Psych 375 - Unit 1 Key Terms and Study
UPDATED ACTUAL Questions and
CORRECT Answers
Compare and contrast Stocking's (1965) notions of presentism and historicism, and discuss the relative
merits of each approach. What considerations are involved in deciding what to include in a history of
psychology? - CORRECT ANSWER -Presentism: Looking at the way psychology is understood
today (in the Western world) and then attempting to show how it became that way.
Historicism: The study of the past for its own sake without attempting to related the past and present.
"Without the present, the very concept of "history" would be meaningless"
It is unsafe to assume that current psychology (presentism) is a direct and better result of previous
historiological psychology; and presentism implies that the present state is the highest state of
development. The field of psychology is too diverse to assume that it is at it's highest state of
development. However, although the use of historicism can provide a better framework in which to
understand psychology's history, even the use of historicism can present false understanding and be
counter productive without regard to present knowledge state. This is important for recognizing where
progress has or has not happened, if only for observation.
Define a Zeitgeist, and explain its relationship to historical accounts. Define both the great-person
approach to history and the historical development approach. What approach did Henley elect to use? -
CORRECT ANSWER -Zeitgeist: It's the approach of emphasizing the influence of non-
psychological factors as developments in other sciences, political climates, technological advancements,
and economic conditions. Together, it creates "a spirit of the times", which is important to understanding
historical development.
Great-Person Approach: is the approach of emphasizing the works of individuals such as Plato, Aristotle,
Descartes, Darwin, or Freud.Historical-
Development Approach: is the approach of showing how various individuals or events contributed to
changes in an idea or concept through the years.
,The author decided to take an eclectic approach in which the approach that seems best to illuminate an
aspect of the history of psychology is used.
Define and describe the three reasons the author cites for studying the history of psychology: (a) deeper
understanding, (b) recognition of fads and fashions, (c) a source of valuable ideas. - CORRECT
ANSWER -Perspective: seeing ideas in their historical perspective allows the student to more fully
appreciate the subject matter of modern psychology.
Deeper Understanding: With a knowledge of history, the student need not take on faith the importance of
the subject matter of psychology. A student with historical awareness knows where psychology's subject
matter came from and why it is considered important.
Fads/Fashions: studying the emotional and societal factors related to the accumulation if knowledge,, the
student can place currently accepted knowledge into a more realistic perspective. Such a perspective
allows the student to realize that the process through which a body of knowledge is accepted as important
or as "true" is at least partially subjective and arbitrary. As Zeitgeists change, so does what is considered
fashionable in science, and psychology has not been immune in this process.
Rep/Mistakes: studying the mistakes of previous individuals and sciences prevent the repetition of
mistakes and in best case, wastes valuable time and effort on rediscovering successes.
Valuable Ideas: Studying history also allows one to rediscover previously developed ideas that remained
dormant for whatever reason. Many potentially fruitful ideas in psychology are waiting still waiting to be
tried again under new, more receptive, circumstances.
Curiosity: Why not study history of psychology? Wanting to know as much as possible about a topic or
person of interest, including a topic's or a person's history is natural. Psychology is not an exception.
Why did Galileo and Kant claim that psychology could never be a science? What are the two major
components of a science? - CORRECT ANSWER -They claim that science psychology could never
be science because of its concern with subjective experience.
,Science has come into existence as a way to answer questions of nature by examining nature directly
rather than by depending on church dogma, past authorities, superstition, or abstract thought processes
alone. However, there is more to science than direct observation. To be useful, observation must be
organized or categorized and the similarities and differences from other observations must be noted. Then
the observations must be explained.
Science, is then characterized as having two major components: (1) empirical observation and (2) theory.
Define empirical observation and scientific theory, including its two functions, and describe their relation
to rationalism and empiricism. What is public observation and why is it important? - CORRECT
ANSWER -Empirical observation: The direct observation of that which is being studied in order to
understand it.
Scientific Theory: Traditionally, a proposed explanation of a number of empirical observations; according
to Popper, a proposed solution to a problem.
It's 2 functions: 1) It organizes empirical observations
2) It acts as a guide for future observations
**The latter function of a scientific theory generates confirmable propositions (propositions capable of
validation through empirical tests)
Public observation: the stipulation that scientific laws must be available for any interested person to
observe. Science is interested in general, empirical relationships that are publicly verifiable.
