you are apart from that person, and, being an adult, you
can put your feelings into words and describe how it feels.
However, most attachment research is carried out using infants and young
children, so psychologists have to devise subtle ways of researching
attachment styles, usually involving the observational method.
Psychologist Mary Ainsworth devised an assessment technique called the
Strange Situation Classification (SSC) in order to investigate how attachments
might vary between children.
The Strange Situation was devised by Ainsworth and Wittig (1969) and was
based on Ainsworth’s previous Uganda (1967) and later Baltimore studies
(Ainsworth et al., 1971, 1978).

Mary Ainsworth's (1971, 1978) observational study of individual differences in

attachment is described below.

Strange Situation Procedure

The security of attachment in one- to two-year-olds were investigated using
the strange situation paradigm, in order to determine the nature of
attachment behaviors and styles of attachment.
Ainsworth developed an experimental procedure in order to observe the
variety of attachment forms exhibited between mothers and infants.
The experiment is set up in a small room with one way glass so the behavior of
the infant can be observed covertly. Infants were aged between 12 and 18
months. The sample comprised of 100 middle-class American families.
The procedure, known as the ‘Strange Situation,’ was conducted by observing
the behavior of the infant in a series of eight episodes lasting approximately 3
minutes each:
(1) Mother, baby, and experimenter (lasts less than one minute).
(2) Mother and baby alone.
(3) A stranger joins the mother and infant.
(4) Mother leaves baby and stranger alone.
(5) Mother returns and stranger leaves.
(6) Mother leaves; infant left completely alone.
(7) Stranger returns.
(8) Mother returns and stranger leaves.

PreviousNext

Scoring
Strange Situation classifications (i.e., attachment styles) are based primarily
on four interaction behaviors directed toward the mother in the two reunion
episodes (Ep. 5 & Ep. 8).

1. Proximity and contacting seeking

2. Contact maintaining
3. Avoidance of proximity and contact
4. Resistance to contact and comforting

The observer notes down the behavior displayed during 15-second intervals
and scores the behavior for intensity on a scale of 1 to 7.
Other behaviors observed included:

 Exploratory Behaviors e.g., moving around the room, playing with toys,
looking around the room.
 Search Behaviors, e.g., following mother to the door, banging on the
door, orienting to the door, looking at the door, going to mother’s empty
chair, looking at mother’s empty chair.
 Affect Displays negative, e.g., crying, smiling.

Results - Attachment Styles

Ainsworth (1970) identified three main attachment styles, secure (type B),
insecure avoidant (type A) and insecure ambivalent/resistant (type C). She
concluded that these attachment styles were the result of early interactions
with the mother.
A fourth attachment style known as disorganized was later identified (Main, &
Solomon, 1990).

Secure Resistant Avoidant

Separation Distressed when Intense distress No sign of distress

Anxiety mother leaves when the mother when the the
leaves mother leaves

Stranger Avoidant of stranger The infant avoids The infant is okay

Anxiety when alone, but the stranger - shows with the stranger
friendly when the fear of the stranger and plays normally
mother is present when the stranger
is present

Reunion Positive and happy The infant The Infant shows

Behavior when mother returns approaches the little interest when
mother, but resists the mother returns
 Secure Resistant Avoidant

contact, may even

push her away

Other Uses the mother as a The infant cries The mother and
safe base to explore more and explores stranger are able to
their environment less than the other comfort the infant
two types equally well

% of 70% 15% 15%

infants

B: Secure Attachment
Securely attached children comprised the majority of the sample in
Ainsworth’s (1971, 1978) studies.
Such children feel confident that the attachment figure will be available to
meet their needs. They use the attachment figure as a safe base to explore the
environment and seek the attachment figure in times of distress (Main, &
Cassidy, 1988).
Securely attached infants are easily soothed by the attachment figure when
upset. Infants develop a secure attachment when the caregiver is sensitive to
their signals, and responds appropriately to their needs.
According to Bowlby (1980), an individual who has experienced a secure
attachment 'is likely to possess a representational model of attachment
figures(s) as being available, responsive, and helpful' (Bowlby, 1980, p. 242).

