26 Matching Annotations
  1. Feb 2022
  2. psy352sp22csi.commons.gc.cuny.edu psy352sp22csi.commons.gc.cuny.edu
    1. While Wundt, Titchener and others were interested in the structure of the mind, other psychologies were developing in America and Europe.

      This is an example of an annotation.

  3. Aug 2021
    1. The goal of this text is topresent a version of the history of psychologythat resists the traditional storylines of greatachievements by eminent people or schools ofthought that rise and fall in the wake of scientificprogress and that instead attempts to reveal thecomplex trajectory of psychology as a sociallyembedded set of theories and practices thatboth reify and reflect the contexts from whichthey arise and to which they return.

      This seems to be the key idea of the authors writing. Identifying that their approach to the history of Psychology will differ from the usual "traditional storylines" and to bring in a more complex, messy(?) and overlapping narratives that reflects the contexts that these psychological knowledge emerge from.

    2. historicalknowledge is foundational to beingable to understand ourselves as humans.

      Interesting! (Note: This does NOT count as an action.)

    3. In every case, Psychol-ogy as a modern scientific discipline producesknowledge that changes the individuals, soci-eties, and cultures in which it is embedded, andthese changes then feed back into psychologicaltheory and practice.

      Oh! I am interested in seeing how this unfolds throughout the semester. (Note: This does NOT count as an action.)

    4. With these three examples, Danzigermakes the point that a historical analysis of thestructure of the psychological experimentitselfreminds us that there has never been such a thingasthepsychological experiment, or only one wayof doing research.

      Is this what the authors meant when they said to make US and European psychologies self-consciously aware that they are at the center?

    5. he object of interest was notthe normally functioning, but the abnormallyfunctioning human mind.

      It seems like the different subject of study, in this case of "normally functioning" and "abnormally functioning" has shaped the models for experiments and the role expectations for observer and participant even though both models were developed in the same time period.

    6. How does the historian decidewho is, or was, important enough tobe included? That is, who should be at the center of the story,who should be at the periphery, andwho should be left out entirely?

      These are really great questions that are raised by the authors. Prior to this, I have not really considered or questioned who gets chosen to "represent" Psychology or why we are learning about them (e.g. Freud, Watson) over other theorists. This also relates to the reading by Conolly-Smith on Historiography which brings up the importance of questioning "who writes history, with what agenda in mind, and towards what ends?“ demonstrating that there is a purpose to the Psychological knowledge that gets recorded and remembered.

    7. What Morawski’s analysis demonstrates is notthat reflexivity renders experimentation impos-sible in psychology but that an understandingof its effects is sometimes required to make ourinterpretations of psychological data more mean-ingful.

      This is helping me with understanding some of my conundrum with the problems of not being able to replicate lab results of psychology experiments in the real world. Perhaps if more studies consider Morawski's consideration of reflexivity it can better help us with interpreting the results of our experimental studies?

    8. Psychology has been actively involved in creat-ing its own subject matter, has often changed thesubject matter that it has taken up in complexways, and has arguably created constructs thatwould (probably) never have existed without it.

      Ah! I'm guessing this is why Psychology moved from the study of observable behavior only in Behaviorism to the study of the mind in Cognitive psychology approaches? The object of study seem to have shifted quite drastically even as we recognize both as part of Psychology; seems like Psychology has a broad and/or ever-changing definition based on what is interesting to the psychologists at that time?

    9. Although theUnited States and Europe are often at the centerof our account, we attempt to make them self-consciously so, rather than assuming that thisform of psychology isthepsychology, or eventhat within this context psychologists adhere toone way of organizing and interpreting reality.

      Hmm.... what do the authors mean by "mak[ing] them self-consciously" aware that US and European Psychologies are at the center of their account of history? Would it be an attempt at drawing attention to why they become the center?

    1. Watson’s ideas

      You can stop here for reading and annotations

    2. C H A P T E R10Behaviorism: The Beginnings

      Please read and annotate from pp. 211-228.


      Please read and annotate from pp. 122 - 133.

    2. learned

      You can stop here for reading and annotations.

  4. fa21psy352.commons.gc.cuny.edu fa21psy352.commons.gc.cuny.edu
    1. History and Philosophy of Psychology, First Edition. Man Cheung Chung and Michael E. Hyland.© 2012 Man Cheung Chung and Michael E. Hyland. Published 2012 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.5Further Early Beginnings of Psychology

      Begin from pp. 95 to 102.

    2. philosopher.

      You can end your annotations here.

    3. Some ideas from James’ Psychology

      Begin from here to p. 102.

  5. fa21psy352.commons.gc.cuny.edu fa21psy352.commons.gc.cuny.edu
    1. 4 The Birth of Modern Psychology: WilhelmWundt and William James

      Please read and annotate pp. 51 - 70.

    2. Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850–1909)

      You can stop annotating here.


      Please read and annotate from p. 94 - p. 108.

    2. psychology.

      You can stop here for your annotations and reading.

    1. intellectually.

      You can stop here for your annotations and reading.


      You will only need to read and annotate pages 42-49.

    3. You will only need to read and annotate pages 42-49.


      Please read and annotate from pages 118-137.

    2. (1980, p. 434)

      You can stop here for your annotations and reading.