Therefore, it is important because no knowledge is secret, nor is it only available to qualified authorities.
All scientific claims must be verifiable by any interested person.
Describe the two types of scientific laws and give an original example of each. Describe the difficulties in
identifying causes. - CORRECT ANSWER -Correlational laws describe how classes of events vary
together in some systematic way. The downside of correlational law is that it is only a prediction.
Example: If your hair is longer, you will need more shampoo.
Causal laws specify how events are causally related, such laws specify the conditions that are necessary
and sufficient to produce a certain event.
, This law is the most powerful between the two because it allows prediction AND control.
Example: If your plants leaves begin to turn brown, you can predict that it is getting too much sun
exposure, therefore, you can control this and move the plant to a more shaded area.
To determine cause is often a complex matter, as it requires the knowledge of all the many differing
factors that take place to influence the cause.
Describe Karl Popper's (1902-1994) objections to the traditional view of scientific activity. Define the
principle of falsifiability and the concept of postdiction, describing their relevance to scientific theorizing.
Describe Popper's views on theories. - CORRECT ANSWER -Popper disagreed with the traditional
description of science in two fundamental ways.
1) Disagreed that scientific activity starts with empirical observation. "Observation is always selective" -
You can't just walk around, make observations and then attempt to explain what you've observed.
2) Popper's second disagreement is the vagueness of theorist's ideas. Vague theories are unrefutable due to
the fact that the theories are so vague that anything can be claimed as verification. Popper believed for a
theory to be scientific, it must make risky predictions- predictions that run a real risk of being incorrect.
Principle of falsifiability: For a theory to be considered scientific it must specify the observations that, if
made, would refute the theory. To be considered scientific. a theory must make risky predictions.
Postdiction: An attempt to account for something after it has occurred. Postdiction is contrasted with
prediction, which attempts to specify the conditions under which an event that has not yet occurred will
occur.
According to Popper, it is a theory's incorrect predictions, rather than its correct ones, that cause scientific
progress.
Popper used falsification as a demarcation between a scientific and a nonscientific theory but not between
a useful and useless theory.
Many theories in psych fail Popper's test of falsifiability either because they are stated in such general
terms that they are confirmed by almost any observation or because they engage in postdiction rather than
prediction.
UPDATED ACTUAL Questions and
CORRECT Answers
Compare and contrast Stocking's (1965) notions of presentism and historicism, and discuss the relative
merits of each approach. What considerations are involved in deciding what to include in a history of
psychology? - CORRECT ANSWER -Presentism: Looking at the way psychology is understood
today (in the Western world) and then attempting to show how it became that way.
Historicism: The study of the past for its own sake without attempting to related the past and present.
"Without the present, the very concept of "history" would be meaningless"
It is unsafe to assume that current psychology (presentism) is a direct and better result of previous
historiological psychology; and presentism implies that the present state is the highest state of
development. The field of psychology is too diverse to assume that it is at it's highest state of
development. However, although the use of historicism can provide a better framework in which to
understand psychology's history, even the use of historicism can present false understanding and be
counter productive without regard to present knowledge state. This is important for recognizing where
progress has or has not happened, if only for observation.
Define a Zeitgeist, and explain its relationship to historical accounts. Define both the great-person
approach to history and the historical development approach. What approach did Henley elect to use? -
CORRECT ANSWER -Zeitgeist: It's the approach of emphasizing the influence of non-
psychological factors as developments in other sciences, political climates, technological advancements,
and economic conditions. Together, it creates "a spirit of the times", which is important to understanding
historical development.
Great-Person Approach: is the approach of emphasizing the works of individuals such as Plato, Aristotle,
Descartes, Darwin, or Freud.Historical-
Development Approach: is the approach of showing how various individuals or events contributed to
changes in an idea or concept through the years.
,The author decided to take an eclectic approach in which the approach that seems best to illuminate an
aspect of the history of psychology is used.
Define and describe the three reasons the author cites for studying the history of psychology: (a) deeper
understanding, (b) recognition of fads and fashions, (c) a source of valuable ideas. - CORRECT
ANSWER -Perspective: seeing ideas in their historical perspective allows the student to more fully
appreciate the subject matter of modern psychology.
Deeper Understanding: With a knowledge of history, the student need not take on faith the importance of
the subject matter of psychology. A student with historical awareness knows where psychology's subject
matter came from and why it is considered important.