A: Insecure Avoidant
Insecure avoidant children do not orientate to their attachment figure while
investigating the environment.
They are very independent of the attachment figure both physically and
emotionally (Behrens, Hesse, & Main, 2007).
They do not seek contact with the attachment figure when distressed. Such
children are likely to have a caregiver who is insensitive and rejecting of their
needs (Ainsworth, 1979).
The attachment figure may withdraw from helping during difficult tasks
(Stevenson-Hinde, & Verschueren, 2002) and is often unavailable during
times of emotional distress.

C: Insecure Ambivalent / Resistant

The third attachment style identified by Ainsworth (1970) was insecure
ambivalent (also called insecure resistant).
Here children adopt an ambivalent behavioral style towards the attachment
figure. The child will commonly exhibit clingy and dependent behavior, but
will be rejecting of the attachment figure when they engage in interaction.
The child fails to develop any feelings of security from the attachment figure.
Accordingly, they exhibit difficulty moving away from the attachment figure to
explore novel surroundings.
When distressed they are difficult to soothe and are not comforted by
interaction with the attachment figure. This behavior results from an
inconsistent level of response to their needs from the primary caregiver.

Strange Situation Conclusion

Ainsworth (1978) suggested the ‘caregiver sensitivity hypothesis’ as an
explanation for different attachment types. Ainsworth's maternal sensitivity
hypothesis argues that a child’s attachment style is dependent on the behavior
their mother shows towards them.

 ‘Sensitive’ mothers are responsive to the child's needs and respond to

their moods and feelings correctly. Sensitive mothers are more likely to
have securely attached children.
 In contrast, mothers who are less sensitive towards their child, for
example, those who respond to the child’s needs incorrectly or who are
impatient or ignore the child, are likely to have insecurely attached
children.
For example, securely attached infant are associated with sensitive and
responsive primary care. Insecure ambivalent attached infants are associated
with inconsistent primary care. Sometimes the child’s needs and met, and
sometimes they are ignored by the mother / father.
Insecure-avoidant infants are associated with unresponsive primary care. The
child comes to believe that communication of needs has no influence on the
mother/father.
Ainsworth’s (1971, 1978) findings provided the first empirical evidence
for Bowlby’s attachment theory.
For example, securely attached children develop a positive working model of
themselves and have mental representations of others as being helpful while
viewing themselves as worthy of respect (Jacobsen, & Hoffman, 1997).
Avoidant children think themselves unworthy and unacceptable, caused by a
rejecting primary caregiver (Larose, & Bernier, 2001). Ambivalent children
have a negative self-image and exaggerate their emotional responses as a way
to gain attention (Kobak et al., 1993).
Accordingly, insecure attachment styles are associated with an increased risk
of social and emotional behavioral problems via the internal working model.

Theoretical Evaluation
This caregiver sensitivity theory is supported by research from, Wolff and Van
Ijzendoorn (1997) who conducted a Meta-analysis (a review) of research into
attachment types.
They found that there is a relatively weak correlation of 0.24 between parental
sensitivity and attachment type – generally more sensitive parents had
securely attached children.
However, in evaluation, critics of this theory argue that the correlation
between parental sensitivity and the child’s attachment type is only weak. This
suggests that there are other reasons which may better explain why children
develop different attachment types and that the maternal sensitivity theory
places too much emphasis on the mother.
Focusing just on maternal sensitivity when trying to explain why children have
different attachment types is, therefore, a reductionist approach.
An alternative theory proposed by Kagan (1984) suggests that the
temperament of the child is actually what leads to the different attachment
types. Children with different innate (inborn) temperaments will have
different attachment types.
This theory is supported by research from Fox (1989) who found that babies
with an ‘Easy’ temperament (those who eat and sleep regularly, and accept
new experiences) are likely to develop secure attachments.
Babies with a ‘slow to warm up’ temperament (those who took a while to get
used to new experiences) are likely to have insecure-avoidant attachments.
Babies with a ‘Difficult’ temperament (those who eat and sleep irregularly and
who reject new experiences) are likely to have insecure-ambivalent
attachments.
In conclusion, the most complete explanation of why children develop
different attachment types would be an interactionist theory. This would argue
that a child’s attachment type is a result of a combination of factors – both the
child’s innate temperament and their parent’s sensitivity towards their needs.
Belsky and Rovine (1987) propose an interesting interactionist theory to
explain the different attachment types. They argue that the child’s attachment
type is a result of both the child’s innate temperament and also how the parent
responds to them (i.e., the parents’ sensitivity level).
Additionally, the child’s innate temperament may, in fact, influence the way
their parent responds to them (i.e, the infants’ temperament influences the
parental sensitivity shown to them). To develop a secure attachment, a
‘difficult’ child would need a caregiver who is sensitive and patient for a secure
attachment to develop.

