On This Page:ToggleStructuralist School of ThoughtIntrospection Structuralism’s Main TechniqueTitchener’s StructuralismInfluence on Psychology
On This Page:Toggle
On This Page:
Take-home Messages
Structuralist School of Thought
Introspection: Structuralism’s Main Technique
Highly trained assistants would be given a stimulus such as a ticking metronome and would reflect on the experience. They would report what the stimulus made them think and feel. The same stimulus, physical surroundings and instructions were given to each person.
Wundt’s method of introspection did not remain a fundamental tool of psychological experimentation past the early 1920″s. His greatest contribution was to show that psychology could be a valid experimental science.
Titchener trained his students to become skilled at trained introspection, and to report only the sensations as they were experienced without reliance on “meaning words”, which he called a stimulus error.
Using this approach, Titchener’s students reported various visual, auditory, tactile, etc experiences: InAn Outline of Psychology(1899), he reported over 44,000 elements of sensation, including 32,820 Visual, 11,600 Auditory, and 4 Taste.
Titchener’s Structuralism
Elements of the Mind
Titchener (1908) concluded that three kinds of mental components could be considered to constitute conscious experience:
He suggested these components could be dissected into their unique properties, which he identified as quality, intensity, duration, clearness, and extensity.
Interaction of ElementsThe second issue in Titchener’s hypothesis of structuralism was the topic of how the psychological components consolidated and interfaced with one another to shape any conscious experience.His decisions were generally founded on thoughts of associationism. Specifically, Titchener centers around the law of contiguity, which is the idea the elements combine together.Titchener dismissed Wundt’s ideas of apperception and innovative blend (intentional activity), which were the premise of Wundt’s voluntarism. Titchener contended that consideration was essentially a sign of the “clearness” property inside sensation.
Interaction of Elements
The second issue in Titchener’s hypothesis of structuralism was the topic of how the psychological components consolidated and interfaced with one another to shape any conscious experience.His decisions were generally founded on thoughts of associationism. Specifically, Titchener centers around the law of contiguity, which is the idea the elements combine together.Titchener dismissed Wundt’s ideas of apperception and innovative blend (intentional activity), which were the premise of Wundt’s voluntarism. Titchener contended that consideration was essentially a sign of the “clearness” property inside sensation.
The second issue in Titchener’s hypothesis of structuralism was the topic of how the psychological components consolidated and interfaced with one another to shape any conscious experience.
His decisions were generally founded on thoughts of associationism. Specifically, Titchener centers around the law of contiguity, which is the idea the elements combine together.
Titchener dismissed Wundt’s ideas of apperception and innovative blend (intentional activity), which were the premise of Wundt’s voluntarism. Titchener contended that consideration was essentially a sign of the “clearness” property inside sensation.
Physical and Mental RelationshipWhen Titchener distinguished the elements of the mind and the specific interactions they make with each other, his theory was concerned with figuring out why the components cooperate in the manner they do.Specifically, Titchener was keen on the connection between the physical process and the conscious experience – he wanted to discover specifically what was responsible for most of the interactions between them.Titchener accepted that physiological cycles give a nonstop foundation that gives mental cycles a coherence they in any case would not have. As a result, the sensory system doesn’t cause any form of conscious experience, yet can be utilized to clarify a few attributes of mental occasions.
Physical and Mental Relationship
When Titchener distinguished the elements of the mind and the specific interactions they make with each other, his theory was concerned with figuring out why the components cooperate in the manner they do.Specifically, Titchener was keen on the connection between the physical process and the conscious experience – he wanted to discover specifically what was responsible for most of the interactions between them.Titchener accepted that physiological cycles give a nonstop foundation that gives mental cycles a coherence they in any case would not have. As a result, the sensory system doesn’t cause any form of conscious experience, yet can be utilized to clarify a few attributes of mental occasions.
When Titchener distinguished the elements of the mind and the specific interactions they make with each other, his theory was concerned with figuring out why the components cooperate in the manner they do.
Specifically, Titchener was keen on the connection between the physical process and the conscious experience – he wanted to discover specifically what was responsible for most of the interactions between them.
Titchener accepted that physiological cycles give a nonstop foundation that gives mental cycles a coherence they in any case would not have. As a result, the sensory system doesn’t cause any form of conscious experience, yet can be utilized to clarify a few attributes of mental occasions.
Influence on Psychology
Despite the fact that structuralism spoke to the development of psychology as a field separate from reasoning, the basic school lost significant impact when Titchener eventually passed away.
Over the years Titchener’s approach using introspection became more rigid and limited. By today’s scientific standards, the experimental methods used to study the structures of the mind were too subjective; the use of introspection led to a lack of reliability in results.
Other critics argue that structuralism was too concerned with internal behavior, which is not directly observable and cannot be accurately measured.
Also, because introspection itself is a conscious process it must interfere with the consciousness it aims to observe.
The development drove, nonetheless, to the advancement of a few countermovements that would in general respond firmly to European patterns in the field of exploratory psychology.
Filling in as an impetus to functionalism, structuralism was consistently a minority school of psychology in America.
References
Titchener, E. B. (1898).The postulates of a structural psychology.The Philosophical Review, 7(5), 449-465.
Titchener, E. B. (1908).Lectures on the elementary psychology of feeling and attention. Macmillan.
Titchener, E. B. (1899).An outline of psychology(New edition with additions). MacMillan Co
Further ReadingLeahey, T. H. (1981). The mistaken mirror: On Wundt’s and Titchener’s psychologies. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 17(2), 273-282.Leahey, T. H. (1981). The mistaken mirror: On Wundt’s and Titchener’s psychologies. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 17(2), 273-282.Titchener, E. B. (1921). Wilhelm Wundt. The American Journal of Psychology, 32(2), 161-178.FAQs
Further Reading
Leahey, T. H. (1981). The mistaken mirror: On Wundt’s and Titchener’s psychologies. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 17(2), 273-282.Leahey, T. H. (1981). The mistaken mirror: On Wundt’s and Titchener’s psychologies. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 17(2), 273-282.Titchener, E. B. (1921). Wilhelm Wundt. The American Journal of Psychology, 32(2), 161-178.FAQs
Leahey, T. H. (1981). The mistaken mirror: On Wundt’s and Titchener’s psychologies. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 17(2), 273-282.
Titchener, E. B. (1921). Wilhelm Wundt. The American Journal of Psychology, 32(2), 161-178.
FAQs
What is structuralism in psychology?
The goal was to break down mental processes into their most basic elements, such as sensations and feelings, to understand how they combine to create complex experiences.
Who founded structuralism?
Saul McLeod, PhD
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester
Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.
Gabriel Lopez-GarridoUndergraduate at Harvard UniversityPolitical Science and PsychologyGabriel Lopez-Garrido is currently in his final year at Harvard University. He is pursuing a Bachelor’s degree with a primary focus on Political Science (Government) and a minor in Psychology.
Gabriel Lopez-GarridoUndergraduate at Harvard UniversityPolitical Science and Psychology
Gabriel Lopez-Garrido
Undergraduate at Harvard University
Political Science and Psychology
Gabriel Lopez-Garrido is currently in his final year at Harvard University. He is pursuing a Bachelor’s degree with a primary focus on Political Science (Government) and a minor in Psychology.