Fads/Fashions: studying the emotional and societal factors related to the accumulation if knowledge,, the
student can place currently accepted knowledge into a more realistic perspective. Such a perspective
allows the student to realize that the process through which a body of knowledge is accepted as important
or as "true" is at least partially subjective and arbitrary. As Zeitgeists change, so does what is considered
fashionable in science, and psychology has not been immune in this process.
Rep/Mistakes: studying the mistakes of previous individuals and sciences prevent the repetition of
mistakes and in best case, wastes valuable time and effort on rediscovering successes.
Valuable Ideas: Studying history also allows one to rediscover previously developed ideas that remained
dormant for whatever reason. Many potentially fruitful ideas in psychology are waiting still waiting to be
tried again under new, more receptive, circumstances.
Curiosity: Why not study history of psychology? Wanting to know as much as possible about a topic or
person of interest, including a topic's or a person's history is natural. Psychology is not an exception.
Why did Galileo and Kant claim that psychology could never be a science? What are the two major
components of a science? - CORRECT ANSWER -They claim that science psychology could never
be science because of its concern with subjective experience.
,Science has come into existence as a way to answer questions of nature by examining nature directly
rather than by depending on church dogma, past authorities, superstition, or abstract thought processes
alone. However, there is more to science than direct observation. To be useful, observation must be
organized or categorized and the similarities and differences from other observations must be noted. Then
the observations must be explained.
Science, is then characterized as having two major components: (1) empirical observation and (2) theory.
Define empirical observation and scientific theory, including its two functions, and describe their relation
to rationalism and empiricism. What is public observation and why is it important? - CORRECT
ANSWER -Empirical observation: The direct observation of that which is being studied in order to
understand it.
Scientific Theory: Traditionally, a proposed explanation of a number of empirical observations; according
to Popper, a proposed solution to a problem.
It's 2 functions: 1) It organizes empirical observations
2) It acts as a guide for future observations
**The latter function of a scientific theory generates confirmable propositions (propositions capable of
validation through empirical tests)
Public observation: the stipulation that scientific laws must be available for any interested person to
observe. Science is interested in general, empirical relationships that are publicly verifiable.
Therefore, it is important because no knowledge is secret, nor is it only available to qualified authorities.
All scientific claims must be verifiable by any interested person.
Describe the two types of scientific laws and give an original example of each. Describe the difficulties in
identifying causes. - CORRECT ANSWER -Correlational laws describe how classes of events vary
together in some systematic way. The downside of correlational law is that it is only a prediction.
Example: If your hair is longer, you will need more shampoo.
Causal laws specify how events are causally related, such laws specify the conditions that are necessary
and sufficient to produce a certain event.
, This law is the most powerful between the two because it allows prediction AND control.
Example: If your plants leaves begin to turn brown, you can predict that it is getting too much sun
exposure, therefore, you can control this and move the plant to a more shaded area.
To determine cause is often a complex matter, as it requires the knowledge of all the many differing
factors that take place to influence the cause.
Describe Karl Popper's (1902-1994) objections to the traditional view of scientific activity. Define the
principle of falsifiability and the concept of postdiction, describing their relevance to scientific theorizing.
Describe Popper's views on theories. - CORRECT ANSWER -Popper disagreed with the traditional
description of science in two fundamental ways.
1) Disagreed that scientific activity starts with empirical observation. "Observation is always selective" -
You can't just walk around, make observations and then attempt to explain what you've observed.
2) Popper's second disagreement is the vagueness of theorist's ideas. Vague theories are unrefutable due to
the fact that the theories are so vague that anything can be claimed as verification. Popper believed for a
theory to be scientific, it must make risky predictions- predictions that run a real risk of being incorrect.
Principle of falsifiability: For a theory to be considered scientific it must specify the observations that, if
made, would refute the theory. To be considered scientific. a theory must make risky predictions.
Postdiction: An attempt to account for something after it has occurred. Postdiction is contrasted with
prediction, which attempts to specify the conditions under which an event that has not yet occurred will
occur.
According to Popper, it is a theory's incorrect predictions, rather than its correct ones, that cause scientific
progress.
Popper used falsification as a demarcation between a scientific and a nonscientific theory but not between
a useful and useless theory.
Many theories in psych fail Popper's test of falsifiability either because they are stated in such general
terms that they are confirmed by almost any observation or because they engage in postdiction rather than
prediction.