Methodological Evaluation
The strange situation classification has been found to have good
reliability. This means that it achieves consistent results. For example, a
study conducted in Germany found 78% of the children were classified in the
same way at ages 1 and 6 years (Wartner et al., 1994).
Although, as Melhuish (1993) suggests, the Strange Situation is the most
widely used method for assessing infant attachment to a caregiver, Lamb et al.
(1985) have criticized it for being highly artificial and therefore lacking
ecological validity.
The child is placed in a strange and artificial environment, and the procedure
of the mother and stranger entering and leaving the room follows a
predetermined script.
Mary Ainsworth concluded that the strange situation could be used to identify
the child's type of attachment has been criticized on the grounds that it
identifies only the type of attachment to the mother. The child may have a
different type of attachment to the father or grandmother, for example (Lamb,
1977). This means that it lacks validity, as it does not measure a general
attachment style, but instead an attachment style specific to the mother.
In addition, some research has shown that the same child may show different
attachment behaviors on different occasions. Children's attachments may
change, perhaps because of changes in the child's circumstances, so a securely
attached child may appear insecurely attached if the mother becomes ill or the
family circumstances change.
The strange situation has also been criticized on ethical grounds. Because the
child is put under stress (separation and stranger anxiety), the study has
broken the ethical guideline protection of participants.
However, in its defense, the separation episodes were curtailed prematurely if
the child became too stressed. Also, according to Marrone (1998), although the
Strange Situation has been criticized for being stressful, it is simulating
everyday experiences, as mothers do leave their babies for brief periods of
time in different settings and often with unfamiliar people such as babysitters.
Finally, the study's sample is biased - comprising 100 middle-class American
families. Therefore, it is difficult to generalize the findings outside of America
and to working-class families.

Nature vs. Nurture in

Psychology
By Saul McLeod, updated 2018

The nature versus nurture debate involves the extent to which particular
aspects of behavior are a product of either inherited (i.e., genetic) or acquired
(i.e., learned) influences.
Nature is what we think of as pre-wiring and is influenced by genetic
inheritance and other biological factors. Nurture is generally taken as the
influence of external factors after conception, e.g., the product of exposure, life
experiences and learning on an individual.
The nature-nurture debate is concerned with the relative contribution that
both influences make to human behavior, such as personality, cognitive traits,
temperament and psychopathology.
Nativism (Extreme Nature Position)
It has long been known that certain physical characteristics are biologically
determined by genetic inheritance.
Color of eyes, straight or curly hair, pigmentation of the skin and certain
diseases (such as Huntingdon’s chorea) are all a function of the genes we
inherit.

These facts have led many to speculate as to whether psychological

characteristics such as behavioral tendencies, personality attributes, and
mental abilities are also “wired in” before we are even born.
Those who adopt an extreme hereditary position are known as nativists. Their
basic assumption is that the characteristics of the human species as a whole
are a product of evolution and that individual differences are due to each
person’s unique genetic code.
In general, the earlier a particular ability appears, the more likely it is to be
under the influence of genetic factors. Estimates of genetic influence are called
heritability.
Examples of an extreme nature positions in psychology include Chomsky
(1965), who proposed language is gained through the use of an innate
language acquisition device. Another example of nature is Freud's theory of
aggression as being an innate drive (called Thanatos).
Characteristics and differences that are not observable at birth, but which
emerge later in life, are regarded as the product of maturation. That is to say,
we all have an inner “biological clock” which switches on (or off) types of
behavior in a pre-programmed way.
The classic example of the way this affects our physical development are the
bodily changes that occur in early adolescence at puberty. However, nativists
also argue that maturation governs the emergence of attachment in
infancy, language acquisition and even cognitive development as a whole.

Empiricism (Extreme Nurture Position)

At the other end of the spectrum are the environmentalists – also known as
empiricists (not to be confused with the other empirical / scientific approach).
Their basic assumption is that at birth the human mind is a tabula rasa (a
blank slate) and that this is gradually “filled” as a result of experience
(e.g., behaviorism).
From this point of view, psychological characteristics and behavioral
differences that emerge through infancy and childhood are the results of
learning. It is how you are brought up (nurture) that governs the
psychologically significant aspects of child development and the concept of
maturation applies only to the biological.
For example, Bandura's (1977) social learning theory states that aggression is
learned from the environment through observation and imitation. This is seen
in his famous Bobo doll experiment (Bandura, 1961).

Also, Skinner (1957) believed that language is learnt from other people via
behavior shaping techniques.
Freud (1905) stated that events in our childhood have a great influence on our
adult lives, shaping our personality. He thought that parenting is of primary
importance to a child's development, and the family as the most importance
feature of nurture was a common theme throughout twentieth century
psychology (which was dominated by environmentalists theories).

Nature and Nurture

In practice, hardly anyone today accepts either of the extreme
positions. There are simply too many “facts” on both sides of the argument
which are inconsistent with an “all or nothing” view.
So instead of asking whether psychological traits are influenced by nature or
nurture the question has been reformulated as “How much?” That is to say,
given that heredity and environment both influence the person we become,
which is the more important?

This question was first framed by Francis Galton in the late 19th
century. Galton (himself a relative of Charles Darwin) was convinced that
intellectual ability was largely inherited and that the tendency for “genius” to
run in families was the outcome of a natural superiority.
This view has cropped up time and again in the history of psychology and has
stimulated much of the research into intelligence testing. A modern
proponent is the American psychologist Arthur Jenson. Finding that the
average I.Q. scores of black Americans were significantly lower than whites he
went on to argue that genetic factors were mainly responsible – even going so
far as to suggest that intelligence is 80% inherited.
The storm of controversy that developed around Jenson’s claims was not
mainly due to logical and empirical weaknesses in his argument. It was more
to do with the social and political implications that are often drawn from
research that claims to demonstrate natural inequalities between social
groups.
Galton himself in 1883 suggested that human society could be improved by
“better breeding.” In the 1920’s the American Eugenics Society campaigned
for the sterilization of men and women in psychiatric hospitals. Today in
Britain many believe that the immigration policies are designed to
discriminate against Black and Asian ethnic groups.
For many environmentalists there is a barely disguised right-wing agenda
behind the work of the behavioral geneticists. In their view, part of the
difference in the I.Q. scores of different ethnic groups are due to inbuilt biases
in the methods of testing.
More fundamentally, they believe that differences in intellectual ability are a
product of social inequalities in access to material resources and
opportunities. To put it simply children brought up in the ghetto tend to score
lower on tests because they are denied the same life chances as more
privileged members of society.
Now we can see why the nature-nurture debate has become such a hotly
contested issue. What begins as an attempt to understand the causes of
behavioral differences often develops into a politically motivated dispute about
distributive justice and power in society.
What’s more, this doesn’t only apply to the debate over I.Q. It is equally
relevant to the psychology of sex and gender, where the question of how much
of the (alleged) differences in male and female behavior is due to biology and
how much to culture is just as controversial.

Behavioral Genetics
Researchers in the field of behavioral genetics study variation in behavior as it
is affected by genes, which are the units of heredity passed down from parents
to offspring.
“We now know that DNA differences are the major systematic source of
psychological differences between us. Environmental effects are important but
what we have learned in recent years is that they are mostly random –
unsystematic and unstable – which means that we cannot do much about them.”
Plomin (2018, xii)
Behavioral genetics has enabled psychology to quantify the relative
contribution of nature and nurture with regard to specific psychological traits.
One way to do this is to study relatives who share the same genes (nature) but
a different environment (nurture). Adoption acts as a natural experiment
which allows researchers to do this.
Empirical studies have consistently showed that adoptive children show
greater resemblance to their biological parents, rather than their adoptive, or
environmental parents (Plomin & DeFries, 1983; 1985).
Another way of studying heredity is by comparing the behavior of twins, who
can either be identical (sharing the same genes) or non-identical (sharing 50%
of genes). Like adoption studies, twin studies support the first rule of behavior
genetics; that psychological traits are extremely heritable, about 50% on
average.
The Twins in Early Development Study (TEDS) revealed correlations between
twins on a range of behavioral traits, such as personality (empathy and
hyperactivity) and components of reading such as phonetics (Haworth, Davis,
Plomin, 2013; Oliver & Plomin, 2007; Trouton, Spinath, & Plomin, 2002).

Polygenic Inheritance
Rather than the presence or absence of single genes being the determining
factor that accounts for psychological traits, behavioral genetics has
demonstrated that multiple genes – often thousands, collectively contribute to
specific behaviours.
Thus, psychological traits follow a polygenic mode of inheritance (as opposed
to being determined by a single gene). Depression is a good example of a
polygenic trait, which is thought to be influenced by around 1000 genes
(Plomin, 2018).
This means a person with a lower number of these genes (under 500) would
have a lower risk of experiencing depression than someone with a higher
number.

The Nature of Nurture

Nurture assumes that correlations between environmental factors and
psychological outcomes are caused environmentally. For example, how much
parents read with their children and how well children learn to read appear to
be related. Other examples include environmental stress and its effect on
depression.
However, behavioral genetics argues that what look like environmental effects
are to a large extent really a reflection of genetic differences (Plomin &
Bergeman, 1991).
People select, modify and create environments correlated with their genetic
disposition. This means that what sometimes appears to be an environmental
influence (nurture) is a genetic influence (nature).
So, children that are genetically predisposed to be competent readers, will be
happy to listen to their parents read them stories, and be more likely to
encourage this interaction.

Interaction Effects
However, in recent years there has been a growing realization that the
question of “how much” behavior is due to heredity and “how much” to the
environment may itself be the wrong question. Take intelligence as an
example. Like almost all types of human behavior, it is a complex, many-sided
phenomenon which reveals itself (or not!) in a great variety of ways.
The “how much” question assumes that psychological traits can all be
expressed numerically and that the issue can be resolved in a quantitative
manner. Heritability statistics revealed by behavioral genetic studies have
been criticized as meaningless, mainly because biologists have established that
genes cannot influence development independently of environmental factors;
genetic and nongenetic factors always cooperate to build traits. The reality is
that nature and culture interact in a host of qualitatively different ways
(Gottlieb, 2007; Johnston & Edwards, 2002).
Instead of defending extreme nativist or nurturist views, most psychological
researchers are now interested in investigating how nature and nurture
interact. For example, in psychopathology, this means that both a genetic
predisposition and an appropriate environmental trigger are required for a
mental disorder to develop.
Therefore, it makes more sense to say that the difference between two people’s
behavior is mostly due to hereditary factors or mostly due to environmental
factors.
This realization is especially important given the recent advances in genetics,
such as polygenic testing. The Human Genome Project, for example, has
stimulated enormous interest in tracing types of behavior to particular strands
of DNA located on specific chromosomes.
If these advances are not to be abused, then there will need to be a more
general understanding of the fact that biology interacts with both the cultural
context and the personal choices that people make about how they want to live
their lives. There is no neat and simple way of unraveling these qualitatively
different and reciprocal influences on human behavior.